Talk:Main Page

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Revision as of 21:32, 2 April 2005 by Evin290 (Talk | contribs)
Jump to: navigation, search
In order to shorten the size of this page, all conversations before the 30th of December have been archived. You can access the archive here.

Contents

What the crap?

Why am I not on the list of registered users? --Upsilon

You're number 439. -- Tom 11:42, 30 Dec 2004 (MST)

2004/2005 Tsunami Donation Link

I was just reading up on the Indian Ocean Earthquake and realized how incredibly horrible this event was, and I'm seriously thinking we need some kind of banner to a donation link to the Wikipedia donation page. Or something like that. →[[User:FireBird|FireBird]]

How very specific your request is. -Fhq

Fhq, what's your point? It's a good idea, don't give him crap because he's thinking larger than himself. Bird, perhaps you should send Joey a PM on the forum. -- AgentSeethroo

Just in case anyone was wondering, we won't be adding a notice to the Main Page. If you'd like to put a notice on your userpage, that would be acceptable. -- Tom 20:14, 7 Jan 2005 (MST)

Dubious reference solution

Over the past few Strongbad e-mail articles, I've read a lot of (to be frank) farfetched suggestions of references that TBCs are presumably making to other stuff. Maybe, if you're 100% sure that something is intended as a reference (for example, a character name or line very specific to one TV show), then it's fine to say it's a reference. But if something just seems to remind you of something else (for example, a song that sounds kinda-sorta like a song that was played in the 23rd episode of some TV series), then it's more accurate to say that it is reminiscent of something, rather than a reference to something.

Just a suggestion.

A wonderful suggestion, and it goes along with the ongoing discussion we are having regarding the overhaul of our current fun fact system. Thank you for your concern and idea. -- Tom 14:52, 13 Jan 2005 (MST)

Locking down the main page

I visited today and noticed that the main page had been defaced. Someone else restored the last known good version, but it seems to me that the front page should not be editable by just anyone for this exact reason. Even the main page of Wikipedia is off-limits to anyone except staff...

Yeah, I want the main page protected as well... -woddfellow2|? 14:05, 14 Jan 2005 (MST)

-It happened again. This must be done NOW.

Look, the template does nothing to prevent trolling; it's a redundancy. Locking down the Main Page is a good way to go, since nothing really changes there, anyway. -- FortyTwo 14:26, 14 Jan 2005 (MST)

I find it funny how the MediaWiki's been around for at least 5 months now and only NOW are people starting to complain about wanting the Main Page locked down. Personally, I think it's prime idiot bait, as in "if you deface the main page, you're automatically not fit to be on the wiki." --TheNintenGenius 15:02, 14 Jan 2005 (MST)

You could have a way to detect whether someone is severely defaceing the page or not. --67.161.224.65

Okay, due to several requests and the seeming lack of need to update the Main Page, I've protected it. Please note that I do not like having it protected, this being a wiki and all, but I agree that it really doesn't need to be edited that much and is just sitting there as troll fodder. Thanks to all who helped with that last batch of defacement. -- Tom 19:12, 14 Jan 2005 (MST)
I never change the main page, so I'm pretty happy with that, but I do have one concern. Might the Trollers who automatically go to work on the Main Page to start with, now be forced to move onto smaller, harder to detect defacements on other pages? What if we're only spreading the diease? [[User:Thunderbird L17|?Thunderbird?]] 18:46, 17 Jan 2005 (MST)
A good concern, and lucky for me I have this wonderful ditty to cite:
...the fact is that for every troll with too much spare time, there are 100 users with just as much spare time ready and eager to undo that troll's (un)work. The fact is, the trolls always get bored before the users do, because the users are emotionally invested in what they've created and the Wiki moves fast enough that the average trolling only lasts about two minutes before it's reverted. A troll's work is hardly ever noticed by anybody, but a legitimate user's work is always noticed and appreciated. That's why wikis work. — InterruptorJones 15:37, 17 Jan 2005 (MST) (ref)
Simply put, that's just how wikis work. We'll notice no matter where or how small, and they will get tired. -- Tom 18:55, 17 Jan 2005 (MST)
That is, unless said troll or trolls are emotionally invested in destroying the wiki. --Guest
Good answer, thanks. Come to think of it, I guess if everyone has on their watchlist the pages they created, or just care for, then likely whatever page is edited will be watched by SOMEBODY. Thanks for the quick reply. [[User:Thunderbird L17|?Thunderbird?]] 17:36, 19 Jan 2005 (MST)

Rejects?

Where did Rejects go?? What the? -- Asploder

Away. — InterruptorJones[[]] 23:57, 5 Feb 2005 (MST)
Yes, they're all categorised now, but I don't know where they went. woddfellow2|? 18:08, 14 Feb 2005 (MST)

They all went to better places. Characters are now characters, items are now classified as items. Fancy that ;) - Dr Haggis - Talk 21:48, 27 Feb 2005 (MST)

Confusion over moving dates

The Main Page says that HRWiki will be moving 'from early Friday morning (Feb. 25) to late Sunday evening (Feb. 27)', but every other page says 'early Friday morning (Mar. 4) to late Sunday evening (Mar. 6)'. Someone should probably fix that on the main page, as it appears it's not closed presently. -- Mithent 05:04, 26 Feb 2005 (MST)

The date changed. A hard refresh (likely ctrl+F5) of the Main Page should clear your cache and solve the problem. -- Tom 21:16, 27 Feb 2005 (MST)

New

Hi, I'm new and not on the list.--mailman8 09:19, 1 Mar 2005 (MST)

Yes you are, you're number 895 →evin290 09:50, 1 Mar 2005 (MST)

what number am i?--Harry 10:03, 1 Mar 2005 (MST)

Here, find out for yourself. -- AgentSeethroo 10:46, 1 Mar 2005 (MST)

Thanks--mailman8 11:10, 1 Mar 2005 (MST)

Favorite Character List

It think it might be nice if some o' you guys set up a "Most Popular Character" page to find out who are the most popular main characters in the Homestar Runner universe. There seems to be enough wiki users here to get an accurate idea. In this page, people would say who their favorite character is on the talk section (and their 2nd, 3rd, 4th, etc favorite as well if they want.) and then someone would add them all up into a graph to show who are the most/least popular character and so on. (And remember, MAIN characters only) To keep things simple, it could be a character would get 8 "popularity points" for being a first favorite, 7 for second, 6 for third, and so on. Whoever gets the highest popularity points goes in the most favorite section. Also, only registered users count. I dunno... this could be difficult and messy and inaccuriate, but if done right it could be very interesting. Anyways... opinions anyone? --Joshua 15:46, 7 Mar 2005 (MST)

Sorry, but this here's a vote for no. I think it could be a good idea under a different venu, such as the Fanstuff Wiki, or perhaps a poll in the Forum. But since this is simply a knowledge base, it wouldn't really fit in too well.

[[User:Thunderbird L17|?Thunderbird?]] 16:37, 7 Mar 2005 (MST)

I agree with Thunderbird. It's just not necessary. →[[User:FireBird|FireBird]]
What if it was made in Fanstuff Wiki? Don't care too much if it never happens. Besides, I wouldn't have the know-how and stuff to make a page like that anyway. Someone else would have had to do it. --Joshua 17:09, 7 Mar 2005 (MST)
Yeah, that'd be awesome. Run with it. →[[User:FireBird|FireBird]]
I went and I ran with it. You can check it out in the Interactive section of Fanstuff H*R Wiki. :) It's called, "Character Popularity"--Joshua 16:47, 9 Mar 2005 (MST)

Article of the day?

Why not have a featured article like Wikipedia?

We don't have any featured articles, so we couldn't have a featured article of the day. -- Tom 09:49, 22 Mar 2005 (MST)
We could do it like the Fark.com Wiki does it. Each month has 7 articles (one for each day of the week) that rotate around every week (with a new set every month). For instance, you create a page called HRWiki:Featured article/Tuesday, March then just do an include on the main page like:

== Featured article ==
{{HRWiki:Featured article/{{CURRENTDAY}}, {{CURRENTMONTH}}}}

That would run automatically for a whole month with only 7 articles. --noclip 18:53, 22 Mar 2005 (MST)

The fact remains that we still don't have featured articles. -- Tom 13:05, 23 Mar 2005 (MST)
You don't need to "have" them. You can just make em. Start a poll of which articles should be on the front page, take those and copy-paste them into HRWiki:Featured article/Whatever day and use that link on the front page.

New logo

How about it?

Image:hrwlogoidea-fixed.png

noclip 18:59, 22 Mar 2005 (MST)

I had this alternate too

Image:hrlogowithhr.png

noclip 19:26, 22 Mar 2005 (MST)

I like the one with the dropshadow, but would be happy with either of them... Glutnix 03:03, 23 Mar 2005 (MST)

I've started a "Poll" about this

Sorry, but we don't do polls. I've deleted your poll page accordingly. -- Tom 14:02, 26 Mar 2005 (MST)
JoeyDay told me to start one. It was just to see whether the users were for it. He said it was okay and that the decision would be left up to the admins anyway. It'd have been nice if you protected the page and posted the results instead of straight up deleting it.
Well, if it matters, I really don't like the green "Wiki". Another color would look nice.
And Homestar Runner looks a little bit bumpy. →[[User:FireBird|FireBird]]
I would have used another color but TBC pretty much used everything on the logo.
Just because it's been used once doesn't mean you can't use it again. Orange or grey would look nice (I think). →[[User:FireBird|FireBird]]
The first one looks great. I don't know about the green, but it looks better than the current logo. ~Rainer~
The first one is perfect. --Joshua 18:10, 28 Mar 2005 (MST)
I love them both! Actiually, contrary to what these folks are saying, I like the green (probably because it's my favourite colour... xD). But I agree that Homestar looks bumpy. The first ones real nice, though.
On second thought, the green looks nice, actually. ~Rainer~

I think that the first one is incredible! Nice work! I love the green! →evin290 14:32, 2 Apr 2005 (MST)

Scared of 1.4.0

I'm scared of this upgrading to 1.4.0
I didn't like what it did to the fanstuff. Because...
1. Different font. It's smaller and I don't like it as much.
2. History erased. I expecially do not want that to happen. Not to mention it could leave some page histery blank, making them targets for non-revertable trolling.
So, what I'm trying to say, is that if you can't get past these two problems, I think I'd prefer this wiki staying in the 1.3's. --Joshua 18:37, 29 Mar 2005 (MST)

I ran an upgrade to 1.4 a week ago on a pretty big wiki (~200 articles), it went seamlessly. The main page was defaulted, but that was easily reversible through history. Other than that, it shouldn't mess anything up. My thoughts, go ahead and do the upgrade.
Well, look at what happened to Fanstuff Wiki. Almost all history was erased, the font is smaller and uploading pictures doesn't work. --Joshua 06:20, 31 Mar 2005 (MST)
Personal tools