Wikipedia talk:Community portal/Archive 9

This is an archive of past discussions on Wikipedia:Community portal. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 5

←

Archive 7

→

Proposed additional item

I would like to place the following item in the Things to do section of the Community Portal:

Read a book on a topic you like and use what you learn to improve related articles.

I think this is a good way to improve the accuracy and completeness of articles and should be encouraged. It has the further benefit of making it easy to cite your reference sources.

Comments? -Opus33 17:28, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

No, because the point of that section is for links to specific tasks. Improving articles are an obvious thing to do (that nobdoy does!).--Here T oHelp 17:54, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree with HereToHelp. Too obvious a suggestion. I guess it could potentially be added to Wikipedia:Requests for expansion though (which is linked from the "Here are some tasks you can do:" section, to the right of "Things to do"). -Quiddity 19:07, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Order of GAC and CTC

Zzzzz: your edit summary: "discuss on talk page: nobody cares about duration".

That's what you tried to claim last time, on April 20, when you engaged in a revert war with two admins, over this exact same issue. I don't care what order they are in, but i do care about your lying reasoning. Tell us why you Really think it ought to be closer to the top (ie you're involved with it, or just think it's more important) and we'll be more inclined to take you seriously. -Quiddity 20:00, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

it should be closer to the top to be in alphabetical order. JUST LIKE THE RIGHT HAND SIDE. what is your secret agenda behind putting the letter G above the letter C? could it be an attempt to somehow "promote" the good article project in an underhanded way? there is little reason otherwise to fight over such a minor matter right? clearly any further attempts to "revert" my changes will be an obvious indication that there is a hidden agenda to promote a pet project, which is not what the community portal is for (put a notice in the notice section for that). Zzzzz 00:35, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

I really don't feel like fighting over this again. But not only is the GACOTW more frequent but also more used, with more people involved. But hey, we need those core topics. I should tell you, though, that the AID and the COTW are there because of importance, not alphabetizing.--Here T oHelp 00:52, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Besides, the Core Topics is practically deserted. Good Articles is bustling. Forget alphabetical order, we use importance. Now I will revert, and if you revert again I will lock the page and use my last revert.--Here T oHelp 00:59, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

and i will have you blocked for again abusing admin privileges. Zzzzz 01:00, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm not part of Good Articles. And technically, it's not a Wikiproject. And I have every right to lock a page against edit warring.--Here T oHelp 01:43, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, according to Happy camper, I don't, but that's not grounds for blocking. I'm out of reverts, though.--Here T oHelp 02:04, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Zzzzz: the right-hand side? is not in alphabetical order... A M W L. ((Addendum: Oh, you mean the "other collaborations" list. Well, that and the "fix up projects" are the only things on the CP that are in alphabetical, nothing else is. :) )

I have nothing to do with the GAC or CTC projects, and honestly believe the CTC is more important and underrepresented. Alphabetical ordering is one of many options, and we, the maintainers and redesigners of the page came to the consensus that this current arrangement made the most sense, for some of the reasons HereToHelp mentioned above.

My suggestion would be to expand the CTC summary, in the style of the GAC summary, or with a blockquote like the AID/COTW. A Two sentence synopsis of the current collaboration, instead of just one word. Heck, put a small image in too, look how much space there is now that the COTW is fresh (and a stub, hence no pic yet).

Compromise is the core of diplomacy and progress :) -Quiddity 02:26, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Main & this page's banner styles

Just curious, is anyone interested in changing the main page's banner styles to be more like the ones here (e.g., cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" for "Today's featured article" etc.)? To me the style here is a little crisper and more attractive. Rfrisbie^talk 19:58, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree. (I don't have time to help right now though). I'd suggest Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Usability#Converting main page to CSS would possibly be the place to raise it? -Quiddity 20:24, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Collaborations columns overlap

My display doesn't show all of the text in the left column of Collaborations. The "Edit" link crosses the line as well. I've seen this sort of problem with some infoboxes too. Is this a "bug" or something else? Rfrisbie^talk 23:37, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

What browser/OS/screen-res? (i'm guessing IE6, as that's the one browser i don't have on hand to test with... :( -Quiddity 17:44, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

You guessed it! Windows IE6 @ 1024X768 :-) Rfrisbie^talk 18:52, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

I isolated the problem to the "center" parameter in the Article Improvement Drive image. I found a kludge by removing the parameter and centering the image in a table. Obviously, a more elegant fix is welcome. Rfrisbie^talk 02:33, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Probably the same issue as at Help:Contents. Possibly related to it being a div floated with a table. Might all get fixed once someone (sigh) gets the layout into css. I keep procrastinating relearning tables just so i can fix these. Tables are evil! Not having IE6 to test crossbrowser bugs doesnt help matters. that's my excuse anyway.... </ramble> -Quiddity 02:44, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

If what I did causes some other problem, just revert. I don't know enough about css to help with that. :-( Rfrisbie^talk 02:51, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

How about a shortcut here?

WP:COMM? Arbitrary username 19:19, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

How abut the nagivation bar at the top of your screen?--Here T oHelp 19:25, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

I support this idea. I know there's a link on the navbox, but it would be good for linking to in talk pages, rather than having to put Wikipedia:Community Portal. Of course, WP:CP is taken, but for one thing, the dab at the top of that page would look nicer with a "...see WP:COMM" rather than the whole name there twice. Is there any objection to a shortcut other than that it's easy to get here already? I like the WP:COMM name, I was thinking about this before and couldn't come up with anything better than WP:COMPORT which is pretty ugly :). I'd go ahead and make it if there is no objection? Though I'd have to ask someone else to put the shortcut box on the project page - this page is so dense I dunno where it would go. -Goldom ‽‽‽ ⁂ 00:42, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Uhh, so I just tried out typing WP:COMPORT, and guess what, it already is a shortcut here. I guess it wasn't so bad a name after all, hehe. I still think another at WP:COMM wouldn't be a bad idea - nor would putting that shortcut box somewhere on the page so others could know this one already exists -Goldom ‽‽‽ ⁂ 00:45, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Ok, that was much easier than I imagined. I went and added the other shortcut, since there was already one anyway. Sorry for all the needless text above when I just did it all myself anyway :) -Goldom ‽‽‽ ⁂

I changed it to only list 1 shortcut (and moved it to within the first subtable's code) to prevent excess line-breaks, and keep things simple. (nothing/nobody uses "wp:comport", lets not start anyone using it now just by listing it ;)

It's bad enough that the copyvio page gets "wp:cp", but they also have 3 acronyms for people to mis-remember... multiple acronyms for pages should be inherently discouraged for obvious reasons. -Quiddity 01:28, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

New item?

Since the main page has a featured article/picture, couldn't something similar be displayed in the CP? Specifically I'd propose a Featured/Selected Portal/Wikiproject presented weekly to draw attention to wikipedians' good work maintaining a certain topic. Currently Wikipedia:Featured portals has 13 Portals. There are no featured wikiprojects being selected. Perhaps well working wikiprojects could be proposed to be displayed. They would be displayed for a week (7 days), since there aren't too many to choose from right now. How does this sound? feydey 21:37, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Interesting.--Here T oHelp 22:02, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Page Length

Can we shorten the discussion page? Maybe clean it out occasionally. It could do with a good shortening.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Bad Astronomer (talk • contribs)

This is nothing. See WP:ARCHIVE.--Here T oHelp 11:22, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

New pages seeking contributors (or was it New Projects, Collaborations and Portals)

For ages the new portals, WikiProjects and Collaborations section keeps being renamed, moved, split up stuck back together and so on. I propose that we try to agree what it should be named and where it should go and say if you rename it or move it without community consent then it gets reverted and you get punished (maybe).

So please list suggestions for a permanent title and permanent layout under the subheadings below, then if my idea is a good idea and lots of ideas are submitted then it will go to a voting (I know - evil) thing where we can decide once and for all. Lcarsdata ^{Talk | @ | Contribs} 15:15, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Title Suggestions

New WikiProjects, Collaborations and Portals --Lcarsdata ^{Talk | @ | Contribs} 15:15, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Layout Suggestions

Down the left hand side below the Signpost. See my sandbox for more, needs a bit doing to it. --Lcarsdata ^{Talk | @ | Contribs} 15:15, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

We're working on that already ;) see the top thread on this page: CBB redesign. Currently stalled due to problems with the "Notices"'s edit link mis-floating. -Quiddity 16:40, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Why are there no new "Notices" and "To dos"?

For a fair while now there has been no new points in either the main Notices or in the To Do secion immediately below it. Surely there is stuff going on all over the place but it looks like the whole project is abandoned! Sure, if you scroll down you see all the collaborations of the week etc. but the first thing you see whe you open the Community Portal is the same old message. I would have expected the main bulletin board to be moving too fast, certainly not for it to be moving too slow. Witty lama 15:23, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

CBB: And no-one is archiving their new additions, and only a couple of people are trying to actively maintain it...

Potential options:

Move the CBB's "To dos"(maintenance) section to down under the (green)"To do lists" righthand column (under the "If it exists, it's probably listed at Wikipedia:Maintenance" line)
Or merge the CBB's "To dos" into the notices section, and give them the same 7day pulldate as everything else.

I also want to somehow highlight the Signpost when it is a fresh update (mondays). My eyes tend to skip over it, due to its homogenous layout week-to-week. (I'll bring this up with them).

The only other (drastic) option I can see, is to merge the top two sections into two columns. eg CBB on left, To do lists on right (they're about the same length, so should work as far as that goes..). I can do a mockup if anyone else likes that idea.

Other suggestions? -Quiddity 20:21, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

A redesign is not the answer to inactiveity. Moving stuff further down and separating it makes it less noticeable. Keep it up there, visible, aand advertise about the CBB a bit more.--Here T oHelp 20:25, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, i still suggest we merge the Maintenance section into the Notices section, if only because it'll be empty in 2 days...-Quiddity 05:31, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

CBB archives, and related problems

Noone has been archiving the new additions, for almost 2 weeks. I suggest we give up on the archiving. The wikiprojects/portals/collabs are all (meant) to be listed at their root page in the proposals sections anyway. And the notices archived don't seem to be really useful as a reference.

With agreement, i'll remove the link from the CBB, and from the instructions. -Quiddity 05:31, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Lcarsdata ^{Talk | @ | Contribs}

Done. -Quiddity 23:24, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Change the Article Improvement Drive

I have seen that the current article improvement drive is mathematics ( Wikipedia:Article Improvement Drive ) yet on the community portal it still says Gagauzia. Matwat22 19:26, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Anyone can do it, just follow the directions at Wikipedia:Article Improvement Drive/Maintenance, or nag the project manager/s. :) -Quiddity 20:55, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Awful!

The top of the project page looks terrible. I suggest, a) making the contents and date/time boxes the same width and placing them on the same side of the window, b) losing the bullet points in the text. Alan Pascoe 19:56, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Indeed it does, at 800x600 (or large fonted browsers). Hmmm. Maybe the datebox could be moved into the CBB's header. I'm not sure it really needs to be here anyway, this page is cluttered enough as it is! --Quiddity 20:59, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

I also dislike the date code inserted in teh CBB. --Osbus 22:45, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

i've removed it altogether. -Quiddity 22:54, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Update announcement

I just wanted to update the notice about the backlog on Category:Copy to Wiktionary that was on the bulletin board a couple of weeks ago and let everybody know that the backlog has been completely eliminated. This means that there's now an even bigger backlog of articles in the Wikipedia:Transwiki log holding bin whose final dispositions need to be decided. TheProject 06:47, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

I'll update that for you.--Here T oHelp 11:16, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

There appears to be a glitch in accessing the "general expand an article" page - I presume a minor hiccup.

Thanks a lot. (I've also pushed back the pull-date by a month.) Am I allowed to put up announcements myself (provided they're appropriate)? If I am I won't put you through the hassle next time. TheProject 17:15, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Yupyup :) like it says "Post your Wikipedia related news and announcements here!" --Quiddity 18:44, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Dude, it's a wiki :) --Osbus 20:57, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

How can I get question answered not listed in any of numerous help pages?

I want to know where a page went once it was renamed. The history only shows it after it's new name. Typing the old name in search only shows that it is redirected. KarenAnn 01:20, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Useless comments

Could someone please help me? The Billy Talent talk page is
constantly riddled with unapplicable comments and I'd like to
blacklist these people. Is this possible?Correction officer06 19:28, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

a new standard

could be possible create a new standard with kbibtex developer to make easer add a wikipedia article as reference into a thesis? For example add at the end of each wikipedia articles a little portion of code that kbibtex is able to read and with wich it can create a reference at wikipedia artcile web page? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 151.46.248.128 (talk • contribs) .

The place to ask questions about wikipedia is Wikipedia:Help desk. Thanks. -Quiddity 18:57, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

In any case, AFAIK - we already include BibTeX citation format. Here's an example for the Debian article. 66.81.17.66 19:07, 1 June 2006 (UTC) (really User:JesseW/not logged in)

Guidelines, Help, and Resources display problem

I just noticed the right-hand column for Guidelines, Help, and Resources displays beyond the right border for me. I use IE6. I had the same type of problem with Collaborations until I put the image in a table. Any suggestions? Rfrisbie^talk 02:57, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

I removed the sistertemplate's table's center alignment; did that help/change it at all? -Quiddity 05:23, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

No change, thanks for trying. Rfrisbie^talk 06:54, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

After uncentering the headings in Template:Wikipediasister-list and Wikipedia:Tip of the day/June 1, 2006, the display problem was fixed. Unfortunately, changing every Tip of the day seems a bit "unelegant."" Rfrisbie^talk 18:04, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Any chance we can convince you to switch to firefox? microsoft, and specifically IE, are eeeevil... ;) --Quiddity 18:14, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Mu-hahahahaha!!!! Some here would say that's my middle name! ;-) I asked the TOD folks if they would be willing to left-justify their heading. Otherwise, I'll just live with being half-tipped. Rfrisbie^talk 18:19, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

There's elegant evil, like the 4 horsemen of the apocalypse, or mini-golf in hell. And then there's bad evil, like IE, or screaming-themselves-hoarse babies. IE is really, really, insidiously bad. Bad layout engine, incredibly bad security, bad respect for standards, bad respect for consumers. Unless you're locked in, because of a bad-evil company IT dept, then seriously, switch browsers [1]. :) -Quiddity 18:30, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

I am working under a "no downloads" policy, but I'll take a look. :) Rfrisbie^talk 19:00, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

CBB archive?

I remember there was one, but I cannot find it. Was it moved? deleted? Renata 23:50, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

see above. essentially, there were no active maintainers, and users weren't archiving when they added, so we mothballed the archives. i guess it seemed non-essential make-work, and we'd be more productive writing articles than hand-archiving notices. And everything stays up there for at least 7 days, so the history is a little easier to search through than otherwise. -Quiddity 02:25, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Fine with me. I was just looking for something on CBB explaining what happened because I knew that there were archives somewhere... you know, sort of "we don't archive this thing anymore." :) Thanks for reply! Renata 03:07, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Richard Branson Page Constantly Spammed

I've just removed three sites that were totally unrelated to Virgin and obviously sponging off it. Could a few good Wikipedians volunteer some time to keep an occasional eye on it? Much appreciated. Richard Branson 05:49, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Should we have a chat box?

I think a chatbox like the japanese chatsubo would be a good idea, I mean, the Japanese made a good effort, so I think we could return the favour.

THE PROJUCT PAGE IS TOO WIDE

The projuct page, Community Portal, is too wide for windows 95. I would like it to be repaired so it fits within the screen. I don't know HTML and probably never will. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chuck Marean (talk • contribs)

What resolution are you using? (and please don't SHOUT, and remember to sign your posts with ~~~~). --mtz206 (talk) 15:39, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, and you mean the project page? Hey, don't blame us, blame Windows.--Here T oHelp 15:41, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

HELP, Wikipedia:Community Portal HTML needs repair. Hi, there's something wrong with the HTML of Wikipedia:Community Portal. It causes the page to be about 5 feet wide. IE 5, Windows 95. This is a new computer. (Also, it doesn't get the editing tool bar.) --Chuck Marean 15:44, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

It's your computer, not us. Please use a higher screen resolution.--Here T oHelp 15:53, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

IE 5 came out in 1999. Win95 came out in 1995. Even if your computer is new, your operating system and browser are VERY out-of-date. In fact they are both officially unsupported by microsoft, receiving no new security patches, and hence pose large security risks to anything you do with, or store on, your computer.

I do in fact have IE 5, and the ComPortal is indeed 5 feet wide. But IE 5 uses such an outdated layout engine, and is used by such a tiny minority nowadays, that's it's really not worth troubleshooting.

If someone actually sold you a new computer with win95 on it, go get very angry at them, they took advantage of you. (I should know, i'm using win98, which itself is rapidly becoming unsupported by most major software products). --Quiddity 18:09, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

I reccomend trying Mozilla Firefox. I use it on my iMac G5 and it works great. But even at only a year old, Apple might stop Power PC updates in a year or two. that's the problem with computers, and I will agree that one of Apple's weak points is support to older models.--Here T oHelp 19:38, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Firefox doesnt support win95. ;) Nothing does, it's just too old.

And chuck, the problem isnt in the bulletin board, i don't know why you posted that section of code. -Quiddity 21:40, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

You mean win95 doesn't support Firefox.--Here T oHelp 22:27, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

I think Windows95 was copyrighted a little while ago: 1985.--Chuck Marean 03:51, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Windows 95. -Quiddity 06:16, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Mozilla's (zilla) browsers are based on Netscape Navigator (gator) , & both Netscape Navigator and Internet Explorer evolved from the Mosaic browser. Mozilla's web site is http://www.mozilla.org/. For some reason, Wikipedia:Community Portal is the size of Godzilla. --Chuck Marean 20:13, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

...--Here T oHelp 20:15, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Just because I like beating my head against the wall: Chuck, please get a better browser instead of making things more complicated for thousands of other users. For the sake of historical correctness: Netscape's current browser is built on the Mozilla codebase, not the other way around. Mozilla was a complete rewrite of the browser and has no connection to older versions of Navigator. Navigator was in turn not based on the Mosaic codebase (though IE was). · rodii · 21:56, 10 June 2006 (UTC)