Wikimedia Meta-Wiki

Talk:Www.wikipedia.org portal

Latest comment: 12 years ago by Ohpuu in topic Estonian Wikipedia (et.wikipedia.org) reached 100 000 articles
Learn more about this page

This page was part of the http://www.wikipedia.org/ portal. Not now.

The content of http://www.wikipedia.org/ is derived from a template written in HTML at Www.wikipedia.org template, and a portal written in wikicode at Www.wikipedia.org portal. Both these pages are protected. Changes made to these pages appear on the live portal site within one hour.

  • Discussion of the content of the template and portal pages should take place here, at Talk:Www.wikipedia.org portal.
  • An unprotected version of the template page can be edited at Www.wikipedia.org template/temp. Once changes have been tested and agreed there, an administrator can copy the changes to the protected template page.

To keep article counts up to date, watch the following pages:

Archives

edit

Links to history:

  • multi-language version based on Accept-languages and Automatic forwarding w/ cookies
  • introducing Catherine's version and discussion
  • New languages (mr: and li: and article numbers
  • Poll on version change: (29 Jan 2005 - 11 Feb 2005). Results:
In course of voting some changes to proposed versions were suggested, most commonly: 'get rid of the books' for Catherine's and 'center globe with arcs of primes', 'get rid of English' for Forseti's. Also some voters expressed will for a merge.
  • Briefly, alternative was proposed but not voted
  • introducing Forseti's version and discussion
  • Closing poll. Expressing will to place the Catherine's version up and running to portal page and work on a merge.

Attempts at designs' merge

edit

Here I'll post reworked designs as I'll have them done. I provided the source file in GIMP format in case you wanted to experiment with it. There is also a source in Photoshop format but it is really only convertion from GIMP's format so I cannot make any guarantees if it's correct or even readable (should be). -- Forseti Talk E-mail 12:37, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 
Globe centered, primes aligned around and top.
Photoshop file (PSD)
GIMP file (XCF)
 
Globe centered, primes aligned around and middle.
Photoshop file (PSD)
GIMP file (XCF)
 
Globe centered, primes in a ring around.
Photoshop file (PSD)
GIMP file (XCF)


It looks good, but very much like your first design; you miss the defining point of catherine's version, where the text is laid out in an arc... Looks good though, and it's as good as your first designs, apart for not wrapping as well on small screens.✏ Sverdrup 22:11, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I missed it deliberately - it takes much vertical space while leaving white space at sides. But of course I can make 3rd version with arc. As for wrapping: in v1 and v2 at lowres "2:3:logo:3:2" layout becomes "5:logo:5" and fits the screen. Forseti Talk E-mail 22:38, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Indeed, this is close but not yet there. The major languages need to be in a circle around the logo. At first, it is somewhat confusing when there are languages off to the sides. --204.210.200.251 22:36, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Erm, please don't take this the wrong way, but Forseti, I don't think you're necessarily the best person to merge the two proposals. Unconsciously, you would make it more and more like your version, which was actually the one that got fewer votes. I think it'd be better to just install Catherine's version as is, and let the community improve it the wiki way. GeorgeStepanek 00:22, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Well, I uploaded third variant and it seems that I'm going away from my original design toward Catherine's one rather than reverse way. I don't think of it in categories of my fitness of unfittness. Rather, I don't hinder anyone from making the merge and so I feel I can do it too. Feel free to add any other merge variants to the gallery. Also, as I said in section above, I respect the poll result and I don't mind if somebody puts winner version on portal page if there is desire to. But also I take into account what Catherine and others stated - that there is a will to see a merge. I'm just the first one to provide it - I hope that we are going to see other's variants too. To this end I provided the source files. Forseti Talk E-mail 00:58, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Why are you creating variants? Why do you have a gallery? This is a wiki. Let's just put Catherine's version in place, and allow people to tweak it. That's the version that attracted the most votes. That's what we should base the final version on. All your variants look mostly like your version, with a little bit of Catherine's thrown in. It is starting to seem to me like you want to ignore the results of the vote and get your ideas in via the back door. Let's honour the vote, put Catherine's version in place, and see what people think of it. GeorgeStepanek 19:59, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I'm creating the variants because I'm dark, brooding and utterly evil. <sigh> George, you seem to ignore what I say: many people wanted to see a merge so I did it. This is my version of merge, if you can propose alternative, just put it here and base it on whatever you like. If you don't feel inclined for doing it, that's OK - abstain. But you seem bent on keeping me from publishing my work when there were requests for it. Understand, nobody wants to wrest the victory from Catherine or you, this is a work for some future, done when I was fresh with it.
As for putting Catherine's version on portal: This is a wiki - be bold, do it. I won't hinder you, recruit followers to undermine it, nor I'm in any uber-admin cabal to keep you from it. Do it, see it, be happy. I really doesn't understand why you are so uneasy with it. -- Forseti Talk E-mail 20:32, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
You think I'm ignoring what you say, I feel like you don't understand what I'm trying to say. I phrase it more and more bluntly (even though it's a subtle issue), and you take it the wrong way. <sigh> All I want to say is that, because of the potential for unconscious bias, the best person to do the merge would be Catherine. Next best would be "her team." After that, the rest of us. You'd be last on the list, sorry. No insult is intended regarding your motivation or design skills. Your ideas have impressed us. Now step back and let someone else take them further.
Yes, yes OK, I understand you value decorum but unfortunately I have no time for it as today I had to resume my work after holidays and obviously any creative (and time-consuming) work had to be done until today. However, I just can't understand why you think that no variant is better than even biased variant (I'm in no position to say if my attempts are biased or not). I'd love to see other derivatives as they could lead to even better designs eventually through brainstorming but unfortunately there are none. BTW: It's nice to know that my ideas impressed you ;> - Forseti Talk E-mail 23:56, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I'd love to install the new version, but the blasted page is still locked, and there are few admins here on meta. Let me look for one... GeorgeStepanek 21:38, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Next time I'll be on #wikipedia I'll look for an admin to unblock it. Forseti Talk E-mail 23:56, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)


George, Forseti is doing exactly what I asked him to -- please see my reply to him above, under "Where is it then?". I do not have the technical skill to work with the css elements he's used in his design, and any attempt I made to do the merge would be an approximation at best. My initial idea was mocked up in Fireworks and then implemented in a clumsy HTML table, which was swiftly improved by AlanBarrett; I can't claim credit for anything other than the initial idea. I don't think Forseti's trying to "sneak" his ideas in at all, and you are misunderstanding his intent.
He's done a great job of merging them just as I would have -- I think the header and footer and the way he's handled the tiers is better/more professional-looking/more complete than my idea. I retain my fondness for his design #3, with the circle of languages and the white space; from my background with marketing/advertising graphic design, I know that the design value of white space is often overlooked, and in my opinion a less crowded design is better for a portal page like this. However, this has to balanced with the usability issues of a longer page that requires scrolling, especially since we don't want to "discriminate" against the smaller languages that get pushed down below the fold. I'd consider #2 an acceptable but less attractive compromise. (Again, these are my personal opinions, not an attempt to impose them on anyone else.)
My main concern is the wiki-editability of Forseti's design. I would like to get the help of an admin to set up a functional version on a wiki page (Www.wikipedia.org portal/Forseti, perhaps -- I think this will require a little extra work on dividing the HTML portions from the wiki-editable portions.
Let us get my current "Catherine" version up soon, and get Forseti's merge up where it can be worked on collaboratively, and I'll be happy to have his replace mine in the near future. Catherine 22:35, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Actually, I'd prefer if the data were inserted by some script from comma-separated file. Keeping the data the ordered way would reduce the number of possible errors. Think of following format:
English,en:,The Free Encyclopedia,475151
Deutsch,de:,Die freie Enzyklopädie,199876
the script would sort it, round the numbers and place it in correct placeholder (div tag). The list would be easier to edit in Wikipedia too. If developers agree I can try to write that script. If not there is {{{1}}} {{{2}}} {{{3}}}... syntax but we'd have to use probably one template for each grade to retain readabiliy in edits.
As for whitespace: I don't like overcrowded pages too but I think that irregular sheet of pure #fafafa doesn't look good. I think that some sort of dimmed monochrome clouds could be a good solution (as could be faded text if not internationality issue) but I'm unable to produce the effect that would please me. Well, I'm not that good at graphics anyway :) There is another issue I'm uncertain how to deal with: the text in arcs elements is of varying length - this is especially visible in case of ja:. This requires manual positioning. Of course it would be done in CSS and is invisible to editing wikipedian but what if ja: would switch with fr:? Should they be repositioned manually again? That would require admin again.
One more thing: friend of mine who is graphic artist told me that it is unprofessional to fiddle with paragraph text sizes. Thus he suggested that I rework 2nd, 3rd and stub grade wikis to the same size. While I respect his skills I think that varying size in this case conveys precisely the meaning we want its supposed to. What you think?
Forseti Talk E-mail 23:56, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Catherine, I accept your points completely. I would like to emphasise that I do not attribute any conscious bias or intent to Forseti. I am concerned with unconscious bias. To me, his "merged" versions look like minor variations of his proposal, without the features that made me vote for your proposal. It's a strange situation: if this stuff was online, then we could all help out. GeorgeStepanek 00:02, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)


Your work is very good forseti, and I think you have an eye for layout... the reason you should do this is that your proposal is the only one with a total solution -- with a design to the background, the language list etc.
Anyway: I agree that the circle uses a lot of space, so here is my idea: start from the middle version, which looks good, and add tiny arcs at both sides. What I mean is that you take the middle upper left and right and middle lower left and right (That's Deutsch Deutsch and Nederlands Nederlands in your example rework), and move them horizontally a little more to the middle. Perhaps you can adjust the outer ones a bit to make it look better. This is not perfect though, and may not look good if the display is too narrow for the globe + four languages horizontally. HTH ✏ Sverdrup 18:48, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I really like No. 3. Forseti, do you have a working HTML implementation of your designs so we can put them through scaling and compatibility test? --GrmWnr 22:36, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
No, not yet. For now I'd like to have acceptance of any variant before I commit myself to further work -- Forseti Talk E-mail 23:56, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Just a general comment. I think it may be important to put the search box in the middle under the logo. I understand that is being avoided to save vertical space, but given the layout of Google I think it better to put it under the logo. - RoyBoy 05:47, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Well, it's not that simple. In Google, the logo is at top center and it's the size of our Wikipedia text in the header. We have globe logo at middle center and it's 2 times higher and additionally surrounded by the dark blocks of text so it looks even bigger. So at Google we have searchbox block (note that it is wider than logo and links are relatively few and small) at center of page while ours would be at the bottom under much wider top10+logo block.
There is a rule that when user enters page he scans it in a Z pattern: first header from left to right then across the page main then footer left to right. So at present we have: WIKIPEDIA (site visual identification), searchbox (for returning users) then logo (brand) then top10 (for bulk of new visitors), rest (for the rest).
IMO more worth considering would be pulling the Sister Projects from the bottom of page. Perhaps to the side aligning them vertically? Adding second ring? I really have no solid concept now. -- Forseti Talk E-mail 10:25, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Good explanation. Thx. -- RoyBoy 24.141.72.95 19:23, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Whatever happened to this? I really like the design #3 here. –Andre (talk) 22:57, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Please set up editable version of Forseti's design

edit

Forseti -- I admire your design skills and think you are on the right track, design-wise. However, I think you need to trust the wiki process a little bit more. Things like the exact positioning of the arcs can be handled by many people experimenting and discussing cross-browser solutions. Please consider uploading the graphics and placing the commented css code in a meta wiki page (or give GFDL permission for others to do so from what you've already posted in your zip file), so that we can all tweak the design until we find something satisfactory. Others may be able to find a good graphics solution with your clouds or text idea, that way. It won't be exactly what you designed or had in mind, but your arguments will be part of the process. Top-down decisions by a single person, even one that willingly takes suggestions, are not the way Wikipedia works. You may have to put in a placeholder for things like the Search box which can only be done in HTML, but the rest of the page can then be worked on collaboratively.

Many people can work together on an editable subpage, and then successful solutions can be transferred to the protected live template by an admin.

I believe the developers may eventually be able to provide a language-specific variable (something like {{en:NUMBEROFARTICLES}}) for instance, so that we no longer have to update the article count manually. (see feature request #1534) Catherine 00:37, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

It's not that I doesn't trust community, it's just easier to do an image and once there is agreement on it - proceed with coding. So for now I think it would be best we produce final design in form of static image. Yes, you have GFDL for source graphic files, HTML and CSS. I'd welcome any other variant's image uploaded here for evaluation. Once we'd have that final picture that looks the same to all regardless of browser issues, someone (maybe I, maybe someone else) would code and wikify the mockup and community fine-tuning will begin. When we'd be done with it someone should seal the design by creating template to ease the page's editing.
I understand that we are no Borg ;) and derived designs would be different from what I conceived but OK, I believe that this brainstorming will be for good ultimately. Forseti Talk E-mail 01:27, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I have just spent the last couple of hours trying to pull out some of the elements from Forseti's zip for insertion into Catherine's version. I was unable to get it working. (I'm a software developer, but have had little experience with CSS, so this may mean much or little.) Forseti's version appears to rely on CSS functionality that cannot be directly included in a wiki-editable page. I'm not sure that a merge is even possible. Forseti's design ideas may be attractive, but if we can't get them to work in MediaWiki, then there's not much point even talking about them. GeorgeStepanek 01:34, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Yes, it is time consuming so I'm don't want to do it before some agreement could be reached. Best way I can think of (I assume that the left toolkits can't be removed by some option of MediaWiki) is to hide all the standard page elements with display:none then proceed with rest of CSS. But anyway, the final solution (I briefly mentioned above) should be template with all the HTML/CSS code and editable fields (like top10 slots or other grades' lists) marked as {{{number}}} - it would be some 14 such fields. Yes, wiki-editable flat CSV file processed by PHP script would be better and safer in any case. Also would be better if left toolkits just could be switched off. -- Forseti Talk E-mail 09:50, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
OK, with immeasurable help of Innocence who set up a sandbox for design testing, I was able to put my version online. For now it's my version, when I'll get sure it's correct I'll move on to merge v.3. Now I'm happy to have been able to put both portal and template more or less so you can see the result. More work tomorrow. Now, good night. :) -- Forseti Talk E-mail 02:30, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Unprotect please

edit

This page was protected 3 weeks ago to stop an edit war. I think we can assume that danger has passed. Please unprotect it. I think the editing mechanism is sufficiently obscure to deter vandalism, at least for the moment. -- 202.63.61.242 04:31, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

This is a very high profile portal, and I think we should keep it protected from vandalism. The only things you can do is update the numbers anyway, any layout change would have to be discussed first... ✏ Sverdrup 18:42, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I agree with Svedrup. This is one of the most visible pages on the project --- it should stay protected indefinitely. Raul654 00:56, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Hmph. I should have just made it an scponly HTML upload and not bothered with all this editable template/parsing/caching rubbish. -- 202.63.61.242 08:50, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Hmmm =

edit

To be honest, I like Forseti's version a bit better, though that doesnt seem to be winning out. Since there is no rush maybe he and Catherine can do something collaborative, and maybe a little color might be a good idea. An ever so light tinge of gold against the blue might be alright. -SV 05:56, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

change to Catherine style

edit

I have recieved a request from en:User:CatherineMunro to change the portal to the Catherine-style portal. I find this instruction valid and execution will now follow. --Walter 23:16, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

It seems that cut and paste will not work. I have not the time to play with this now. If someone else has time now please do. Otherwise maybe in about 24 hours --Walter 23:26, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Some of the elements need to go in Www.wikipedia.org portal, and some into www.wikipedia.org template. Oh yes, and the search box needs to be added in (it is currently just mocked up). This task is a bit more than a simple cut-and-paste. GeorgeStepanek 01:37, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
It needs help from a developer to make the search box work. See Talk:Www.wikipedia.org portal/Catherine#Getting it to work. —AlanBarrett 07:08, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Unfortunately, Tim Starling, who set up this page in the first place, is taking a long wikibreak to finish working on his doctorate. Who else can we approach? Catherine 09:33, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I don't agree. We can get the search box to work if we upload the correct HTML to www.wikipedia.org template. We would have needed a developer to get the search box working on another page. GeorgeStepanek 09:41, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

If there are here users who think the can get it to work list your name here and when you have time in UTC to work on it. I will remove the protection for the time that you need and protect it again when you are done. I will watch the RC of Meta closly for that time to defend those pages. Today this can be done until 18:00 UTC Walter 10:33, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Looks good. Some points need still be done but is good enough to stay online for now. I am back in one hour and remove protection then so you can work on it Walter 18:25, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Yikes, what happened to the drop down menu with the Go button? I would suggest that while the Search is disabled for performance reasons we switch to the Go button. For example I put in the word "bitch" and it told me it was disabled, whereas the Go button will take me to the article. Also I see what Forseti was talking about for reducing it from 10 to 8... in 800x600 you need to scroll down to see the search buttons, although that will be mostly corrected if the drop down box is put in. (and of course there is a loose <p> on the bottom left corner. - RoyBoy 24.141.72.95 19:19, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)


I have now unprotected the pages Www.wikipedia.org template and Www.wikipedia.org portal so you can work on it if you like to do. I am garding those pages. I am now online whit Jabber; walter@jabber.belnet.be , ICQ 85153582, MSN wvermeir@hotmail.com and IRC freenode user "WalterBE" in #Meta if i need to do something. --Walter 19:54, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I can't edit non-ascii text right now. To switch the behaviour of the buttons between "seach" mode and "go" mode, switch the comments around at the obvious place in the source code (<input type="hidden" name="go" value="Go"> and <input type="hidden" name="fulltext" value="Search">). To use the drop down list style of search box, copy code from a previous version of Www.wikipedia.org template (but I don't like that because all the labels are in English). The stray <p> should have an obvious fix. —AlanBarrett 20:15, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
If you have font problems; download this font and install it. Ather this you should be abel to see fonts good --Walter 20:21, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I have the code2000 font. It's not only that some chars display wrong, but also when I edit, the previously-existing text gets corrupted when I save. (This is Opera 7.54 on Windows 98. Pretty much the same version of Opera on NetBSD works fine.)
I've fixed the broken tags; will have a try at the search button -- it's just not functional as is now. Catherine 20:23, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Updates to live portal

edit

I have made all the changes I feel confident addressing. Please comment or change if you don't like:

  1. the change from "Search" to "Go" functionality
  2. the use of top ten languages in drop-down
  3. the change of button text from "Go" to a wordless ">" (an image button might be better?)
  4. the arrangement of the searchbox/dropdown/go all on one line, instead of search box with dropdown & button below
  5. is there a better way to vertically align searchbox/dropdown/go button? it's somewhat ugly now

I tried replacing the bottom portion (below the search box) with the "$1" variable, so that the lower tiers would remain editable here at Www.wikipedia.org portal, but for some reason the bookshelf images were missing, and I didn't want to do too much more tinkering with the live version. Does anyone know how to fix this? Perhaps we should just remove the bookshelves altogether, as many people didn't like them?

If no one else has changes to make shortly (say within the next hour), I recommend that the page be protected again. -- Catherine 22:25, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Looks good. The pages are locked again. I have no time more to watch over them. --Walter 23:04, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Suggestion: Can we use a symple arrow (go) / magnifying glass (search) icon in the relevant buttons? The current arrangment of multilingual sort buttons is neither all-inclusive nor particularly aesthetic. --207.106.89.45 23:42, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I believe having the word "Go" is fine in all languages, as for search I guess a magnifying glass is okay, although I would leave the search out entirely until it can be enabled and/or ideally improved to automactically use Google to search through Wikipedia. Very frustrating not to have a reliable search for an encyclopedia. - RoyBoy 24.141.72.95 01:19, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The search buttons need to be commented out and/or simply deleted, the search box needs to be given a set width (not a percentage) to look uniform and be on one line for all resolutions (its on two lines in 800x600). Msg me (don't e-mail, doesn't work for me) if assistance / feedback is required. Also the input box needs to be lowered (or the drop box brought up) to be in alignment, and I think the descriptions of the Wikipedia sister projects should be pasted in, as they appear on en.wikipedia.org. - RoyBoy 24.141.72.95 01:19, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Problems with current version

edit

The Search buttons need to be deleted completely from the page instead of being commented out. This only works on IE. At the moment the page looks very strange on Firefox. GeorgeStepanek 04:08, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The problem is the "--" in the middle of the comment. An admin needs to fix it, probably by changing it to "-". In strict SGML, <!-- this is a comment -- this is not a comment -- this is a comment again -->. —AlanBarrett 05:42, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I don't know if it's just Firefox, but the current search box looks very bad/unprofessional. It should be changed quickly! It's so cluttered and cramped. 202.32.3.147 06:04, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Wikipedia should try to look good on current browsers, not just IE.
 
Screenshot from Firefox/Linux
--Glimz 00:21, Feb 18, 2005 (UTC)

There's also a slight glitch with the books. The top row has 6 on one side and 7 on the other, which means that the "10 000+" text is not properly centered. GeorgeStepanek 22:02, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. Fixed in Www.wikipedia.org template/temp. —AlanBarrett 10:13, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Also the title should read like the rest of Wikipedia; "Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia"... this would also save us from trying to shoehorn it in somewhere else. - w:en:RoyBoy 24.141.72.95 04:09, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

This is supposed to be a multilingual portal. Any text must be repeated in several languages, not just English. —AlanBarrett 10:13, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I tried to fix the search box. Does this look OK now? If not, please edit Www.wikipedia.org template/temp. If it's OK, please could an admin copy it to Www.wikipedia.org template. —AlanBarrett 10:13, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Thank you very much, Alan and Aphaia! Looks much better now. Catherine 21:29, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I tried adding a font-size style to the search input box & Go button (on the temp page), to make them the same size as the drop-down. (see examples at http://www.456bereastreet.com/archive/200409/styling_form_controls/ and especially http://www.456bereastreet.com/lab/form_controls/buttons/ to get some idea of cross-browser compatibility). Going to do some more testing now; let me know if this doesn't work on your browsers. Catherine 22:16, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

It looks very ugly to me in Opera. Previously, all three items (input box, drop down list, and go button) were almost the same height (the input box was almost imperceptibly smaller than the others). Now, the input box and the go button are much larger than the drop down list. (This is Opera 7.54.) However, in Firefox, it looks OK. Perhaps we need to specify height in pixels to get all three elements to look the same? —AlanBarrett 22:59, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Argh. I was afraid of that; thanks for letting me know since I don't have Opera at the moment. I don't understand why they don't render at the same height in IE6 anyway -- they all contain text of the same size (unless perhaps the Japanese characters in one of the options is making the drop-down larger). One should NOT have to fiddle with form elements at the pixel level to make a form look good! Well - revert it or change it; just looking for a solution. Thank you VERY much for setting up the temp page to allow us to tinker this way! Catherine 23:24, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Also, shouldn't the languages in the drop-down list be in the same order as the languages around the globe? At the moment the two lists are in different orders, which seems a little confusing. GeorgeStepanek 05:52, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Changed on the temp page. —AlanBarrett 18:17, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The Wikimedia button on the bottom links to the image rather than to the website. - RoyBoy 800 16:58, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Changed on the temp page. —AlanBarrett 18:17, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The new Wikipedia portal design (Catherine's design) looks horrible in Internet Explorer for Macintosh. 209.149.56.231 17:28, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)

"Unexplained revert"

edit

What's all this about an unexplained revert? All of my edits were entirely original. Mav's revert was the one that was unexplained. --Node

BTW, in reverting, you removed languages that belong validly in the places I put them. In addition to that, to whomever has re-protected the page, "Why?". There has been no vandalism recently, and before you came along and locked it again things were going fine with various people tinkering with it - there hasn't been any outright vandalism to it but once, which was righted almost instantly. --Node

This page is not used any more, so any changes made to it are entirely irrelevant. Until we find a need for it again, we should probably clear it to save confusion. GeorgeStepanek 06:19, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Node ue, you should explain your edits. The edit that was reverted did not have an edit summary. If you moved languages between categories, you should have explained "moved language xx to category yy". If you sorted the languages without changing categories, you should have said "sorting languages bu code instead of by name". —AlanBarrett 09:30, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Vote for layout change (yet again)

edit

Poll ends: 27 Feb 2005 00.00 (UTC)

  • I'd like to ask for prolongation of the vote for another week. This is due to both technical problems with Wikipedia experienced this week and little advertising resulting in few and evenly matched votes. -- Forseti Talk E-mail 12:22, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
    • Frankly, I'd prefer to declare no consensus due to lack of interest. I was always dubious about the idea of holding another poll directly after the first one, but it might have been worthwhile if we'd got some idea of exactly how people wanted the merge to go. I suggest—if you're still interested—to implement option (d) in Www.wikipedia.org_template/temp and then publicise a new vote to get that version moved onto the front page. GeorgeStepanek 00:06, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
      • Well, I'd prefer to not care what you have to say because you do the same to others unless their opinion matches yours exactly. The only good thing about you is that you're kinda cute. But yes, we should vote on a merged version or another and move it to the temp template. --Node ue

Vote here:

Completely change to Forseti's layout

edit
  1. Node ue 00:38, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  2. ✏ Sverdrup 20:05, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  3. Jeff8765 16:31, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  4. Schnee 20:49, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  5. APPER 20:13, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  6. gcbirzantalk 00:14, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC) First option.
  7. TOR 20:12, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC) First option.
  8. Minh Nguyễn (talk, blog) – third option – 22:53, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Make no changes to the current version of the layout

edit
  1. .:Ajvol:. 09:04, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Merge part of Forseti's layout into the current version

edit
Please sign yourself here for convenience of vote counting and then again at suboption you support
  1. GeorgeStepanek 06:19, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  2. AlanBarrett 09:30, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  3. Marcika 05:19, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  4. Catherine 11:57, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  5. grmwnr 21:46, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  6. RoyBoy 800 16:36, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC) Provided its 800x600 friendly.
  7. gcbirzantalk 00:14, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  8. Shaka 16:08, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  9. Ambush Commander 20:07, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
edit

b) Merge only Forseti's formatting for the top group into the current version

edit

c) Merge only Forseti's formatting for the 100+, 1000+ and 10 000+ groups into the current version

edit
  1. AlanBarrett 09:30, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  2. Marcika 05:19, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  3. gcbirzantalk 00:14, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC) Third option.
edit
  1. GeorgeStepanek 06:19, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  2. grmwnr 21:46, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  3. Catherine 23:48, 22 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  4. RoyBoy 800 16:36, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  5. gcbirzantalk 00:14, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC) Second option
  6. Shaka 16:08, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  7. Ambush Commander 20:07, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
edit

f) Other combination (please specify in a new poll option)

edit

Interpretation of poll

edit

How will the latest poll be interpreted? Will the Completely change to Forseti's version votes be matched against individual merge votes, or against the total of merge votes?

Change to TEMP version, please add to main page

edit

Concerning the edits made by me (by Ambush Commander and IP 67.85.35.221 which was me when I forgot to log in), the second having a summary of what I did. As noted here: [1] I have set an overriding style declaration on the Template to eliminate the background image and make the background entirely white. Until we allocate a totally new stylesheet for the front page, I feel this hack should be sufficient in removing the ungainly strip on the top of the main page and reduce the weight of this page. Code change was: 

<body class="ns-0">

To: 

<body class="ns-0" style="background-image:none; background-color:#FFF;">

After an admin with priviledges on the main HTML page reviews these changes, please add them to the primary template. If, for some reason, these edits are incorrect, I would like to know why. Thanks! Ambush Commander 23:21, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Sister Projects - International version

edit

I noticed that some links in the sister project section go to the English version of the Main Pages. Can an admin replace them with the links for the international portals? We should have

Marcika 02:55, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Search button

edit

I think that we should have only one button on the search form, performing the "go" function, not the "search" function. (In other words, keep the one button that is already there.) An arrow-like icon seems appropriate for this button. Do any of the following Unicode characters look acceptable (remember that they can be scaled to a different size)? Or do we need to use an image? —AlanBarrett 21:23, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)

  1. ⏎ (U+23CE RETURN SYMBOL)
  2. ▶ (U+25B6 BLACK RIGHT-POINTING TRIANGLE)
  3. ▷ (U+25B7 WHITE RIGHT-POINTING TRIANGLE)
  4. ➧ (U+27A7 SQUAT BLACK RIGHTWARDS ARROW)
  5. ➨ (U+27A8 HEAVY CONCAVE-POINTED BLACK RIGHTWARDS ARROW)
  6. ➩ (U+27A9 RIGHT-SHADED WHITE RIGHTWARDS ARROW)
  7. ➪ (U+27AA LEFT-SHADED WHITE RIGHTWARDS ARROW)
  8. ➭ (U+27AD HEAVY LOWER RIGHT-SHADOWED WHITE RIGHTWARDS ARROW)
  9. ➮ (U+27AE HEAVY UPPER RIGHT-SHADOWED WHITE RIGHTWARDS ARROW)
Some of these look excellent. I particularly like numbers 2 and 5. I don't think an image is essential at all. GeorgeStepanek 02:00, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Depends. Maybe they don't have a complete unicode font on their system. For instance, number one, for me, renders as a question mark. I agree, however, that they do look spiffy. Ambush Commander 02:22, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Only 2 (U+25B6) and 3 (U+25B7) display properly in the browser I am using now. —AlanBarrett 07:48, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Using IE, Safari and Firefox on my Mac, #5 now looks pretty crap and the only decent one is #2. GeorgeStepanek 08:55, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I tried adding U+25B6 to the temp page, but it looks too small. I tried increasing the size to make the arrow look reasonable, but now the button surrounding the arrow is too large. Any ideas? Does anybody have an appropriate image of an arrow or magnifying-glass? (Forseti's images have apparently not been uploaded here, and I don't want to grab them from his site without knowing their copyright status.) —AlanBarrett 18:12, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Yes, they haven't been uploaded because I'm not pleased with those you've seen. I tried to make something better but haven't been able yet. I'll get to it tomorrow morning so that you can have something you can evaluate. BTW: everything I do for Wikipedia both on its servers and elsewhere has open status. Frankly it's so obvious to me that I regularly forget to state it. -- Forseti Talk E-mail 21:23, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)
If we can't find a good Unicode implementation for the arrow, we shouldn't lose sleep over it: just use an image. They're not that big on that scale anyway. Ambush Commander 03:34, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Language sort order

edit

In the top10 group, I like having the languages sorted by size. But in the other groups, I'd prefer to sort by the short language code, rather than the weird way the languages are sorted at present. It just seems more neutral than trying to guess how to sort non-latin characters. What do others think? —AlanBarrett 10:11, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I have done this. TUF-KAT 00:38, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Edit summaries and discussion of changes

edit

Node_ue has made the following changes recently without discussing them, and (in most cases) without giving good edit summaries:

  1. In language lists, he removed all the newlines [2]. I think that this makes the source code more difficult to edit, because instead of one language per line there is a very long line with all languages, and this makes it harder to check for consistency between languages, or to cut and paste one language at a time.
  2. He also removed several other HTML comments and newlines in the same edit [3]. The comments and line breaks were intended to make the page easier to edit, and removing them should require some justification.
    1. In the end, we should optimize this page for speedy service (strip everything unnecessary out of it) but right now, I think it's expedient that we keep it readable. Ambush Commander 23:32, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  3. Changed the language sort order without discussion or edit summary [4]. I prefer his sort order, but I think he should have discussed it (there was already a question on the talk page, but Node did not answer it).
  4. In language lists, changed "&bull;" to a literal bullet character [5] without explanation. I don't understand the reason for this, though it is harmless.
    1. Probably takes up less space in the file size. Ambush Commander 23:32, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  5. In language lists, changed all "&nbsp;" to spaces [6]. I think that this causes bad line breaks (for example, a line break in the middle of "Basa Jawi", or a line break before instead of after the bullet between two languages). Node said in an edit summary that the nbsps make the output look bad on a narrow screen, and I think that's true if the screen is very narrow (around 200px), but so much else will look bad on such a narrow screen that I don't think we need to worry about it.
  6. Removed the note to editors in an HTML comment [7]. I added that note after a previous incident when Node_ue broke the page layout by attempting to use wikicode instead of HTML.
    1. Once again, on a production version, we shouldn't have that note (that's probably what Node_ue was thinking, correct me if I'm wrong), but I'd reiterate that this is not a production version.
  7. Changed or removed other HTML comments, for no apparent reason [8]. I suspect that what he really did was to start editing from an earlier version instead of from the latest version.
  8. Reinstated some obsolete code in the search box [9]. Again, this is probably because he did not start editing from the current version.
  9. Changed the number of bookshelf images without giving an edit summary [10].
  10. Removed "Wikipedia" title without discussion or edit summary [11].
  11. Removed "//EN" from Formal Public Identifier in DOCTYPE [12] [13]. The "//EN" specifies the language in which the DTD was defined, and is a required part of the FPI. It has nothing to do with the language in which the document is written.
    1. Was this added back then? Ambush Commander 23:32, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  12. Removed "lang=en" and "dir=ltr" from <html> element without giving an edit summary [14]. Removed "dir=ltr" again later [15] after I reverted his earlier edit, again without an explanation. It's probably a good idea not to specify lang=en, and it's probably harmless not to specify dir=ltr, but I see the absence of a good edit summary as a problem.
  13. Removed the "Wikipedia" heading [16] while giving a false edit summary that said "fixing size". I reverted [17]. He removed it again [18], this time with a good edit summary. There was no vote, and there should be no need for a vote. Consensus on the talk page was clearly in favour of having a heading, with Node_ue being the only dissenting voice. (See Talk:Www.wikipedia.org portal/Catherine#Wikipedia image.)
  14. Replaced the "Search/Suche/etc" heading in the search box with a magnifying glass image [19]. This is a good change, but there was no edit summary, and there is no copyright information for the Image:Cweri.png.
  15. Changed "The Free Encyclopedia" to "Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia", and similarly in other languages, without giving an edit summary [20]. I think it's fine to replace the big "Wikipedia" heading with a smaller "Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia", but there should have been an edit summary.
  16. Added a background image at the top of the page [21], without giving an edit summary. The background is an interesting idea, but I think the current version is too dark and distracting.
    1. Definitely agree it's distracting, and it's quite a bit of a facelift too. I don't really like it, but opinions aside, it has to be lightened a bit and perhaps made to look less repetitive (right now, it looks like badly applied wallpaper) Ambush Commander 23:32, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  17. Changed the image used for the round logo from Image:Nohat-logo-nowords-bgwhite-200px.jpg (13 kB) to Image:Kiû-hêng.png (28 kB), without giving a reason [22]. The new image looks just like the old image to me, but there's no information on the image description page (where did the image come from, how does it differ from other similar images, what process was used to create the image), the file size is more than doubled, and there's no explanation for why the change was made.

Now, I know that Node has the best interests of the project at heart, but I find it really difficult to cooperate with people who make changes without giving good edit summaries. A good edit summary should both describe and explain all changes (e.g. "Changed <thing> from <old> to <new> because <reason>"). Sometimes the reason can be omitted if you think it is obvious, but the description of what was changed should never be omitted. I also wish that all non-trivial changes were discussed first. —AlanBarrett 10:00, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Oh wow... we're never going to get this code pasted over. This is going to require extensive explanation. And my lil' background annihiliation change I added isn't going to be committed for a while ::goes teary eyed:: I'm commented on what I thought on each of the changes: we might need to start splicing some of them out. Although some of the complaints are based on a matter of principle... heh. This talk page isn't frequented much, I didn't recieve a single comment on the change I made on the temp page. Ambush Commander 23:32, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)
We are not limited to just one temp page. You can always create a new temp page, perhaps as a personal subpage, and copy the content from a pre-Node version into there. Then, once it's been tested to your satisfaction, you can ask Catherine (who's now an admin on meta) to copy it over onto the live page. GeorgeStepanek 22:15, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Serbian Wiki

edit

Hi, we have now 10 000+ articles, can someone insert link on main page to serbian Wikipedia in 10 000+ category, now on main page we are still on 1000+ category. Thank you.

Macedonian Wiki

edit

Hello, the Macedonian Wikipedia has 247 articles now, can anybody insert a link to it on the mainpage, in the 100+ section? (some of the languages there have less articles than the macedonian version, and we have noticed a language update there, yet Macedonian was still not included) Thank you in advance, from the Macedonian adminstration team --FlavrSavr 16:36, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

No problem. TUF-KAT 07:51, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Hello, again. The Macedonian Wikipedia has 1268 articles as of now. Can anybody, maybe TUF-KAT insert the link to it in in the 1000+ section of the mainpage? In addition, there was a slight problem with the previous link, which included Macedonian with a small 'm'. I've changed it into capital cyrillic 'M' on the template, so I hope it works; if it doesn't, could anybody tell me how to fix this? Thanks in advance for all your help, from the Macedonian administration team --Ivica83 18:23, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Vietnamese Wikipedia

edit

The Vietnamese Wikipedia has reached 1,000 articles today. Could a sysop please remove the following line from the 100+ header: 

[[:vi:Trang Chính|Tiếng Việt]]

And add the following line under the 1000+ header, between Tatarça and Türkçe: 

[[vi:Trang Chính|Tiếng Việt]] •

Thanks. – Minh Nguyễn (talk, blog) 17:17, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Please update

edit
Latest comment: 19 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Please update the number of articles of Portuguese Wikipedia, it has reached over 40,000+. Thank you. --Ikescs 18:27, 1 May 2005 (UTC)Reply

Updated. But I think it is any more no original file of http://www.wikipedia.org ... or this url is not available for me ... --Aphaia | Translate Election | ++ 20:07, 1 May 2005 (UTC)Reply

To the admin team at Meta,

edit
Latest comment: 19 years ago8 comments4 people in discussion

This info is from here:

Georgian (ქართული) wiki: ka - 768 articles
Armenian (Հայերեն) wiki: hy - 542 articles
Bengali (বাংলা) wiki: bn - 454 articles
Macedonian (Македонски) wiki: mk - 354 articles
Northern Sami (Sámegiella) wiki: se - 283 articles
Breton (Brezhoneg) wiki: br - 232 articles
Ossetian (Ирон æвзаг) wiki: os (http://os.wikipedia.org) - 218 articles
Tok Pisin wiki: tpi - 105 articles

It's not fair that those WPs are not on Www.wikipedia.org template when there are some other WPs SMALLER than these on the template (for example, te: has 111 articles and is on the template, but is smaller than br: which has 232 articles and is not on the template after MONTHS of nagging.)

Can you >PLEASE include them? And also, vi: is 100 articles larger than gd: (in the 1000-10000 section) and is STILL in the 100-1000 section.

From Scott Gall on behalf of the admin teams at the WPs affected by your slackness. 05:28, 4 May 2005 (UTC)Reply

PS. To include them, type in the following: [http://{{ISO CODE}}.wikipedia.org/wiki {{NATIVE NAME FOR LANGUAGE}}]

Please don't talk in such a way with huge font, it is very hard to read. And if you mean we edit this file, no worry, this file is not the source of current wikipedia portal. It is already a historical page. So you don't need to worry if this is updated or not. --Aphaia | Translate Election | ++ 05:47, 4 May 2005 (UTC)Reply
I meant for somebody to update the Www.wikipedia.org template. It's not fair how a language bearing a Wikipedia with, for example, 232 articles is not listed on the same template a language bearing a Wikipedia with, for example, 111 articles is. It's also seen as racism directed at the speakers of these languages, and/or thinking that the languages are not real. It would be easier to just include them. Scott Gall 07:31, 7 May 2005 (UTC) edit: PS: You could move ka: to 1000-10000; the way you guys are going, it will already have 1000 articles by the time you get onto the job. All it is is adding eight WPs and moving one up.Reply
I have also put the changes on Www.wikipedia.org template/temp. You just have to copy ka:, hy:, bn:, mk:, se:, br:, os:, and tpi: onto the live page, and put vi: in the 1000-10000 section. This IS emotionally hurting the people on those WPs, if not me, because their languages are not being represeted on the Www.wikipedia.org template. Those languages are being left out of it all, despite being larger than some of the WPs that are on the template. What I am trying to do is make you realise how serious it can get if business is left at the hands of people who can't be bothered to listen to one simple demand. Scott Gall 08:04, 7 May 2005 (UTC)Reply
I second that. Can you please unprotect the Www.wikipedia.org template for half an hour so I can put those languages on the page for those slackers? Scott's plea to have those languages on the template is based on fact. And also, all of these languages (except bn:, tpi:, and br:) are spoken in close proximity to Romania. NazismIsntCool 07:11, 8 May 2005 (UTC)Reply

And I third that. To make a less emotional point: in my opinion, it would look better for the Wikipedia project as a whole if a more diverse selection of languages makes its way onto the page. It's a simple as promoting the languages as they reach their milestones. Currently, the list is nearly completely made of European languages written in Latin-based alphabets. Users may see the list and think, "Yeah, so they have around 200 languages, but a lot of them seem to be tiny variations of the same language - even dialects." – Minh Nguyễn (talk, blog) (vi: sysop) 02:25, 10 May 2005 (UTC)Reply

Okay, I posted a plea to Brion Vibber, a developer here. Hopefully we'll get some kind of response. – Minh Nguyễn (talk, blog) 02:47, 10 May 2005 (UTC)Reply

Brion suggested that I go to MediaZilla, so this issue is now Bug 2142 there. If you have a MediaZilla account, you can cast any number of votes for that bug. – Minh Nguyễn (talk, blog) 04:21, 11 May 2005 (UTC)Reply

Javanese Wikipedia

edit
Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Javanese Wikipedia has reached 1,000 articles. Could you update by adding 

[[:jv:Kaca Utama|Basa Jawa]]

please?

Thanks! Hayabusa future

I posted a request at Talk:Www.wikipedia.org template#Bug 2142, where it is more likely to be seen. – Minh Nguyễn (talk, blog) 04:45, 13 May 2005 (UTC)Reply

languages not properly organized

edit
Latest comment: 19 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

the languages used to be organized by number of articles, Dutch (neederlands) and Portuguese (Portuguese) are now not properly placed. Portuguese is now 50 000+. Dutch overtook Polish and Portuguese overtook Italian and Spanish. ---PedroPVZ 05:12, 22 May 2005 (UTC)Reply

This page isn't updated anymore, but if you know HTML, you can edit Www.wikipedia.org template/temp, and someday an administrator here will update the portal accordingly. See Talk:Www.wikipedia.org template/temp for details. – Minh Nguyễn (talk, blog) 15:53, 23 May 2005 (UTC)Reply
It's probably time to copy Www.wikipedia.org template/temp to Www.wikipedia.org template. I've just got the languages up to where they belong. And thanks to the person who put Chuvash and Macedonian on the template proper. At least you're not the slackers I used to think you are. Scott Gall 03:31, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Update

edit

Could someone please move Albanian (sq - Shqip) to the 1000+ list? Thanks. Dori | Talk 07:59, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Comments

edit

I added the URL and content of the Talk page as comments, so you always have the instructions handy, even if you move the stuff temporarily to your favourite offline editor.

Patio 6 July 2005 06:23 (UTC)

Missing top Wikipedia logo on front page

edit
Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The top Wikimedia logo on the front page displays the infamous "red cross" for a missing file. It takes too long to get it, and all visitors are attempting to download it again and again, producing many 404 NOT FOUND results. Please fix it by restoring a logo (at least a all-blank one if this logo is being redesigned). This will accelerate the loading and display of the main page (http://www.wikipedia.org/). Thanks.

Note: the missing WIKIPEDIA name logo is referenced at this line of HTML code: 

<img src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/meta/thumb/7/7c/Wikipedia-word.png/180px-Wikipedia-word.png" width="180" height="50" alt="WIKIPEDIA" />

May be the URL is now wrong and should reference another location.

 

You may use this uploaded 180x50 image I created, with an equivalent HTML template and a .xcf (The GIMP) image. (May be the HTML will be better. Click on image for details, or look at Logo template (above unsigned comments by User:Verdy p 18:30, 4 October 2005)

It looks fine to me. Was it a temporary problem? —AlanBarrett 08:19, 6 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Please blank Www.wikipedia.org portal

edit
Latest comment: 19 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Over the months, several people have come to Www.wikipedia.org portal, seen the very old and no longer used information, thought that that was a problem, and then come to this talk page to complain. Obviously they didn't realise that things are done differently now. Please could an admin replace Www.wikipedia.org portal with a copy of the instructions from the top of Talk:Www.wikipedia.org portal. Www.wikipedia.org template should continue to be updated from Www.wikipedia.org template/temp —AlanBarrett 08:36, 6 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Done.
James F. (talk) 17:52, 6 October 2005 (UTC)Reply
Thanks. —AlanBarrett 18:34, 6 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Category needed

edit
Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Could a category be added to this page please, such as Category:Wikimedia history? --Spangineer[en] [es] (háblame) 02:35, 16 April 2006 (UTC)Reply

Design of Wikipedia.org portal and Main Page praised

edit
Latest comment: 18 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

As reported at the Wikipedia Signpost:

 
Portal page

Wikipedia was mentioned in the May cover article of .net magazine, "Create sites with impact" (subscription only), which includes a list of ten websites that have "instant impact".

A screenshot of the wikipedia.org portal was accompanied by brief commentary: "Wikipedia pages aren't much to look at. The collaborative encyclopedia overcomes this with two landing pages. The first is a high-impact splash page with language options, search and navigation, while the second [the Main Page] highlights current content." Some of the other sites chosen include Google, Flickr and BBC News Online.

) Catherine 06:55, 25 April 2006 (UTC)Reply

At the bottom, where it links to other projects (wikt, meta, etc) they are arranged in 2 lines of 3, then one line of 2. It would look much nicer in 2 lines of 4. Please change this. 88.154.14.209 10:24, 24 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

Simple English Wikipedia

edit
Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi there, the Simple English Wikipedia (simple:) now has 10 000 articles, please move it up a category. Thanks, Archer7 20:29, 26 July 2006 (UTC)Reply


Volapük Wikipedia

edit
Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello, please move the Volapük Wikipedia from 100+ to 1000+ http://vo.wikipedia.org , many thanks in advance, best regards --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 18:04, 13 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

Macedonian wikipedia

edit
Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Can someone change Македонски ([23]) from 1.000+ to 10.000+ languages? It currently has 10.379 articles. --misos 11:03, 23 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

Maltese Wikipedia

edit
Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Mt.wiki is in the right category but under this url http://mt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paġna_prinċipali This is a redirect since recently it was moved to this new url http://mt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Il-Paġna_prinċipali The former one is still a redirect... Chrisportelli 16:50, 22 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

nl-Wikipedia reaches 500.000 articles

edit
Latest comment: 16 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Please adjust the Www.wikipedia.org-portal from 498 000+ to 500 000+ articles. Thanks and Greetings from the Dutch Wikipedia!! Romaine 12:59, 30 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Done. --Erwin(85) 13:43, 30 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Switch to HTML 5

edit
Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

MediaWiki is soon going to switch to HTML 5 as its markup language, so it makes sense to have www.wikipedia.org consistent. I've been bold and changed over Www.wikipedia.org template/temp to use an HTML 5 doctype, and removed some redundant cruft – some of which wasn't required even in XHTML 1, some of which was required in XHTML 1 but prohibited in HTML 5, some of which was required in XHTML 1 but is unnecessary in HTML 5. The outstanding problems are 1) use of <big> tags, which should be easily fixed using a bit of CSS; 2) some weird thing about one of the URLs, which I'll have to look into further; and 3) the use of invalid language codes, which I'll bring up with some localization people.

Anyway, if there are any objections, feel free to revert my changes. Otherwise please sync them. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 20:00, 3 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Estonian Wikipedia (et.wikipedia.org) reached 100 000 articles

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Estonian version of Wikipedia (et.wikipedia.org) reached 100 000 articles yesterday. The current article count stands at 100 064. Would it be possible to update the portal accordingly? Best regards and thanks in advance. -- Ohpuu (talk) 19:20, 26 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Www.wikipedia.org_portal&oldid=26734372"
Return to "Www.wikipedia.org portal" page.