Template talk: WikipediaSister
From open-encyclopedia.com - the free encyclopedia.
Moved from User talk:Maveric149. --Lexor|Talk 08:12, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
| Contents |
Problems with Template:wikipediasister, do you see them too?
For some reason Template:wikipediasister doesn't want to include properly. On my browser (Galeon/Mozilla under Linux), I start seeing HTML markup inline after I save the page? Do you have the same problem? -Lexor|Talk 10:25, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
- It looks fine to me. I made the links direct. Did that help? --mav
- Yep. Must be something weird in the namespace syntax when it parses it to HTML. Probably have to ask a developer like Brion or Tim Starling. Thanks for fixing this. I wonder if it's worth an extra MediaWiki for the intro paragraph as well for the three versions: standard, text-only and table-free? --Lexor|Talk 10:37, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
- So long as we want to have the wording be the same. --mav
- Well at least a subset of the sentences should be, I would have thought, otherwise the pages could drift, in fact the text version doesn't match the standard right now. By the way, could you also replace the inline markup for the sister projects with the {{msg:wikipediasister}}? Thanks. --Lexor|Talk 11:14, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
- Done. --mav
Images
Do you think this would look better? It needs a bit more formatting/resixing:
Meta-Wiki | Wiktionary | Wikibooks | Wikiquote | Wikisource |
Dmn?
- Well it does look better, standalone. Does it look better on the main page too? Ankur
- You bet it looks better! But, I'm afraid to say, it only looks about 10 times better! Really, these pictures would really lvien up the sister projects section! Great idea!
BTW: I thought that at a point they all used to have pictures? What lonely person had to take the life out of them?! --Exigentsky
Clickable images
Is there any way the images can be made clickable? (ie act as links?) Otherwise it would be annoying to click on the image, expecting to go to the site, when one goes to the Image: page instead. Dysprosia 01:12, 9 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- I've asked about this before as well when the Main Page was first redesigned. It would be nice to have on anything on the main page really. RADICALBENDER★ 23:00, 10 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Absolutely. I mean, a lot of people coming to wikipedia are newcomers. They've spent there lifetime clicking on images that either enlarge or take them to another article. To a newcomer it obviously is a strange behaviour for an image to take the user to the attribution page even if the image does enlarge. On the main page it is expected that clicking on the image will take you to the article rather the Image:Xyz.png page. So definitely image on main page should take you to the article. This reminds me of the wikipedia logo - which takes you to the homepage of wikipedia instead of Image:WikipediaLogo.png or something of the sort. Now if there were a solution to the problem of wikipedians who will want to modify the image. --Ankur 02:29, 11 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- I put a redirect on the image page of the Meta image, the same can be done for the others. The only disadvantage is that it is now inconvenient to go to that page: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Image:Metawiki.png&redirect=no .--Patrick 11:19, 11 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- Actually, I don't think it will, for places like Wikibooks or Wikiquote, which don't have the capability to link to the projects using conventional [[ ]] means (eg, you can't go wikibooks:Main page) Dysprosia 05:04, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- The first three seem to do that but the last two do not. for me at least... --Rj 18:21, Jun 12, 2004 (UTC)
- Three work (plus en: for going back), two do not:
m:Main Page wikiquote:Main Page wikisource:Main Page wiktionary:Main Page wikibooks:Main Page
--Patrick 15:57, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- It seems somebody's had the cunning idea of making them into interwiki redirects - something that I'm normally against, because you can't then get back to the redirecting page without handcrafting a URL, but which is probably forgiveable in this case as it's probably the only way of achieving the desired effect. The reason wikisource and wikiquote aren't like that is that they still haven't had interwiki prefixes set up for some reason. Anyone fancy bugging a developer to do it? - IMSoP 15:22, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)
OK, seems all the interwiki redirects work. Previously, the Wikibooks image took you to a multilanguage portal, which seemed rather illogical to me - this is the English Wikipedia, and the Wikibooks:Main Page links fine to those other languages should the user so desire, so I changed it to just go to the Main Page. --Twinxor 04:03, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Wikitravel
I see that Wikitravel has just been added to this list. First of all, it looks kinda out of place, on its own row to the far right. Secondly, the line above the logos says that the Wikimedia Foundation operates these projects, which isn't true for Wikitravel: according to m:Wikitravel, the project is run by two Wikipedians, but it isn't an official Wikimedia project. – Minh Nguyễn (talk, blog) 20:24, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I would include WikiAtlas links in Wikitravel.
Wikinews
Should a link to wikinews (sorry - I don't know the interwiki) be included? It's a WM project, right? --Whosyourjudas (talk) 06:10, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- It's still in beta, and it doesn't have a final logo, so it's probably too early for that. -- Netoholic @ 07:04, 2004 Dec 4 (UTC)
- Google news is still in "beta" too, so thats a moot point. Plus Wikinews has been in the news already on several high profile sources, so people will be wondering where the link is. The newspaper logo will do for now. Norman Rogers\talk 11:47, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)
