Talk:Main Page

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Revision as of 20:18, 21 July 2004

First post! - InterruptorJones

Second post! (on this page) - hmmm... is that how you do a user name Stu

Just trying to figure out what happens when I post as a guest. -- 64.90.206.254 13:18, 21 Jul 2004 (MST)

What to do?

So, should we freeze the old wiki and start really moving stuff over here? Or do we need to figure things out first? What do you guys think?

First, I think we should only talk about this in one place. So here instead of the Mod forum? I don't know, I personally think the Mod forum is better. However, I'll say here that I do not think I'm ready to start moving stuff over here. I wouldn't want other people trying to do stuff when I couldn't even answer their questions. Ya know? -- Tom 08:17, 20 Jul 2004 (MST)

Links to toons/pages

I think the links to toons and areas of the official site should appear at the top of every page. They are already that way on the Marzipan's Answering Machine transcript pages, and you'll also notice that my beta official version of pom pom (email) has the links at the top. I actually use the wiki to navigate to pages on the Homestar Runner website. If I'm looking for strong bad email "mile", for instance, I'll just type "hrw StrongBadEmail/mile" into my browser. Firefox (using keywords) converts that to http://www.hrwiki.org/index.php?page=StrongBadEmail/mile and then I click the "Watch it!" link to see the toon. Does anyone else agree that it would be better for the links to be more prominently placed at the top of the page? -- JoeyDay 11:39, 20 Jul 2004 (MST)

I think it's pretty standard to have external links at the bottom of articles. I ind of don't like the current format that's on pom pom (email). I use the Wiki to access Homestar Runner.com as well, I usually click on "Toons" or "Strong Bad Email" to do it though. Not ideal, I know. Hmm... I can't decide. -- Tom 11:55, 20 Jul 2004 (MST)

I like having those links at the top. InterruptorJones 12:09, 20 Jul 2004 (MST)

Another thing: Look around Wikipedia. Usually the "summary" is before the table of contents. Now, the screenshot really kind of messes that up, but how should we do that? Bah, I need to get back to work. Just some more "food for thought", I guess. -- Tom 11:58, 20 Jul 2004 (MST)

To be honest, I've never really like the screenshots. All they do is push the content of the pages down so I have to scroll to read it. If the screenshot was smaller it might be useful. Isn't there a way to do that with MediaWiki? I also think the table of contents should be floated. I'll figure out how to do that with the stylesheet. -- JoeyDay 12:05, 20 Jul 2004 (MST)

I like the screenshots, but I think they should be significantly smaller. And I agree about the floating TOC. -- InterruptorJones 12:11, 20 Jul 2004 (MST)

Hey, good idea Joey! I know I see those thumb nail type things in WikiPedia all the time. And they don't even break the text format. Uh... Since you suggested it, you get to look up how to do it. -- Tom 12:12, 20 Jul 2004 (MST)

Upload file

Can we turn this off? I haven't tested it, and don't want to try to at work, but I can only imagine the kind of crap that would get uploaded. And I'm not just talking low quality, I'm talking stuff kids shouldn't even think about... -- Tom 11:57, 20 Jul 2004 (MST)

Well, unless you turned it off yourself, it looks as though it's disabled by default. I kinda want to figure out how to turn it on, but will leave it off for now. I've never really liked the idea of pulling the images from elsewhere. -- JoeyDay 12:20, 20 Jul 2004 (MST)

I didn't turn it off. Hm. Odd. But you're exactly right. Kids could just as easily put a link to an inappropriate image. And as to the upload thing, I like the idea, but would that increase our bandwidth draw by several orders of magnitude? I like using pretty big .png files. I know they are compact, but still... I mean we are pulling down around a GB a day now. Hey, is MediaWiki going to up the bandwidth too? I'd imagine it would, with all this stuff. -- Tom

That really depends on the page weight, but MediaWiki (with the current skin) seems to have a bit more markup overhead than Tavi, upon superficial inspection. I have no idea how much of an impact it'll have. But hosting all of the images from this server may indeed cause bandwidth to spike. If nothing else, it'll be in our best interest to size down all of the screenshots as much as possible. -- InterruptorJones 13:14, 20 Jul 2004 (MST)

Okay, image uploading has been on for half an hour or so. I uploaded that image for SBEmail pom pom. From what I can see, the image must be uploaded in order to do all that fancy thumbnail stuff (assuming it would work on our server, but it won't since ImageMagick isn't installed -- I'm getting in touch with our host to see about that). Anyway, check out the special image pages: Special:imagelist, Special:unusedimages. I think these will facilitate management of images pretty well. As long as we keep an eye on what's going on in there, we should be fine. -- JoeyDay 13:32, 20 Jul 2004 (MST)

Stylesheet

I'm thinking about messing around with the stylesheet, but I'm hesitant. I want to change all the fonts over to what I'm used to at the old wiki, but maybe change is good. What do you guys think? Also, do you like the link colors? I personally don't like the links changing colors after I've visited them, but maybe that's useful. Comments? Thoughts? Thanks. -- JoeyDay 09:39, 21 Jul 2004 (MST)

Heh heh. The color thing can be (somewhat) tweaked a bit by the user in his or her preferences. I know you can change the "edit new page" links to be either red or have that little question mark after them. I don't mind the purple for visited links, this way I can find that one page I haven't been to. And Times New Roman ain't all that bad. I know I see lots of "trebuchet ms" and I might like a change. That all being said: I want you, JoeyDay, to tweak the stylesheet. I just like what you come up with. I've seen it in action before and I like what I seeHolyCrapLookAtTheLogo! Did you just change that? It looks great! See, that's the kind of stuff I'm talking about. Carry on. -- Tom 10:11, 21 Jul 2004 (MST)

I'm not at all a fan of Trebuchet MS. But I prefer sans-serif for reading, so my vote is for Verdana or Arial or similar. And I prefer the red links over the links with question marks for nonexistant pages. -- InterruptorJones 12:35, 21 Jul 2004 (MST)