User talk:Steelviper/MemoryAlpha

Mind if I play around with this Main Page setup on my own Steelviper?--The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 18:43, 6 April 2006 (CDT)

Steelviper, I also think it a better idea to do what MemoryAlpha did and just call categories what they are "Articles of Interest", etc. as making up our own fun names for sections would just confuse newcomers. --19:42, 6 April 2006 (CDT)

Did you know...

I love this section of the MA front page and I think we'll be able to amass enough random trivia to do well with a counter-part. I bet there's a way to have it randomly pick, say, 5 from a list every midnight or 3am or something (server time). I'd prefer this to the way the Quote of the day works, so that we don't have the same 5 appearing together every time they appear and we don't have to worry if we don't have 1800 trivia ideas. I'd also love to implement the QotD like that (pick randomly at midnight a new one from a list, rather than have one assigned to each calendar day). This would allow for continued growth as RDM continues, rather than having to have a database limited to 365 (well, for 33 out of 4 years, anyway). --Day ^(talk) 23:33, 6 April 2006 (CDT)

Alternatively, and preferably, I could just update the trivia every day myself. I trust that more than randomizers, which don't have good judgement, otherwise we might get stuck with 5 things saying what the colors of the walls are. We don't have enough info yet to update them daily. Memory Alpha can because they've got 10 movies and over 700 episodes to choose from. We've got 33 episodes (plus a Miniseries). Even if we tacked on the one season of TOS, we don't have enough to sustain that kind of thing. One every week or so, done manually for optimum quailty, is the better path for the near future. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 23:47, 6 April 2006 (CDT)

This is all possiable, but there is a problem though. Right now the quotes aren't in a database. We could easily do that, but that's not the problem. The problem is that I have to set up some scripts to first input quotes, then have a script "running" on the server that would have to run at midnight. From there that "outputed" data would have to go in the correct form. (This is where bot's come in.) It's the same concept for "Did you know..." random pick. That even gets more complicated. Most of the Wikipedia stuff (FA, POTD, NEWS) is run by tons of people and they have 1 million articles, so they have a large selection. MemoryAlpha has a little more stuff. I persoanlly don't see the effort for such little content. We would need to set up the boards that selects FA or what quotes go in. --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 00:22, 7 April 2006 (CDT)

I have a better idea:

A) We do not have enough trivia to warrant a bot randomly picking trivia on a daily basis from a large pool, therefore we should not do that
B) I will pick the triva myself, on a roughly weekly basis, and if someone disagrees with it, they can leave a note in Talk to change it--->similar to how our Quote of the Day system works now.
C)If others are unwilling to make the effort, I will be willing to sacrifice my time to the endeavor.--The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 00:36, 7 April 2006 (CDT)

A)not enought content towarrent the effort.
B) Knock yourself out
C)Other people can contribuate to the "Did you know..." Group effort.
--Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 01:04, 7 April 2006 (CDT)

Would this section work similar to the quote of the day, or would it just be random from a database? Can MediaWiki do this as default or will it need a new extension. Wouldnt be too hard to write up in php. --Mercifull 03:14, 7 April 2006 (CDT)

Merv, I don't want to, no offense to you, rely on a single user to update this thing. I think we either do it in an automated way (and if it's picking five every day from a database of 15, that's fine with me) or leave it simply open for all to update as they see fit (like the rest of the Wiki). However, I don't think that a lack of volume means we shouldn't automate the thing. --Day ^(talk)

(Unindenting, but still related to the MA thing). Over at MA, they've already run into this issue. Currently the English MA site is still manual, I believe. The German language site, though, has a template for each week, and kind of like the "Quote of the Day". So the code on the main page would access the current week's DYK's, and users can go as far ahead as they want to lay down future DYK's that will automatically be highlighted when that week comes around. Sort of a compromise on the automation vs. human quality. --Steelviper 07:56, 7 April 2006 (CDT)

Alphabetical Categories

I don't really mind the MA design, but it doesn't really address what I think is the number one problem navigating this site, and that is the distance (in terms of clicks, page scrolling, etc.) between the front-page visitor and as quick an understanding as possible of the categories and types of articles there are available. For an example of a page that I think works fairly well in this regard (not a wiki) go here. Notice that in the sidebar I have easy and immediate access to both an alphabetical listing, 'latest entries', 'maps', as well as divisions naturally suggested by the subject matter like 'Races' and 'Places'. Also notice the way the list is designed as a tight compromise between comprehensiveness and my ability to take in all of it in a single glance. They don't give me a full alphabetical list to page through, nor do they give me a link that says 'alphabetical index'. Instead, they give me 26 links for 26 letters. This two-tiered approach to categorisation is superior, because it's a manageable list that leads to a manageable list. It's a good lay of the land. I want to be able to look at the front page and get as good a 'lay of the land' as possible in a single glance. For example, I don't want to see a link that says 'Characters'. I want to see a section called 'Characters' followed by a set of subcategories (Pilots, Soldiers, Command Staff, Government, Civilians), all on the top of the front page among the other second-tier indices. I would even say that it would be an improvement to turn the Memory Alpha organisation on its head. Put the index stuff at the top (but organised more along the lines of the Encyclopedia of Arda, perhaps in two columns to allow even more categories than Races and Places). And put these bells and whistles which are really just icing, at bottom 'below the fold', so that as people scroll, pure hard information starts to fade more into entertainment. That would be my ideal set of priorities for the front page, so take it for what it's worth to you, I will support whatever design the group settles upon.--Dogger 15:26, 7 April 2006 (CDT)

I must say Encyclopedia of Arda is run really well. I love that site. I don't know if that works on Wikitech very well, but a good point Dogger. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 15:40, 7 April 2006 (CDT)

Below is the closest I've been able to come to an alphabetical index. It's pretty compact. Would you be more interested in a vertical alignment with example words like Arda, or is the horizontal alignment ok? --Steelviper 10:24, 11 April 2006 (CDT)

I like it, Steelviper. It gets the job done. Minor criticisms: (a) When I pick 'R' if there is room it includes 'S' and 'T', which might be useful in some circumstances, but the trouble is that it forces me to scroll further to get at all the 'R's. Since I just clicked 'R' to deprioritise some of the 'R' entries in favour of some 'S' entries which appear at the top of the results, doesn't make much sense. I don't know if this is imposed on you by the wiki tools, or if this is a matter of choice, but it would be better to use all three columns for 'R's, and then to start another 3 columns below that for 'S's, etc. If the only way to achieve three columns of 'R's is to have only 'R's on the page, then I think that would be preferable. (b) I find the distinction between subcategory 'R's and article 'R's to be confusing, and a bit annoying in that it pushes the actual 'R' articles further down the scroll. There aren't that many subcategories, but in the future, there could be. There could be so many subcategories that none of the actual 'R' articles are visible without scrolling, and then you've got a another real problem with deemphasising the most-looked-for results of the click. Not knowing whether this is easy to do, my ideal layout would be: three columns of 'R' articles at the top; scroll down to reveal three columns of 'R' subcategories; scroll drown to reveal three columns of 'S' articles, and then another three columns of 'S' subcategories. That's assuming that we'll keep all the same information on that page and just change the layout. I would not have problem with removing everything from the 'R' page except the 'R' articles proper, and listing subcategories elsewhere in a more conceptual organisation. Alphabetical is alphabetical, and categorical is categorical. There seems to me to be limited value in hybridising them like that by alphabetising categories. Once again, my standard disclaimer: feel free to completely ignore me.--Dogger 14:30, 13 April 2006 (CDT)

I was mainly following the example that I found categories here. From that page it looks like I can specify a "From" as a starting point, but not a "To" for an ending. So basically you end up with all those "unwanted" entries from other letters crowding the screen. This APPEARS to be a technical limitation of the wikicode. The only way around it that I can think of off the top of my head is an ugly hack. (Tagging each article with an "alphabet" category (Category:A, Category:B), so that the category listing would ONLY show that letter.) Same goes with showing the subcategories (other than evaluating which subcategories should actually be subcategories of A to Z). If the "hack" were implemented, you could omit the subcategories and be left only with articles. Hopefully this is just a case of ignorance of wikicode on my part... and I'll continue to look around to see if I can find a way for "R" to just serve up "R" articles with no subcategories. I'm not that hopeful though, as the code above is swiped directly from the category navigation at Wikipedia, and Wikipedia usually has the latest and greatest widgets at work. --Steelviper 14:57, 13 April 2006 (CDT)

Also, I suppose if Mediawiki doesn't do what we need it to, we can change it. The linked extension isn't exactly what we need (lists the whole category, not a specified subset), but it does provide a good example of generating a page based on the category info. If I can't find anything further I may look at modifying that code to do what we have discussed. Do you think the columns are the way to go, or would a flat (vertical) list like the one this extension generates is good enough. --Steelviper 15:34, 13 April 2006 (CDT)

Wow. SV, if I could vote for you for Administrator again, I would!--The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 15:36, 13 April 2006 (CDT)

Alignment

Lawful good. Er. If anybody more knowledgable about html/wikitables reads this, I'd appreciate any help at getting the "Pages of Interest" to align at the top of the box that it's in rather than centering like it currently is. --Steelviper 09:00, 7 April 2006 (CDT)

Looks like I got it. --Steelviper 10:36, 7 April 2006 (CDT)

Control Panel

All the sections on the page lack "edit" buttons, just like MemoryAlpha. As an aid to you, the editor, I figured I'd publish a quick little control panel that exposes edit buttons for all the content sections.

• Did You Know - a trivia section (see discussion above)
• Article of the Week - a featured article section (would need some procedure/policy), and maybe automation
• Template:Article/Spoiler-free - this is the "news" template from the current main page (anything you do to this will show on main page as well)
• Pages of Interest - highlights popular pages and pages that need work
• Encyclopedia - exposes the categories currently. Uses actual category names instead of going to hub pages like the memoryalpha version.
• Template:Content/Menu/Box4 - used in "community", "The Community" on main page
• Template:Content/Menu/Box5 - used in "community", "The Fan Stuff" on main page
• Template:Content/Menu/Box6 - used in "community", "The Wiki" on main page

That's it. --Steelviper 10:36, 7 April 2006 (CDT)

Motion to use this template instead of the Portl project's new front page

Excellent work Steelviper; I couldn't have done this. Needs some minor tweaking here or there, adding Cylon categories etc (I'll get to that today), otherwise I'm in love with this format. Who else thinks that this would be good as our new front page? I think it is easy to use and quiet informative, as well as intuitive. Plus it's "battle-tested" as it were. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 12:48, 7 April 2006 (CDT)

This is a (nearly complete) implementation of a replica of the MA design. I hoped that it could be used as a springboard for figuring out ideas for a main page redesign. Maybe we should discuss the positives and negatives of this design, in hopes of identifying the features we're trying to achieve. For example... I'm not a huge fan of the "Encyclopedia" as it stands. I just exposed categories, but category navigation isn't always the most intuitive, and in the case of the episode guide categories can be pretty ugly (yeah, they're all there, but there's no order to them). Any main page design would probably incorporate finished portals. Also, MA has some categories for Main characters, recurring characters, etc., which I think we might benefit from. The problem of major character navigation remains. --Steelviper 13:58, 7 April 2006 (CDT)

Just saying that, perhaps through my constant association with MA over the years, I just kind of like this one more.--The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 14:15, 7 April 2006 (CDT)

I like this lay-out, but I think we should outline specific goals and make sure this lay-out is meeting them before we put it up. It may be doing everything we want it to do, but I'd like to make sure. Basically, I don't want to get into copying this lay-out just because it works for MA. --Day ^{(Talk - Admin)} 22:06, 7 April 2006 (CDT)