Removed my comments |
Adam Cuerden (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 289: | Line 289: | ||
*'''Questions:'''<br />1. I share Raul's concerns regarding the layout mock-up. Am I correct that this is merely a non-binding example (and we'll have an opportunity to propose/discuss alternative implementations later)? That was my impression during the previous discussion.<br />2. Is there any special significance to Wednesday? I believe that it would make more sense to use Friday or Monday, thereby grouping together all of the special content (in a memorable/promotable manner) instead of needlessly switching back and forth.<br />—[[User:David Levy|David Levy]] 18:32, 23 February 2011 (UTC) |
*'''Questions:'''<br />1. I share Raul's concerns regarding the layout mock-up. Am I correct that this is merely a non-binding example (and we'll have an opportunity to propose/discuss alternative implementations later)? That was my impression during the previous discussion.<br />2. Is there any special significance to Wednesday? I believe that it would make more sense to use Friday or Monday, thereby grouping together all of the special content (in a memorable/promotable manner) instead of needlessly switching back and forth.<br />—[[User:David Levy|David Levy]] 18:32, 23 February 2011 (UTC) |
||
**Hi David, thanks for your questions. (1) the proposal above states "If this proposal passes, coding of the FL main-page inclusion will be put up for review, including a mock-up of it in action, and a "rubber-stamping" vote at simple majority to confirm its use." so yes, the mockups are precisely that, mockups, with scope to be modified. (2) No, not really, it was simply to provide natural breaks in the second FP listings. Your proposal has merit, so a Friday or Monday could well be a better bet. [[User:The Rambling Man|The Rambling Man]] ([[User talk:The Rambling Man|talk]]) 18:41, 23 February 2011 (UTC) |
**Hi David, thanks for your questions. (1) the proposal above states "If this proposal passes, coding of the FL main-page inclusion will be put up for review, including a mock-up of it in action, and a "rubber-stamping" vote at simple majority to confirm its use." so yes, the mockups are precisely that, mockups, with scope to be modified. (2) No, not really, it was simply to provide natural breaks in the second FP listings. Your proposal has merit, so a Friday or Monday could well be a better bet. [[User:The Rambling Man|The Rambling Man]] ([[User talk:The Rambling Man|talk]]) 18:41, 23 February 2011 (UTC) |
||
*'''Support''' - it should be possible to put FL on the left (by simply switching the locations of its and FP's box), but that's a separate debate that can be had once the mock-up's ready. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup></span> 19:05, 23 February 2011 (UTC) |
Revision as of 19:05, 23 February 2011
Archives: Sections of this page older than three days are automatically relocated to the newest archive. |
---|
001 002 003 004 005 006 007 008 009 010 011 012 013 014 015 016 017 018 019 020 021 022 023 024 025 026 027 028 029 030 031 032 033 034 035 036 037 038 039 040 041 042 043 044 045 046 047 048 049 050 051 052 053 054 055 056 057 058 059 060 061 062 063 064 065 066 067 068 069 070 071 072 073 074 075 076 077 078 079 080 081 082 083 084 085 086 087 088 089 090 091 092 093 094 095 096 097 098 099 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 |
Main Page error reports
To report an error in content currently or imminently on the Main Page, use the appropriate section below.
- Where is the error? An exact quotation of the text in question helps.
- Offer a correction if possible.
- References are helpful, especially when reporting an obscure factual or grammatical error.
- Time zones. The Main Page runs on Coordinated Universal Time (UTC, currently 20:06 on 8 June 2024) and is not adjusted to your local time zone.
- Can you resolve the problem yourself? If the error lies primarily in the content of an article linked from the Main Page, fix the problem there before reporting it here. Text on the Main Page generally defers to the articles with bolded links. Upcoming content on the Main Page is usually only protected from editing beginning 24 hours before its scheduled appearance. Before that period, you can be bold and fix any issues yourself.
- Do not use {{edit fully-protected}} on this page, which will not get a faster response. It is unnecessary, because this page is not protected, and causes display problems. (See the bottom of this revision for an example.)
- No chit-chat. Lengthy discussions should be moved to a suitable location elsewhere, such as the talk page of the relevant article or project.
- Respect other editors. Another user wrote the text you want changed, or reported an issue they see in something you wrote. Everyone's goal should be producing the best Main Page possible. The compressed time frame of the Main Page means sometimes action must be taken before there has been time for everyone to comment. Be civil to fellow users.
- Reports are removed when resolved. Once an error has been addressed, determined not to be an error, or the item has rotated off the Main Page, the report will be removed from this page. Check the revision history for a record of any discussion or action taken; no archives are kept.
Errors in the summary of the featured article
Today's FA
Tomorrow's FA
Day-after-tomorrow's FA
Errors with "In the news"
Errors in "Did you know ..."
Current DYK
The DYK on Fang Yi'ai states "his wife Princess Gaoyang was forced to commit suicide after their failed rebellion". However, there is no mention of suicide in the linked article on Princess Gaoyang, which states: "They stormed the palace but were stopped and captured. Gaoyang and her husband were executed by hanging shortly after." The only mention of a suicide on her page is the category: "Forced suicides of Chinese people". Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 13:43, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
- Confirmed. Secretlondon (talk) 14:19, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
- It wasn't even approved like that. Someone made up another hook as it looked hookier! Secretlondon (talk) 14:26, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
- The hook that was approved in the DYK hook review is now on MainPage. --PFHLai (talk) 16:15, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Secretlondon and PFHLai: both hooks were approved in the nomination. Could you please explain the logic of dismissing a hook based on what is in another, much more poorly-written article? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:49, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
- The hook that was approved in the DYK hook review is now on MainPage. --PFHLai (talk) 16:15, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
- It wasn't even approved like that. Someone made up another hook as it looked hookier! Secretlondon (talk) 14:26, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
The DYK on the Larmanjat guided rail system describes it as being "successfully demonstrated in England", but the demonstration system was actually built in France, according to the article itself. FourteenDays (talk) 16:29, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
- The third paragraph in the Lisbon steam tramways section says
Sharp Stewart delivered the first locomotive to Buckhurst Hill, Essex, in December 1872, where a length of demonstration track had been laid. Public trials were held ... Performance was satisfactory on the first day, ... Clark, Punchard were authorised to continue construction in Lisbon.
Buckhurst Hill, Essex is in England. --PFHLai (talk) 18:55, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
Next DYK
Next-but-one DYK
Errors in "On this day"
Today's OTD
Tomorrow's OTD
Day-after-tomorrow's OTD
Errors in the summary of the featured list
Friday's FL
Monday's FL
Errors in the summary of the featured picture
Today's POTD
Tomorrow's POTD
- 9 June - in blurb at "This E. penia buttefly perching on a flower", pls tweak typo in "buttefly". JennyOz (talk) 13:02, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
- Done, thank you. Black Kite (talk) 13:06, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
General discussion
Featured sounds vote
- The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
There are currently 155 featured sounds, which, thanks to some being long, symphonic works, equals 235 files. There is also a backlog of featured pictures over a year long.
The basic proposal is that a second featured pictures section is added to the main page. On Saturdays and Sundays, this will become a Featured sound section instead. I've run this past Howcheng, who manages Picture of the Day, and he fully supports this.
This will both deal with the massive backlog in featured pictures, while at the same time giving featured sounds more visiblity, thus encouraging that sort of content. It would also make for a good press release.
As a further beneficial side effect, the code to make that possible can easily be adapted to have other additions to the main page. The Featured List community have expressed an interest in Wednesday, for example. (Though that is another vote)
With the number of featured sounds we have, at two a week, we have between a year and a half and two years of backlog before we run out. However, the greater visibility of the project should both encourage people and groups to offer more recordings to Wikipedia, and increase participation in the project. Should the number of featured sounds being nominated and promoted increase, we could add additional days of sound. (In the very unlikely event that featured sounds cannot become viable after this, it can be scrapped from the main page at such time as the sounds run out.)
The formatting will be roughly the same as Featured pictures.
I created the backend for the MOTD section of the Commons Main Page, and have a high level of experience in Wikipedia templates and code. As such, no further technical assistance is required. For the code geeks, my rough plans for the backend are below the following cut.
Technical details |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
This proposal is made with the full support of the featured sounds community.
Voting will close on the 22nd, at about 8pm. A 2/3rds majority is required.
If this proposal passes, the coding will commence. Coding time is estimated at one month, though it may be quicker. When it's complete, it will be put up for review, including a mock-up of it in action, and a "rubberstamping" vote at simple majority to confirm its use. Adam Cuerden (talk) 19:44, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support Sven Manguard Wha? 18:27, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support providing a diversity of featured content on the main page is a worthwhile objective, and featured sounds would be a logical step. --RexxS (talk) 19:05, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support for the same reason lists should be on the page. And apologies, this wasn't intended to be a vote for FL, it was simply to see if the usual objections to lists on the main page still existed. I've collapsed that part of the discussion until we have a complete technical solution. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:32, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support —Chris!c/t 19:37, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support -- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 19:54, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support (e • nn • en!) 20:17, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support The Celestial City (talk) 20:45, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support putting featured sounds on the main page. (About the others: I support putting featured lists on the main page in principle, if there's a way to mesh it with the existing content. I oppose putting the featured topics/portals up - I don't think they're well-suited for the main page, at least as illustrated by File:Front Page Mockup with Featured Sounds and Topics.png.) Raul654 (talk) 21:00, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support featured sounds - very much so. This is fully in keeping with a NOTPAPER encyclopedia. Thanks as ever to those providing the technical solutions for their generous work. Pedro : Chat 21:10, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support - Fully. This has been necessary for a while. (X! · talk) · @939 · 21:31, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support It's not "featured content" if it isn't, well, featured! --Dorsal Axe 21:45, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support It seems that the community's atttitude toward putting other featured content on the Main Page has changed. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:24, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support in concept although I will reserve final judgement for when the layout is done. howcheng {chat} 23:02, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
- What do you think of the layout in the mock up in the image above? (focusing only on the purple section, not the yellow section.) I think that Adam has confirmed his intention to do the split that way (55/45 I think) with the ability to recombine them into one full length section on days with panoramas. It is, based on what I saw when I was doing research for the mock up, perfectly possible to do. Sven Manguard Wha? 23:39, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
- Note: that's easily tweaked. It's literally just a matter of changing a width parameter for the box. This might be better dealt with once the code's set up, and I can easily show changes. =) Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:02, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support All featured content should have a degree of representation on the main page. —WFC— 23:10, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support "Sounds" (sorry!) awesome. I'm just wondering, what will the header be when the second box is used for FPs? "Featured picture two" doesn't sound very good (ahhh puns). /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 23:21, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
- I was thinking "Today's bonus featured picture" or "Today's second featured picture", but that's trivial to change. We could also do some clever code to make it "Today's featured pictures", and so on. There'll be a period of feedback before the final vote when all this can be discussed and tweaked, but, for obvious reasons, I don't want to spend days or even weeks on code before getting the community's approval. =) Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:35, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
- A single "Today's featured pictures" heading would work nicely. —David Levy 00:37, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- I was thinking "Today's bonus featured picture" or "Today's second featured picture", but that's trivial to change. We could also do some clever code to make it "Today's featured pictures", and so on. There'll be a period of feedback before the final vote when all this can be discussed and tweaked, but, for obvious reasons, I don't want to spend days or even weeks on code before getting the community's approval. =) Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:35, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support conditional on Howcheng's final approval. Howcheng and POTD are the ones giving up Main Page space, and if he's content with the final setup then I'm content. In case there's any doubt created by the image used above to illustrate how this would look, I oppose inclusion of featured topics. - BanyanTree 00:32, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- Query will this prevent very wide pictures being suitable for POTD? They are something of a wiki-speciality - some of the most striking FPs are panoramas, of a type seldom seen elsewhere on the web. If the second "featured whatever" box is e.g. a featured sound that doesn't need much space, that'd work well, but will it be practicable to adjust the sizes of the two boxes to ensure a good fit in general? TheGrappler (talk) 00:33, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- No, it will not prevent panoramas from appearing on the main page. Adam mentioned in the (collapsed) technical details section that the second box could be suppressed, meaning that there would be one box on days scheduled for panoramas (identical to what currently exists today.) And I agree, panoramas are just awesome. Sven Manguard Wha? 01:06, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks Sven - I just spotted your comment upthread and struck through my query but got an edit conflict! I think the proposal should probably make this fact explicit: the fact that some days (determined by rota? at the very least it's going to involve putting some heads together) there will be only one FP, isn't obvious from what's written above. But the proposal actually sounds very good. (And in contrast to Raul, I even liked the Featured Topic idea!) TheGrappler (talk) 01:19, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- This was all made very clear at some point yesterday before the voting started. As an indication of how much has happened, and why I'm not at all bothered by the query, I can't even find it anymore. The short answer is that if this goes through, there will be two featured pictures on Mondays through Fridays, and one Featured picture and one featured sound on Saturdays and Sundays. This is part of the reason that the FP people are behind this, they've got quite a backlog to clear themselves, and this will certainly help. On days where there are two featured pictures, the option exists to combine the two boxes into one and insert a panorama there. The FP leadership will continue to determine which FPs go where, when, and the FS leadership will determine which sounds appear when, however Featured Sounds will only appear on the main page on the weekends, that's not based on rotation. I hope this clears everything up. Sven Manguard Wha? 01:34, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- For the record, I'm going to set it up so that panoramas can run on any of the double-FP days, but I don't think the percentage is high enough that there should be a specific day of the week for them, just whenever they show in rotation. Adam Cuerden (talk) 01:51, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks Sven - I just spotted your comment upthread and struck through my query but got an edit conflict! I think the proposal should probably make this fact explicit: the fact that some days (determined by rota? at the very least it's going to involve putting some heads together) there will be only one FP, isn't obvious from what's written above. But the proposal actually sounds very good. (And in contrast to Raul, I even liked the Featured Topic idea!) TheGrappler (talk) 01:19, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- No, it will not prevent panoramas from appearing on the main page. Adam mentioned in the (collapsed) technical details section that the second box could be suppressed, meaning that there would be one box on days scheduled for panoramas (identical to what currently exists today.) And I agree, panoramas are just awesome. Sven Manguard Wha? 01:06, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support. What a great idea! All featured content should have a chance to reach the main page and I think this is an excellent way to do it.4meter4 (talk) 01:39, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support All of our best work should eventually be featured. The inclusion of sounds would be fantastic. Melicans (talk, contributions) 02:04, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support per the peer pressure above and the fact that this is a good idea. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 02:10, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- support mostly we should be prepared be switch back if the backlog of FP ever becomes significant depleated. Oh and we'll need to to the usual cross browser/screen resolution and skin testing before going live. So dig out those old computers with tiny screens and IE6 people.©Geni 02:14, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- There is no reason why either of those would be infeasible. I've got access to a public school computer lab, so if you want this tested on Netscape with a 600x400 tube-style screen, I can actually do that. Take a minute to contemplate how sad a statement that is. Sven Manguard Wha? 02:52, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- Why bother? Not even Microsoft supports IE6 any more, and the Main Page gets horizontal scroll bars when the viewport goes below 1264px in both Firefox and Opera. --RexxS (talk) 03:31, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- 3.66% of our non mobile users use IE6 compared to 3.55% of non mobile users who use opera of all types[1]. Good news is MSIE 5.01 is down to 0.02%.©Geni 18:56, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- It won't go live until the mockups are up and have had time to be tested, obviously. =) Thanks for the reminder, though: I had forgot about cross-browser testing. Adam Cuerden (talk) 19:07, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- 3.66% of our non mobile users use IE6 compared to 3.55% of non mobile users who use opera of all types[1]. Good news is MSIE 5.01 is down to 0.02%.©Geni 18:56, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- Why bother? Not even Microsoft supports IE6 any more, and the Main Page gets horizontal scroll bars when the viewport goes below 1264px in both Firefox and Opera. --RexxS (talk) 03:31, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- It's called browsershots.org. (X! · talk) · @106 · 01:33, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
- Hey, I have an old computer, and I use it when the "main" computer is being used by someone else. It has W98, MS 5 and a 800x600 CRT monitor that goes all green-ish if the VGA cable is not exactly placed in a certain position. I manage to browse and edit wikipedia in it. --Enric Naval (talk) 16:42, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
- There is no reason why either of those would be infeasible. I've got access to a public school computer lab, so if you want this tested on Netscape with a 600x400 tube-style screen, I can actually do that. Take a minute to contemplate how sad a statement that is. Sven Manguard Wha? 02:52, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support in principle. From what I remember, the FP backlog was about 300 two or so years ago. How has that changed, and what's the (average) promotion rate now? MER-C 02:47, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- I'm told we have a year of FP backlog, and, looking at the last couple months, the FP promotion rate appears to be slightly above the (current) break even point at about 35 a month. This should give enough time for FS to find its feet. Adam Cuerden (talk)
- I remember you saying something like this two years ago! I opposed this last time, but my concerns (mostly about inflexibly squashing the FP to one column) have been addressed. I'm confident that this will help FS to find its feet and if we run low on F[PS]s, we can fill out the space with something from the other categories. MER-C 05:30, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- Well, I've actually coded a backend since then, and thus know more about what's possible =) Adam Cuerden (talk) 18:28, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- I remember you saying something like this two years ago! I opposed this last time, but my concerns (mostly about inflexibly squashing the FP to one column) have been addressed. I'm confident that this will help FS to find its feet and if we run low on F[PS]s, we can fill out the space with something from the other categories. MER-C 05:30, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- I'm told we have a year of FP backlog, and, looking at the last couple months, the FP promotion rate appears to be slightly above the (current) break even point at about 35 a month. This should give enough time for FS to find its feet. Adam Cuerden (talk)
- Support, an excellent idea, great proposal. -- Cirt (talk) 02:54, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support. Great idea. --Patar knight - chat/contributions 04:04, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support everything looks good to me, and it adds some variety to the Main Page. Imzadi 1979 → 05:07, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support Jclemens (talk) 05:29, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support Should also encourage people to become more active in FS and may result in some high-quality media released for WP use. Great idea! Adabow (talk · contribs) 05:33, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- I would certainly hope that those two things happen. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:43, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support Not only would this be a great way to show more featured content on the main page, but it would be a great way at getting exposure for the featured sounds project as well (full disclosure: also support featuring FL on the main page). Great proposal. Nomader (Talk) 07:53, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support Featured Sounds is a great part of Wikipedia, and I think that everyone should know about it.--Danaman5 (talk) 08:54, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support This would demonstrate some more of the exciting resources available at Wikipedia. Major Bloodnok (talk) 09:24, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support, in principle. Good idea. --Tone 10:26, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support A good proposal, and an applicable one too. – Novice7 (talk) 11:06, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- Conditional Support I am for this proposal as long as the people at FP on on board with reducing their current space on the Main page, that at a certain point in time (say 6 months from when this is implemented) we revisit to see if any issues have risen we are not seeing right now, and that a proposal to include Featured Lists is forthcoming.--Found5dollar (talk) 15:08, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- My understanding is that they are on board as this gives them a chance to reduce their considerable backlog of FPs themselves. Sven Manguard Wha? 16:11, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- I'm slightly against making an "official" review-in-six-months proposal, simply because I honestly don't think anyone will remember to actually do it. But, of course, if issues arise, they should be brought up and looked at, at any time they're noticed. Adam Cuerden (talk) 16:25, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- My understanding is that they are on board as this gives them a chance to reduce their considerable backlog of FPs themselves. Sven Manguard Wha? 16:11, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- Strong support Great idea! --Perseus8235 17:17, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- For today's featured topic, we should make a short summary of the topic, in my opinion. --Perseus8235 18:00, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- Topics aren't part of this proposal, and, frankly, without someone involved in them pushing for it and planning things out, it's not going to happen. You can't put something on the main page without that community's support. Adam Cuerden (talk) 18:24, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
Strong suggestion - in this case, someone ought to crop the mockup image at the bottom, to remove the "Featured Topic" section. Particularly since the technical details are hidden in a collapsed box, I suspect a lot of people are basing their decisions on the mockup (which is certainly the most prominent and easily-understood part of this proposal). TheGrappler (talk) 18:34, 16 February 2011 (UTC)- Fixed Adam Cuerden (talk) 19:15, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks, I suspect there'll be a bit less confusion now! TheGrappler (talk) 21:09, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- Fixed Adam Cuerden (talk) 19:15, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- Topics aren't part of this proposal, and, frankly, without someone involved in them pushing for it and planning things out, it's not going to happen. You can't put something on the main page without that community's support. Adam Cuerden (talk) 18:24, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- For today's featured topic, we should make a short summary of the topic, in my opinion. --Perseus8235 18:00, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support. We need to have more diversity on the Main Page and need to do some promotion to get more sound files. --Eleassar my talk 17:49, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- Full support for increasing the diversity of content on the Main Page. Happy‑melon 18:15, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support I believe that this will be a positive change to the main page. Alpha Quadrant talk 19:34, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support Excellent work. I really hope this turns out as well as envisioned. BobAmnertiopsis∴ChatMe! 20:17, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support – I agree with the general feeling that a piece of featured content should be able to have its day on the Main Page, and think that the example shows that a featured sound would be a good fit there. It just feels right in that position. I wouldn't want to see an FS every day because we don't have enough of them, but twice a week should be fine. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 22:47, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- Oppose Not every featured sound or featured image needs to hit the front page. The process of selecting items for the front page should be a second layer of editorial control. With regards to featured sounds, the quality and quantity are currently too low to warrant a spot on the front page. John Vandenberg (chat) 00:35, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
- I respectfully disagree with you on several points here. First of all, with over 150 featured sounds, there is over a year and a half of sounds if we place two a week on the main page. Several editors are working on acquiring more high quality recordings, and a few Wikipedians upload their own performances. As to the quality of the sounds, these sounds represent the very best of free sound on the internet anywhere. Also featured are historical recordings of great importance, including presidential speeches and "firsts" in sound (such as the first known recording of the human voice.) I believe that there are plenty of excellent works that deserve to be featured.
- If this still does not sway you, consider the comparative states of Featured Pictures now and when it first began appearing on the main page. Clearly much has improved since then, in quality, quantity, and participation. Many of us in the featured sounds community see this as not just a way of featuring excellent content, but as a way of pushing the genre forward, much as the at first occasional featuring of pictures on the main page did for images.
- I do hope you and the community come to embrace and support this, I wholeheartedly believe it is truly deserving. Sven Manguard Wha? 01:55, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support: More representation of featured content on the Main Page. --Another Believer (Talk) 00:39, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
Oppose. Change to "Support", after discussions, but I do believe the system should be prepared to adapt if it becomes clear that there are shortages of "professional"-standard featured sounds. We simply do not have the kind of professional-quality sound files to sustain two exposures a week—and here I talk mainly of our music files. The same issue does not apply to speeches and animal sounds, I think. But music files are different from everything else, including featured articles and pictures. The standard of performance and the audio-engineering that is essential to produce an acceptable quality in a music file occupies a highly professional, exclusive realm. We have very few featured sounds that are of professional standard. The few that are of professional standard are unsatisfactory in certain ways—it's complex and multifactorial. This contrasts with high-quality pictures and prose, which involve skills that are less reliant on exclusive, advanced professional training, which don't suffer from the same extraordinarily tight rules about copyright as apply to music recordings, and the almost total lack of a culture worldwide of free uploading by professionals. Let us not forget, too, that "found" featured content is just a little bit weird when we drum on about it on the main page, whereas featured articles always show off the talent of WPians. I can cope with "found" featured pictures, although the work of our own photographers is somehow inherently more satisfactory when highlighted on a page that is quintessentially associated with the achievements of the community and its product. On another level, I believe the public who arrive at the main page are going to be far more judgemental of music files than they are of pictures and prose: music files are in your face a lot more than pictures are prose. I love the idea of two featured pics per day (there's a huge backlog), but I think one featured sound per week would be wiser, not two, given the current state of our repository. Who is going to choose these music files for main-page exposure? I'll be coming in as a wet blanket, applying the highest standards, at the venue for selection. It will end up being a slot for frog noises and old speeches, and very occasionally a music file. Tony (talk) 02:08, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
- To the concern of who is deciding on what appears on the main page, it is my understanding that Adam would be integral to that. As you know, he is just as capable of picking out the finer points within a musical performance as you are, and I don't think he would allow anything substandard onto the main page. You, of course, would also be invited to weigh in. The objective here is to showcase the best of Featured sounds on the main page, which will by virtue of prominence promote the upload and expansion of the FS process. Sven Manguard Wha? 02:56, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
- I reject the argument. There may be some sounds that do need selected out, but can you name a repository of freely-licensed music that's better than Wikipedia? No. Because none exists
- Featured sounds will improve with exposure. Denying that exposure, while asking it to reach a level that's only possible through a slow process of increasing quality, is counterproductive.
- Even then, we have many sounds that are of professional quality. Pandora Records was a professional record company that opened its archives after failure. We have expert-level performances by User:Jujutacular on the classical guitar, User:Makemi singing, and User:La Pianista on piano. We have Enrico Caruso, the first recorded jazz piece, Scott Joplin himself on piano roll, and John Philip Sousa's band playing John Philip Sousa.
- Dozens of Wikipedians have searched out and found the history of recording, from the earliest known recording of the human voice, which was never actually intended to be played back, to an Edison phonograph cylinder advertising itself, as the technology became commercialised. We have speeches by Walt Whitman, Arthur Sullivan, Neville Chamberlain, and even have a recording of Heinrich Himmler talking about the planned extermination of the Jews. We have entire albums by notable artists such as Hungry Lucy. Could it be better? Yes. Will the prestige of being on the main page directly lead to it being better? If Featured pictures is any guide, yes. Adam Cuerden (talk) 03:58, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
- Speaking from (a little) experience, getting good recordings of some material types isn't beyond the ability of many with home recording instruments. It'd be nice to attract more of them - I bet most people don't even know you can upload sound to wikipedia. JJ Harrison (talk) 08:37, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support Though Saturday and Sunday we receive the fewest hits of the week. What if sounds were featured on Sunday and Monday? Then you get a bigger hit day, and therefore more views? I don't see a downside to that. upstateNYer 04:54, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
- Can you link me to the data for that please. I didn't know that was the case. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:31, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
- Outweighing that is surely the fact that people accessing Wikipedia at work won't be as likely to listen to audio content as at home. Rd232 talk 06:44, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support. I'm all in favour of spreading the goodness of Main Page exposure more widely. Rd232 talk 06:44, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support. I was a little skeptical at first but Adam Cuerden's little rant above convinced me otherwise :P --haha169 (talk) 08:04, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support — Tivedshambo (t/c) 11:32, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support ~~Awsome EBE123~~(talk | Contribs) 15:17, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
- Extremely minor issue, I have already voted, but realized a small issue. I am basically the only year round editor at Wikipedia:April Fool's Main Page and I am just curious as to weather or not you plan on adding the Featured Sounds before April fools day this year. If so i will have to create new pages for discussion as it is less than 2 months away.--Found5dollar (talk) 16:07, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
- April 1st is a Friday, so we would not be scheduled for the main page, although I wouldn't turn down the invitation. The closest thing I can think of that would fit is File:DescenteInfinie.ogg, an aural (audio) illusion. Sven Manguard Wha? 16:38, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
- Fully support this well thought-out proposal. Careful With That Axe, Eugene Hello... 17:12, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
- Strong support - this is a considerable launching pad for FS. The key to improving a wikiproject is exposure, and with main page coverage, we'll only continue to grow. —La Pianista ♫ ♪ 18:46, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
- Oppose the use of the "vote" terminology. Wikipedia is not a democracy. Corvus cornixtalk 01:19, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
- (apologies for the tangental comment) One day I'll get around to writing Wikipedia:Wikipedia is a de-facto democracy. I'm not saying I'm happy about it, but it's difficult to argue that most discussion-based processes (RfA, Arbcom elections and resolutions, RfCs, most XfDs, DRV) are democratic processes nowadays. The only exceptions are AfD (where admins can do by-and-large as they please), and the featured processes (where actionable objections must be resolved, except where there is consensus that an objection is not valid).—WFC— 01:46, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
- Do you have any comments on the concept of featured sounds on the main page or just about the method? Also, what exactly is your alternative. I point out that just under 50 people have already showed interest in this by posting here. I expect that number to at least double. With 100 people in an open discussion, the amount of chaos generated would drown out any ability to reach consensus, and it would likely end up in a straw poll when that became apparent. There's a reason that all the processes that have the highest levels of participation use polls, it might not be the idea way, but it's the most functional one. Sven Manguard Wha? 03:24, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
- (apologies for the tangental comment) One day I'll get around to writing Wikipedia:Wikipedia is a de-facto democracy. I'm not saying I'm happy about it, but it's difficult to argue that most discussion-based processes (RfA, Arbcom elections and resolutions, RfCs, most XfDs, DRV) are democratic processes nowadays. The only exceptions are AfD (where admins can do by-and-large as they please), and the featured processes (where actionable objections must be resolved, except where there is consensus that an objection is not valid).—WFC— 01:46, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support. Are there implications for server load from serving multiple sound streams over serving pictures? Stephen 03:35, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
- Sound files are smaller than video files, which are occasionally included on the main page as part of Featured pictures. (For example, File:DuckandC1951.ogg, a 20 megabyte file, was on the main page in March 2009). As such, there shouldn't be any problems. Comparing them to regular pictures, I actually suspect that sounds may use less resources compared to pictures, as the pictures are served to everyone, but sounds are only served to those who choose to listen to them. Adam Cuerden (talk) 03:41, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, what Adam said. Also, for the sake of discussion, the video on the main page today is 6.8 MB for 17 seconds. The Featured Sound that was put on the main page on January 15th for Wiki10, a part of The Four Seasons, was 4.1 MB for three and a half minutes. Sound files really are not that large, and the main page does not seem to have any trouble today holding the video file. Sven Manguard Wha? 03:54, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
- Sound files are smaller than video files, which are occasionally included on the main page as part of Featured pictures. (For example, File:DuckandC1951.ogg, a 20 megabyte file, was on the main page in March 2009). As such, there shouldn't be any problems. Comparing them to regular pictures, I actually suspect that sounds may use less resources compared to pictures, as the pictures are served to everyone, but sounds are only served to those who choose to listen to them. Adam Cuerden (talk) 03:41, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support per duh. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 06:31, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support It'd be a great way to showcase the fine sounds hosted on enwp and possibly encourage more participation in FSC. Ancient Apparition • Champagne? • 01:28, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support Long overdue.--White Shadows We live in a beautiful world 02:53, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support Yay ! Hopefully encourage more participation at FSC, and possibly donation of high-quality sound files.Acather96 (talk) 14:41, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support I've always believed that 'Featured Media' should make an appearance. Iciac (talk) 03:23, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support It's something that I'll never use, but I can certainly see the benefits. As long as it doesn't preclude wide images on occasion, I'm happy to support WormTT 09:53, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
- It won't, I assure you. Sven Manguard Wha? 20:27, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support along with FL. Courcelles 10:03, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
- They are already working on their proposal and are going to launch it as soon as this one clears. We just didn't want to have multiple ones going on at once, it would become too chaotic. I agree though, FLs would be a wonderful addition to the main page.
- In an either/or proposition, I would much rather have FLs and/or or GAs, which are more encyclopaedic and often require more work (not that I wish to disparage Featured Sounds), but, in principle, more Featured Stuff on the MP is no bad thing. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:20, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
- See my response to Courcelles directly above. Sven Manguard Wha? 20:27, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support. --Avenue (talk) 00:29, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support I have some concerns on the technical end (the player), but running stuff on the front page, may make those more likely to get fixed. Would love to see Featured Videos for same reason (probably joint with sound as FEatured Media). Featured Lists (maybe even GAs) would be good as well. I don't really care how often the run or what they steal from, just get more stuff in the mix. Wiki needs to grow or die.TCO (talk) 00:54, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- To Tony's point, I think we are better off running some stuff on the front page and using that as a driver to improve quality. I could support once a week though. Maybe an FL a week and an FS a week. I don't have an issue with showing off uploaded stuff. This is about displaying what is in the encyclopedia, not about emphasizing original work, per se.TCO (talk) 01:03, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what can and cannot be done with the default player. All featured sounds should be able to run on it though, and if one isn't capable of doing so, that's actually rather easy to fix.
- As to featured videos, the current system is that both FP and FS have videos. Really though, videos are much more common in FP, FS only has three. That isn't to say we don't want them, however in FS videos would have to be focused on things already covered by FS (so we would have videos of speeches, videos of musical performances, and video field recordings.) The judging would swing heavily towards the audio component of the video, although both parts would have to be of a high quality. If the audio was outstanding and the visual was awful, I suppose we might separate the two, however to my knowledge that hasn't been done or even proposed before. I suppose the best answer I have is that if you see something that you thing is FS or FP quality and is in Video form, don't hesitate to submit it. If it's primarily an audio centered video, send it to FS, if it's primarily a visuals centered video, send it to FP. Sven Manguard Wha? 01:48, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- To Tony's point, I think we are better off running some stuff on the front page and using that as a driver to improve quality. I could support once a week though. Maybe an FL a week and an FS a week. I don't have an issue with showing off uploaded stuff. This is about displaying what is in the encyclopedia, not about emphasizing original work, per se.TCO (talk) 01:03, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support - FS, FP, FL and FV also. Although the latter video infrequently because of browser and bandwidth issues, but having a video infrequently would highlight the lack of royalty free video support on many browsers. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 02:15, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- Videos are generally considered part of Featured pictures, and have been on the main page for ages. I don't think anyone will be hugely surprised to know FL will be going to vote once this one is done, since the proposal uses this one's backend. Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:40, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- It's pleasing to hear videos are considered pictures. As I don't recall seeing one on the main page, can I ask when (what date) was the last one on the main page? Regards, SunCreator (talk) 03:06, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- I honestly don't know. I know two were promoted last week, if that helps. Adam Cuerden (talk) 03:39, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- I remembered a plasmaball File:Plasmaball vid2.ogg, but it turns out that was over a year ago (16 Feb 2010). A cursory check reveals a couple of animated gifs, but I didn't see any other videos since then. WormTT 12:06, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- I honestly don't know. I know two were promoted last week, if that helps. Adam Cuerden (talk) 03:39, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- It's pleasing to hear videos are considered pictures. As I don't recall seeing one on the main page, can I ask when (what date) was the last one on the main page? Regards, SunCreator (talk) 03:06, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- Videos are generally considered part of Featured pictures, and have been on the main page for ages. I don't think anyone will be hugely surprised to know FL will be going to vote once this one is done, since the proposal uses this one's backend. Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:40, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support. Will the sound files increase the download time of the page?--DJDunsie (talk) 18:53, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- They shouldn't: Sounds are only loaded after you click the "Play" button. Adam Cuerden (talk) 19:15, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
Suggested another category
Under the section languages are 4 categorys (500,000, 150,000, 100,000 and 50,000 articles). I would suggested another one/two with 1 Mio./250,000. It would easier to show the increase of the non-english wikis. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.153.238.248 (talk) 12:06, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
- Please see Talk:Main Page/Archive 153#Over one million articles, Talk:Main Page/Archive 154#Proposal: Add million-article level to Wikipedia Languages section, Talk:Main Page/Archive 155#1,000,000 +, and Talk:Main Page/Archive 155#Wikipedia size: Implementation of proposed changes for some of the more recent discussions of this perennial proposal and the reasons it has not been implemented. --Allen3 talk 12:48, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
Libya
What happened to the Libya protest in the news section? Hiberniantears (talk) 01:21, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- It's the third out of the five there, "Authorities open fire on demonstrators in Libya and Bahrain amid continuing protests across the Middle East and North Africa." Sven Manguard Wha? 01:50, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- Howcheng appears to have restored an old version of the template by accident; Libya had its own blurb earlier today. StrPby (talk) 01:59, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
Wikipedia languages
Please add Azerbaijani Wikipedia (Azərbaycanca) to "More than 50,000 articles" section. Regards.--PPerviz (talk) 02:00, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
Interwikis too.--PPerviz (talk) 02:09, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- In addition to the quantitative requirement, we also have qualitative ones. Please see Template talk:Wikipedia languages#Azerbaijani wikipedia. —David Levy 06:10, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
Featured list proposal
Following on from the proposal to include featured sounds on the main page alongside a second featured picture on Saturdays and Sundays, I would like to propose the regular inclusion of a featured list on the main page. There are currently nearly 2,000 featured lists, and the recent changes in featured list criteria have ensured that all new promotions meet the highest standards, and that the older lists are being actively evaluated (via our WP:FLRC process) so only the best remain featured. We propose that, on Wednesdays, the "second slot" be allocated to a featured list, replacing the second featured picture. The FL community have provided their backing to this, as have the three FL directors. This would automatically benefit from the successful FS proposal, since User:Adam Cuerden's coding for that purpose will be written so it can easily be adapted to enable the appearance of lists on the main page.
The FL community have selected a set of existing featured lists; these provide an indication of the diversity of the project's very best work in lists. The directors would be responsible for the initial selection of lists for main page inclusion; the community would have two weeks to ensure that each blurb is of the highest standard for the main page. Once the process is more mature, we aim to move toward the WP:TFA/R model, which could either be integrated with the FA version or be a stand-alone process, managed by the FL community:
The following technical details are virtually a straight copy of those produced by Adam Cuerden, who made the same proposal for the inclusion of featured sounds. The requirements for FL inclusion in the same slot on the main page are identical.
Technical details |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
The proposal will run for approximately seven days, and like the FS proposal, will depend on a two-thirds majority for success. If this proposal passes, coding of the FL main-page inclusion will be put up for review, including a mock-up of it in action, and a "rubber-stamping" vote at simple majority to confirm its use. Thanks for your time and interest. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:03, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
P.S. The proposal will be closed around 17:00 (UTC) on 2 March. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:05, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
Discussion of proposal
I'm definitely in favour of including lists to the main page. But I'm not certain about including it in that particular spot of the page, for some reason. Featured Sounds make sense there, I suppose, as all the multimedia is kept together in one place. I guess I just feel prosaic content belongs higher up on the page. I think it would look kinda weird to have FA in one corner, and FL in the other... That's just me though. --Dorsal Axe 17:13, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- Well, the coding proposal allows for the list to be placed on the left-hand side on the main-page, under the featured article/DYK, if that would be considered acceptable to all parties. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:19, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- I just saw the other draft on your page Rambling Man. Left alignment is better in my opinion. I support this proposal, by the way. – Novice7 (talk) 17:23, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- As I say, the proposed coding caters for both! The Rambling Man (talk) 17:24, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for the quick response. I like the look of that mockup you posted on my talk page (might be worth posting that here). It certainly makes more sense to have it left aligned, and I'm happy to accept that. --Dorsal Axe 17:26, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- No problem. I've added a small thumb here. Not wishing to repeat myself too many times already, the proposal supports both configurations! The Rambling Man (talk) 17:31, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) I absolutely agree with this proposal. – Novice7 (talk) 17:33, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- No problem. I've added a small thumb here. Not wishing to repeat myself too many times already, the proposal supports both configurations! The Rambling Man (talk) 17:31, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- I just saw the other draft on your page Rambling Man. Left alignment is better in my opinion. I support this proposal, by the way. – Novice7 (talk) 17:23, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support The FL process has developed beyond recognition from the sorts of lists that made the grade in 2006. Nowadays we have a large, diverse stockpile of high quality material, that is worthy of being featured on the main page. —WFC— 17:22, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support discussed above. – Novice7 (talk) 17:33, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support: There is a large selection of high quality lists covering a variety interesting topics, and they certainly have as much of a right to be on the Main Page as featured pictures and sounds. Hopefully this will inspire people to create new Featured Lists as well. BigDom talk 17:36, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support per all above. --Dorsal Axe 17:39, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) Support The FL process has finally matured to the point where it's appropriate to include them on the main page. We've come a long way since the process first started, and I'm more than happy to support. Nomader (Talk) 17:40, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support Good work deserves to be featured, and the samples I looked at from the subpage linked above were very good work. Sven Manguard Wha? 17:45, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support Wiki needs to grow or die. I see the general having of more types of featured content on the front page, very good. Not just for what we deliver to our readers, but for how it motivates us to up our game, knowning that we will have "front page" view. I know that runs through Sandy's head all the time. It is a good influence on the content work and even spreads beyond featured work itself. Lists are something we've been figuring out, and still are (are they "good" or "bad", how do we make them best use for the reader, what are the boundaries of list and article.) I think getting stuff to front page, will end up helping us work through these things and just improve overall as a content source. The simple way of starting with just a few features, and of picking the clearest best stuff, without a lot of upfront process, makes sense. We can evolve from there, but starting simple and "certain to succeed" makes sense. TCO (talk) 17:46, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- I supported putting featured sounds on the main page, but I never supported a second featured picture, nor was that ever mentioned in the proposal (such things were explicitly left to be decided later). Frankly, that would look very stupid and I oppose it. I support putting featured sounds on the main page, and featured lists too, if we can find a non-wonky way of doing it. Raul654 (talk) 17:47, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- To quote the third sentence under "Featured sounds vote" (above) "The basic proposal is that a second featured pictures section is added to the main page. On Saturdays and Sundays, this will become a Featured sound section instead." Don't know how you can say that a second featured picture was never mentioned in the proposal, Raul. BencherliteTalk 18:07, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, I missed that part. I was looking at the mockup, which apparently only applies 2 or 3 days out of the week. What I'd like to do is find a non-stupid solution that makes everyone happy, like the 2x3+1 layout I mentioned on my talk page (featuring lists, sounds, and pics every day of the week, in their own dedicated panes). Raul654 (talk) 18:13, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- To quote the third sentence under "Featured sounds vote" (above) "The basic proposal is that a second featured pictures section is added to the main page. On Saturdays and Sundays, this will become a Featured sound section instead." Don't know how you can say that a second featured picture was never mentioned in the proposal, Raul. BencherliteTalk 18:07, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- Oppose for now, per Raul. If the design issues are sorted out, and Raul switches to Support, my !vote can be considered the same as his. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:53, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- Have I missed something here? Where are we proposing a second featured picture? —WFC— 17:55, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- The very first sentence of Rambling man's proposal: Following on from the proposal to include featured sounds on the main page alongside a second featured picture on Saturdays and Sundays Raul654 (talk) 17:58, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- This was in the FS proposal, and has been agreed by the consensus of the community. We just followed in its footsteps... The Rambling Man (talk) 18:01, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- The very first sentence of Rambling man's proposal: Following on from the proposal to include featured sounds on the main page alongside a second featured picture on Saturdays and Sundays Raul654 (talk) 17:58, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- (e/c) I have to admit to being confused as the "technical details" here are virtually identical to those of the FS proposal. The screenshots are mockups, as stated, and the coding proposed by User:Adam Cuerden in the successful FS proposal would be the same as that used for FLs. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:56, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- If the design issues are sorted out to Raul's satisfaction, I'm a support (I also agree that pictures and sounds should be on the mainpage, but only if Lists are as well), but working out the design issues is crucial in mainpage proposals. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:04, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- Well, Raul supported the design of the FS proposal, and that's identical to this one, which he now opposes as being stupid. I guess we'll have to see what the remainder of the community think! The Rambling Man (talk) 18:07, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- You're mis-characterizing my position. I support putting featured lists and sounds on the main page, but I think the proposed layout is terrible. And I would have opposed the featured sounds proposal for the same reason too, had I read all the fine print. Raul654 (talk) 18:16, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- It wasn't fine print. It was the second paragraph of the proposal. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:19, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- Arguing what Raul missed or didn't in the proposal now won't be as productive as working out the design issues. There is support for including the content: the question is how. My !vote is contingent upon working this out with Raul because I will likely be traveling as the details are worked out, and if that occurs, please count my !vote as the same as Raul's. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:24, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- I think the FP mention should be stricken altogether from the proposal; what we want to do on non list days is irrelevant as far as lists themselves are concerned. —WFC— 18:22, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- Why not just HAT this proposal and start a new one with a sensible layout? Raul654 (talk) 18:26, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- I think that's a much better way forward. It's clear that some version of the proposal has support, but we should not separate that from design, which is crucial to discussions of mainpage proposals. I agree that starting over is the way forward, focusing now on design, given that the support is there. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:30, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- Why not just HAT this proposal and start a new one with a sensible layout? Raul654 (talk) 18:26, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- I think the FP mention should be stricken altogether from the proposal; what we want to do on non list days is irrelevant as far as lists themselves are concerned. —WFC— 18:22, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- Arguing what Raul missed or didn't in the proposal now won't be as productive as working out the design issues. There is support for including the content: the question is how. My !vote is contingent upon working this out with Raul because I will likely be traveling as the details are worked out, and if that occurs, please count my !vote as the same as Raul's. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:24, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- It wasn't fine print. It was the second paragraph of the proposal. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:19, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- You're mis-characterizing my position. I support putting featured lists and sounds on the main page, but I think the proposed layout is terrible. And I would have opposed the featured sounds proposal for the same reason too, had I read all the fine print. Raul654 (talk) 18:16, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- Well, Raul supported the design of the FS proposal, and that's identical to this one, which he now opposes as being stupid. I guess we'll have to see what the remainder of the community think! The Rambling Man (talk) 18:07, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- If the design issues are sorted out to Raul's satisfaction, I'm a support (I also agree that pictures and sounds should be on the mainpage, but only if Lists are as well), but working out the design issues is crucial in mainpage proposals. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:04, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- Have I missed something here? Where are we proposing a second featured picture? —WFC— 17:55, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support In a best case scenario, we would be able to rotate the four types of featured content that never get any MP space (lists, topics, sounds, and portals) instead of running a second picture four days a week... but the proposal on the table is better than the status quo. (Not to mention the FT promotion rate is too low.) Courcelles 18:11, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support (obviously, given my involvement with FL). Featured lists have improved immensely in quality in the last few years and there is a lot of excellent material here that is likely to be of interest to our readers. BencherliteTalk 18:12, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support Looking at the example above, the list's lead he took is not really small by size. We must ensure we take FL with such size. The layout won't be ideal like above if the lead is small.-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 18:28, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- Questions:
1. I share Raul's concerns regarding the layout mock-up. Am I correct that this is merely a non-binding example (and we'll have an opportunity to propose/discuss alternative implementations later)? That was my impression during the previous discussion.
2. Is there any special significance to Wednesday? I believe that it would make more sense to use Friday or Monday, thereby grouping together all of the special content (in a memorable/promotable manner) instead of needlessly switching back and forth.
—David Levy 18:32, 23 February 2011 (UTC)- Hi David, thanks for your questions. (1) the proposal above states "If this proposal passes, coding of the FL main-page inclusion will be put up for review, including a mock-up of it in action, and a "rubber-stamping" vote at simple majority to confirm its use." so yes, the mockups are precisely that, mockups, with scope to be modified. (2) No, not really, it was simply to provide natural breaks in the second FP listings. Your proposal has merit, so a Friday or Monday could well be a better bet. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:41, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support - it should be possible to put FL on the left (by simply switching the locations of its and FP's box), but that's a separate debate that can be had once the mock-up's ready. Adam Cuerden (talk) 19:05, 23 February 2011 (UTC)