|
Post by alf1951 on Jun 13, 2015 3:58:20 GMT
Have just entered Wild About The British Isles on google with same result as Insomniac. Unfortunately putting in related terms eg wildlife in Britain; wildlife forums; etc failed to find WABI - I don't know if that can be solved by adding more meta tags/keywords in the code?
|
|
|
Post by insomniak on Jun 13, 2015 12:16:45 GMT
Have just entered Wild About The British Isles on google with same result as Insomniac. Unfortunately putting in related terms eg wildlife in Britain; wildlife forums; etc failed to find WABI - I don't know if that can be solved by adding more meta tags/keywords in the code? Ahh... I see your point. All is well and good if you know the exact name of the site, but a random wildlife search isn't finding it.
|
|
|
Post by jimford on Jun 15, 2015 18:47:27 GMT
Bit late to the survey, but: I believe that however sentimental we may feel about the old WAB site, by not making any effort to contact the ex admins to offer any explanation for the site's demise, or any possible plans for the future, 'stu' (the WAB site owner) has forfeited any right to retaining the name 'Wild About Britain', if it or any variants are available. Having said that, I'm quite happy with the current name! As a matter of interest, I've mentioned before that the old WAB site is archived on the 'Wayback Machine': wayback.archive.org/web/20070805001928/http://wildaboutbritain.co.uk/Unfortunately the archive is incomplete, particularly with regards to images; but it may prove to be useful for some purposes. The site is also painfully slow. Jim
|
|
|
Post by Tringa on Jun 24, 2015 11:21:22 GMT
I agree about not using WildAboutBritain. Apart from the potential problems related to it being a charity, it is currently still a registerwed domain.
I think WABI is good. Although in WAB we were, quite rightly I think, not fussed about members from outside Britain (I recall one member from France), WABI includes Ireland, which I think it is good.
The name will get better known, we can all mention it on other forums, if the those forums allow it.
Dave
|
|
|
Post by John Pappus on Jul 1, 2015 20:44:05 GMT
Seems pretty good as it is to me - I vote to keep it the same.
|
|
|
Post by John Pappus on Dec 4, 2015 6:18:43 GMT
I'm definitely of the opinion that we've no particularly pressing reason to change the name. The reasons for avoiding the original seem perfectly understandable to me also, people have emotional investment in the old name and that should be respected in my book. I think the name is fine as it is and will simply rise or fall upon it's own slowly-growing merits. My vote - keep it as it is - folk will arrive in their own time.
|
|