Talk:Main Page alternative (text only)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

This is the talk page of Main Page (text only) which is a text-only version of Main Page.

Contents

[edit] Talk

What's your opinion? Optim 03:06, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)

That's a WAP portal, not a home page. --HappyDog 03:08, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Well, we can use it as a "text-only" main page. If you like it you can move it to Main Page/Text-Only and remember to update it whenever we update the Main Page. Optim 03:22, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Now that is ugly. --mav
OK, I think you should officially recuse yourself from this discussion.—Eloquence
Me or Optim? I don't see why either of us should officially do anything. --mav
Optim. If that is his idea how the Main Page should look, I don't think his opinion should be taken into account for determining whether consensus has been reached for a switch.—Eloquence
What's the problem with the plain vanilla main page? Optim 03:25, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
It is extremely visually unappealing and does not provide as fast access to the different links as either the present Main Page or the one in development. I have no objection to you maintaining this Main Page in parallel to the existing one, but it is never going to become the standard one.—Eloquence
I don't think I will be able to maintain it only by myself. If nobody has objections to use it as a PDA-portal, we can move it to Main Page/Text-Only and hope Wikipedians will remember to update it... Optim 03:41, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Objection. Too much maintenance for too little added value.—Eloquence

Its ugly. Perl 03:34, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)


How retro: Welcome to 1990. mydogategodshat

Or to 2001, as the case may be [1].—Eloquence

That version is better than the vanilla one. Perl 03:39, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Wow, the 2001 main page is superb. Why we changed it? Who did that? Optim 03:41, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Reasonable people.—Eloquence
People who think everyone have DSL-Cable bandwidth, 20" monitors and modern browsers. Optim 01:25, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I think this would be a useful design model if we ever get a decent "text-only" skin. It would be interesting to see if anything resembling this could be auto-generated from any of the current or proposed front page designs, as I agree that updating it manually might prove too much effort to maintain. Out of interest, is there any reason why you didn't use __NOTOC__, or did you just not think of it? - IMSoP 13:36, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I wanted to have a TOC, so I didn't use the NOTOC directive. Optim 01:23, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Do you actually get value from the TOC? To me it just mimics the structure that is very much apparent anyway (except for that the TOC takes up the screen space that otherwise would allow access to the links, even when I "hide" it.) Bevo 04:43, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
It helps the user to navigate in the page, by going quickly at the exact section they want to go, without scrolling. Optim 04:57, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
I agree with IMSoP: a text-only main page for digibox and disabilities and WAP and similar folks would be useful, but it would have to be auto-updated. Hence, feature request, so take this to SourceForge, I guess. wikipedia:bug reports has the links. Martin 14:34, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
I agree with an auto-generated text-only main page. Optim 01:23, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)

It is difficult to maintain the "Selected articles" section, so I will remove it. If you can maintain it, feel free to re-add it. Optim 03:36, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Add a link to the Main Page?

Now, without the "Selected articles" it's very easy to maintain the Plain Vanilla Main Page. Anybody objecting adding a link (named "Text-Only") somewhere in the Main Page? Optim 03:38, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Vote below:

Should we add a link in the Main Page pointing to Wikipedia:Plain vanilla main page ?

[edit] Yes

  • Optim
  • Humus sapiens 07:26, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC): Simple and functional. Especially useful for slow connections, weird browsers and those who prefer encyclopedia without flashy news.
  • jew
  • your nickname here

[edit] No

  • —Sverdrup(talk)
  • Martin (sorry, but I don't think this adds anything over the auto-updated "table free")
  • your nickname here

[edit] Neutral / Don't care

  • your nickname here

[edit] Discussion

  • This page's target group is too small, add a note on a community page somewhere. —Sverdrup(talk) 15:55, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • The page is intented for readers, not for Wikipedians. Optim 16:28, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Anything you add on this page MUST FIT the 320x240 screen

In regards to the comment in this page's markup
<!-- Anything you add on this page MUST FIT the 320x240 screen -->
I don't see how the current content fits that vertical limitation, at all. Bevo 04:49, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)

It seems to fit to me. The text wraps nicely. —Sverdrup(talk) 15:55, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
It fits very well, what's the problem? Of course there is vertical scrolling involved. Optim 16:26, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Why even mention the "240" aspect if vertical scrolling is allowed? Isn't the 320 the only important number? Bevo 16:35, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Why the Wikipedia mainpage says "800x600" ? I just copied the main page (the old one) and changed the numbers. Optim 16:54, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
That "800x600" advice is not there on the current Main page source. Anyway, I think I have my answer, that in fact the only restriction you want on this page is respect for the 320 pixel width limitation (and in fact isn't some of that going to be devoted to painting a vertical scrollbar?) Bevo 17:25, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)

[edit] NOTOC, NOEDITSECTION

NOTOC and NOEDITSECTION added. Optim 05:41, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Using MediaWiki messages?

What about creating a MediaWiki:wikipedia_topics and a MediaWiki:wikipedia_translations MediaWiki messages that can be reused on the Main Page and this page for the encyclopedia and the translations. Would avoid having to update the links in two places.

Any comments on this? --Lexor|Talk

[edit] Shouldn't this be in the article namespace?

Also any reason this isn't in the article namespace? Seems that it is just an alternative way of viewing the main page. To borrow wikipedia disambiguation style it would normally be Main Page (text only). --Lexor|Talk 08:22, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)

This is not a text-only version of the mainpage; this is a text-only TOC of wikipedia. —Sverdrup(talk) 08:26, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Well, it's linked from the Main Page with a link saying "Text only", so from a reader's point of view, I would expect exactly that: a text-only version of the main page. Also the current title pretty much claims that's what it is: "Plain vanilla main page", not "Plain vanilla table of contents". --Lexor|Talk 08:47, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Regardless, Texor is correct that it should be in the article namespace.—Eloquence

[edit] Encyclopædia versus Encyclopedia

Who agrees or disagrees with this: Encyclopædia (Encyclopaedia) is better because it is more classical and better resembles the Greek word Εγκυκλοπαίδεια. A text-only mainpage is often used by people who use older computer equipment, so an "older" spelling may be used as a funny way to symbolise this fact. Also, Encyclopædia looks more professional, more beautiful, and more correct to some people; a percentage of scholars and professors may like it more, too. Finally, Encyclopædia is often used by EB (Britannica). So in the text-only main page we should use Encyclopædia instead of Encyclopedia. -- Optim 04:16, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Encyclopædia is better

[edit] Encyclopedia is better

  • IMSoP (I understand that the Encyclopædia Britannica uses that spelling in its official name. Since this isn't Wikipædia, clearly we don't. See also Encyclopedia)
  • Lexor for consistency it should be Encyclopedia (even though I kind of like Encyclopædia).
  • Angela
  • — Sverdrup Text-only is maybe useful for text browsers. I don't think my terminal does æ, so it's definitely better with e.
  • Nope. We're Wikipedia, not Wikipædia. - Kookykman|(t)(c)

[edit] Don't care / Neutral

  • your name here

[edit] Discussion on æ versus e issue

  • On 27 Feb 2004, Optim said:

A text-only mainpage is often used by people who use older computer equipment [...]

Vacuum 21:49, Mar 19, 2004 (UTC) : People with older computer equipment might have a hard time displaying the ae digraph.

[edit] Red link on "main page"

What happened to Friends of Wikipedia? Mathmo Talk 12:36, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../m/a/i/Talk%7EMain_Page_alternative_%28text_only%29_972d.html"