From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Computing (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject United Kingdom (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Former good article nominee .uk was a Engineering and technology good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
February 11, 2012 Good article nominee Not listed

usage of subdomain[edit]

As I understand it, was made available in the UK as a clearly 'UK' based indication that the company was based in the UK, in contrast with .com which implied a USA base. Private individuals in the UK who wanted their own 'UK based domain' names for personal use had no option other than . Consequently I suspect that there are many domains that are personal rather than commercial. It is also possible that there are more personal domains than commercial ones.

In due course the domain was made available, and doubtless there was some take-up of that option for personal use. But I also feel that has not been particularly popular, and that remained the domain-name of choice for personal users.

Now that .uk has been made available, it has proven to be very popular. Even so, I suspect that inertia will still result in a preponderance of existing domains remaining as 'personal' domains, both for websites and as a base for personalised email addresses. If this is so, then maybe the indication that domains are "usually commercial" needs clarification or modification.--Lepton6 (talk) 17:03, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

The UK zone is probably still massively in nature as there were approximately 10 million domains registered. This is unlikely to have changed much. The co in is the commercial indicator and because it is the most popular subdomain, it is used by businesses and individuals. Traditionally, the personal subdomains in ccTLDs are less successful becaus they are typically made available years after the ccTLD is launched and the bulk of registrants wishing to have their own personal domains would have already registered a domain name. Jmccormac (talk) 21:14, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, Jmccormac. Therefore, even though the inclusion of '.co' in is a commercial indicator, if it is true that there are actually more 'personal' domains than commercial domains, then the line in the article which says that usage is 'general (usually commercial)' would be inaccurate. Similarly, even if the commercial v. personal(individual) balance were even roughly equal it would still be inaccurate to describe as 'usually commercial'. If either of those two scenarios are true, or even 'likely', perhaps it would be better to describe usage as "general (commercial and personal)" rather than simply "general (usually commercial)". Just a thought!--Lepton6 (talk) 22:38, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Separating personal websites from commercial websites is very difficult, Lepton6. I regularly run surveys on web usage and there has been a trend where webdevelopers increasingly use blogging software like Wordpress for website development so it is now even harder to tell ordinary personal blogs from commercial sites and their associated blogs without analysing the text and links. The use of would be primarily commercial (that might be a better way of explaining it) but also includes some personal websites/usage. Commercial usage would be far greater than personal usage though. There are registrant breakdowns published in the annual ccTLD registry reports but I am not sure if Nominet includes such data. Jmccormac (talk) 23:57, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Jmccormac. If separating personal from commercial registration of domains is difficult, then the assertion that domains are 'usually commercial' would be an assumption rather than a fact. While not denying the possibility that most domains could reasonably be regarded as more often used for commercial purposes than by individuals for personal purposes e.g. hobbyists and web-savvy individuals, in the absence of hard data I remain unconvinced that this is necessarily so.Lepton6 Lepton6 (talk) 00:50, 19 November 2014 (UTC) (+ subsequent minor edits)

On the basis of what is known, I propose changing the description of the usage of from "- general (usually commercial)" to "- commercial and general", which I feel would be more accurate and avoids committing ourselves to making an statement which cannot be verified.--Lepton6 (talk) 09:46, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

The problem is that only Nominet would have accurate statistics of the registrant types. Even web surveys don't generally differentiate the two. I think that the subdomain was added after the subdomain so therefore many of the people who would have registered a personal domain name had already done so by the time .me was launched. The would be overwhelmingly commercial in nature. Typically the personal use domain names in a TLD only represent a small (<10%) part of a TLD. (This is based on reading registry reports on other TLDs rather than Nominet's reports.) There is a way to derive an estimate of commerical usage by running a company name parser against the data from a .uk web survey and looking for business indications. The last web survey I ran covered 110K domains and Wikipedia might consider any business/personal breakdown research on this data to be "original research". Nominet did a 5K domain survey a few years ago (possibly 2011) and it may have had some indications of the registrant types but I can't seem to find it on their website. The phrase "commercial and general" is an accurate description and I have no problem with that. Jmccormac (talk) 10:55, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your response, Jmccormac. Another difficulty in attempting to classify the commercial v. personal mix of registrants is that this cannot readily be determined by a (simple?) survey of websites, because doubtless many domains have been registered but which do not have a direct web presence; and some of these may also have been registered solely for personal and other non-commercial purposes. Conclusion: Having considered the whole matter and your invaluable feedback, I have made the proposed edit, which, being an arguably reasonable generalisation, is unlikely to be challenged. Thanks again. --Lepton6 (talk) 13:55, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Many migrating to[edit]

Lots of government organisations seem to be moving from to After Ofcom, the Information Commissioner is I think the latest. This seems odd to me as they are still very much part of the government. Would a mention of this trend be relevant in the article? Mongoosander (talk) 20:53, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Sources modified on .uk[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just attempted to maintain the sources on .uk. I managed to add archive links to 1 source, out of the total 1 I modified, whiling tagging 0 as dead.

Please take a moment to review my changes to verify that the change is accurate and correct. If it isn't, please modify it accordingly and if necessary tag that source with {{cbignore}} to keep Cyberbot from modifying it any further. Alternatively, you can also add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page's sources altogether. Let other users know that you have reviewed my edit by leaving a comment on this post.

Below, I have included a list of modifications I've made:

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 15:41, 5 July 2015 (UTC)