Welcome to the staging ground for new communities! Each proposal has a description in the "Descriptions" category and a body of questions and answers in "Incubator Q&A". You can ask questions (and get answers, we hope!) right away, and start new proposals.
Are you here to participate in a specific proposal? Click on the proposal tag (with the dark outline) to see only posts about that proposal and not all of the others that are in progress. Tags are at the bottom of each post.
What should the "webmasters" site name and url be?
When SE's webmasters community was just starting out, they had a Meta discussion about what the site name should be. Although they settled on "webmasters", some of the arguments given at the time may no longer apply today.
For example, Bing still uses the term webmaster tools, but Google appears to have moved away from using the term.
If anyone has any alternative name suggestions, it might be easier to discuss possible names now, at proposal stage, rather than after the URL has been chosen.
4 answers
You are accessing this answer with a direct link, so it's being shown above all other answers regardless of its score. You can return to the normal view.
Web Builders would make a decent name with web.codidact.com as the URL.
It's more modern that "Webmasters" and covers more of the site scope than "Web Developers."
0 comment threads
-
Website Management
-
Q&A about all the stages of hands-on website management.
-
Questions and answers about the whole website lifecycle, from conception, development, launching, operating, maintenance and responsible retirement, for anyone getting their hands on these tasks willing to do their best to learn and share with the world their learnings.
-
webmanagement
I think that "name" proposals should include
- Name
- Blurb (short description)
- Description (a bit longer description)
- Subdomain
2 comment threads
I'm recommending sticking with Webmasters as the name with webmasters.codidact.com as the URL. It is the shortest and most succinct way to encompass the entire scope of the site.
The problem with "webmasters" is that it is outdated terminology. 20 to 25 years ago it was an actual job title. Companies hired a webmaster that was responsible for the companies website. Today, nobody has that as their job title. Creating a website is broken up into much more specialized roles:
- Web developer
- Front end developer
- Back end developer
- Devops
- Systems admistrator
- Web designer
- Web copy writer
- Community manager
- Usability expert
- SEO expert
- Keyword marketer
- Web sales
- and many more
It is impossible for one person have all the skills needed for all of these.
I've brainstormed other names, but I have problems with all of them:
- Websites -- Short, and sweet. But I worry it would attract lots of questions about using every website under the sun. It doesn't imply that the site is about creating and managing websites.
- Web Developers -- Web developers would exclude the marketing, sales, writing, and other important aspects of managing websites
- So maybe combine "websites" or "web" with a term about building or owning? I'm not sure if any of them would be any good.
- Website Builders
- Web Builders
- Building Websites
- Website Management
- Managing Websites
- Website Creators
- Creating Websites
- Web Admin
- Webadmin
I have personally never been all that keen on the term 'Webmaster' for 2 reasons:
- It implies a certain level of competency that has already been attained rather than talking of levels of knowledge that are gained over time. Thus I believe the term is off putting for those who do not feel themselves as 'master' level.
- The term is laden with a gender stereotype (male) which is very much out of touch with modern times.
My personal preference is Web Developers. This does not claim any form of mastery and does not come with any gender stereotyping while also loosely encompassing all of the areas of interest to this section of Codidact.
1 comment thread