http://drupal.org/node/1726722 is no longer using Drupal http://under.me/admin

(It's currently a featured site, and I don't recall if we made a decision on whether to set to hidden or unpublish.)

Comments

Tezza’s picture

Tezza commented

That is most unfortunate.

I'm not privy to any discussion about hiding or unpublishing the node so I've hidden it for now. Will discuss during weekly IRC chat Monday 28/01.

tvn’s picture

tvn commented

Very sad. Case study itself is good, and even though that website is no longer running Drupal, case study is still a description of particular Drupal implementation. I don't think we should just hide/unpublish/delete it. However having it in the Featured section will cause questions. I think this is probably something for "Hall of Fame/Archive" sort of section, gdemet was talking about e.g. here #1588892: Case Studies should be sortable by year, and older case studies should be moved to an Archive section

Tezza’s picture

Tezza commented

If the author is happy for us to add a line or two at the top of the case study to inform readers that the site no longer runs Drupal we could at least place it back in the Community Showcase for the time being?

The Project URL is a required field so we will have to determine what to place there if not the URL to a non-Drupal installation.

tvn’s picture

tvn commented

#3 sounds good to me.

silverwing’s picture

silverwing commented

For me, the point of our case studies is, in part, to actually see how a site is being used, and not just read about it. And while the write-up is good, it is only half the story.

So I feel that if you're case study site changes from Drupal, you forfeit the exposure you get from us.

tvn’s picture

tvn commented

Often the team which built website on Drupal and spent time writing up a case study has nothing to do with the site owner's decision to switch to another platform for whatever reason. It'd be sad to just delete posts people spent decent amounts of time on. What if we remove all descriptions of the site owner and links to the site, but keep case study itself in a separate section e.g. http://drupal.org/case-studies/archive? Not such an exposure in this case.

silverwing’s picture

silverwing commented

An archive section does work for me.

Tezza’s picture

Tezza commented

A fair compromise. There are a couple D5 case studies that would fit nicely there too, if appropriate

lisarex’s picture

lisarex commented

Archive section makes a ton of sense. I'd be in favor of using #1588892: Case Studies should be sortable by year, and older case studies should be moved to an Archive section to get that done.

Tezza’s picture

Tezza commented

I've re-opened the original under.me promotion request #1727230: Promote Under.me to Featured and contacted the author directly.

I note lisarex has updated the "case study archive" to reflect the thoughts put forward earlier in this thread issue so I'm guessing this one can be closed, maybe?

lisarex’s picture

lisarex commented
Status: Active » Fixed

Yes, marking this as fixed, since we're dealing with it in other issues.

Status: Fixed » Closed (fixed)

Automatically closed -- issue fixed for 2 weeks with no activity.