Template talk:Main Page banner

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Template:Main Page banner is permanently protected from editing, as it is a heavily used or visible template. Substantial changes should be proposed here, and made by administrators if the proposal is uncontroversial, or has been discussed and is supported by consensus. Use {{editprotected}} to attract the attention of an administrator in such cases.

Contents 1 1,000,000 article! 2 Wikified link 3 This looks HUGE 4 This should go away 5 Interwiki link to vi: 6 Shorter message 7 Discussion on Main Page banner 8 1,500,000 9 New color scheme 10 Why was the vi inter-wiki link removed? 11 Article 12 Milestone message 13 10M overall 14 Colors 15 How long will this be on the homepage?

[edit] 1,000,000 article!

Anything planned? --Banana04131 00:55, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

I'll put something up. -- user:zanimum

We just passed 1,000,000 articles a few minutes ago. It'd be kind of cool to have this up soon.--naryathegreat | (talk) 23:10, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

I fell asleep at the switch. I'm waiting for a confirmation on 1M. -- user:zanimum

[edit] Wikified link

Perhaps this would look better if the first link used this code: [[Wikimedia:Press releases/Wikimedia announces Yahoo support|Wikimedia announces Yahoo! support]]. Since it's a wikified link, it wouldn't have yet another external link arrow after it.

Yes, I was thinking the same thing myself. We should use interwiki wherever possible, shouldn't we? Phoenix-forgotten 23:13, 2005 Apr 13 (UTC)

The complete URL is better because if someone is mirroring the site, it should still go to here. Pages which reference Wikipedia itself in normal articles should use full URLs (there is a rule somewhere about it?) - Stoph 00:53, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

It all follows from Wikipedia:Avoid self-references, though it is a bit convoluted in this case. --W(t) 00:39, 2005 Jun 26 (UTC)

[edit] This looks HUGE

Hi!

This banner is simply *huge* - in my resolution and font size, all I see is the banners on the first page! I think this is a big problem - only seeing banners. It's like a bad office where all you can see are POST-ITs all over the place. I use a big resolution (1152x852) but rather big fonts (Konqueror, 14pt Nimbus Sans). I believe others can have the same problem with smaller res&font size.

Do we *really* need this yellow stuff? The donate banner is on the top anyways!

Msoos 10:35, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Agreed. We can do better with a smaller banner... and slightly less new-message orange. Perhaps even more colorful, if possible? Some ideas below:

[edit] This should go away

We already have two banners on the top of every page to admire, which is one more than we need. We don't need this banner on the Mainpage too. Ëvilphoenix ^Burn! 03:56, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Agreed; done. Dan100 (Talk) 09:59, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Interwiki link to vi:

Please add an interwiki link to the Vietnamese Wikipedia without transcluding it:

<noinclude>[[vi:Tiêu bản:Thông báo từ Trang Chính]]</noinclude>

Thanks.

 – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 09:06, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Shorter message

[edit] Discussion on Main Page banner

I saw that the Main Page banner announcing 1,000,000 articles had disappeared, and was trying to find any discussion of why it was removed and the reasoning behind the timing of its appearance and disappearance. Thanks. Carcharoth 13:48, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Raul654 took it down, because it was "more than 2 days now". Personally I think we should keep it up for a little bit longer, until the press mentions actual kick into full swing, as I presume they will by at least Wednesday. -- user:zanimum

This is begining to puzzle me, I am sure that 1 million articles was ages ago now... We are at over 1,100,000. Ian13/talk 18:48, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Which is precisely why it's been changed to state 1000 featured articles, IE articles that are featured on the main page. Cowman109^Talk 21:14, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 1,500,000

What is the subject of the 1,500,000th article? GameKeeper 09:39, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

There were four possibles, I'm being bold an awarding it to Kanab Ambersnail, as it has the most potential. -- Zanimum 18:44, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

There are a few questions on Talk: Kanab Ambersnail about other milestone Wikipedia articles. Any objections to adding a link to Category:Milestone Wikipedia articles to the tmeplate in order to head off those qustions? (I'd be bold & do it myself, but I'm a little shy about taking the risk of breaking a template everyone will see.) -- llywrch 20:22, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New color scheme

The hex triplets used in this template do not match the saturation, darkness, etc. of those now used on the page. i propose we use the colors found on the Community Portal (listed at Wikipedia:Colours) to produce the following:

Thoughts?--HereToHelp 19:41, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

that is very light colour background to me, to distinguish it I would prefer something darker. The original looks better IMHO GameKeeper 20:13, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Why was the vi inter-wiki link removed?

Can someone put the vi inter-wiki link back in? --- RockMFR 22:27, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article

The article was removed as it took an entire line of the main page. The only reason this happened was because of that user's webbrowser width. The article is important. This sort of 'event' means randomly selected articles get an intense makeover. This leaves a great example of how an otherwise unnoticed subject can be covered in depth. The previous 1,000,000 article is still worth a look Jordanhill railway station. In addition this may be covered by some press, the more info that is given the fuller any article can be. Please restore this GameKeeper 00:44, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

The reason was actually the presence of a <br> in the wikitext, meaning it occupies an entire line regardless of screen size etc. — Dan | talk 00:48, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

OK my mistake on that , is there a way to restore the article link on one line? GameKeeper 00:52, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

looks like someone has restored the 2 line version. You are making valid point Dan regarding 2 lines. Can anyone suggest a solution? Can the 2nd lines text be reduced in size or something? GameKeeper 00:56, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Milestone message

"The English language Wikipedia thanks its contributors..." seems a little meaningless. The encyclopedia itself is not thanking its contributors, nor is it capable of doing so. Is the community thanking itself for achieving the milestone? I think we should take this out and use something a little more concise in future milestone announcements ("The English-language Wikipedia has reached X million articles."). Any opinions? --Oldak Quill 07:02, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 10M overall

Anyone have any serious objections to this? Feel free to make changes. I plan to post this at 1 pm ET -- Zanimum (talk) 14:55, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Why not do it now? Maxim_(talk) 15:15, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I changed the external link to the Foundation wiki into an interwiki; aside from wondering about the wording, this looks fine. Nihiltres^{t.l} 15:23, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Good news, and it's good to see the article's on such a great topic, but I don't think we should have it on the main page. I don't like these 'look how great we are!' messages, I think they look very unprofessional. The header that only logged in users can see would perhaps be a good location, but not the main page. This basically opens up the door to all sorts of notices on the main page. J Milburn (talk) 15:32, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Sure it's a good overall milestone, but it's not what we want on the English Wikipedia. Here at least we want quality, not quantity. How about a banner for so many WP:Featured articles? We're almost at 2,000. Reywas92^Talk

I disagree that that's the main message - it'll tell people there are other Wikipedias. I frequently do press requests from other countries that have a Wikipedia in their language that they've never heard of, because they just use the English one.

And I think putting this up would be a good Foundation-y thing for en:wp to do - show that we're not just the biggest kid in the playpen [*], that the other kids exist - David Gerard (talk) 15:51, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

[*] WMF has three bloody huge database servers. One does en:wp only, the other two do everything else - David Gerard (talk) 15:51, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and we should definitely have one for 2000 FAs. A press release might be good on that subject, in fact - David Gerard (talk) 15:52, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Also ... it isn't 10 millionth article overall but 10 millionth wikipedia article overall, ie plenty of articles on the other projects ;-P --AlisonW (talk) 16:55, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I know, and I'm very pleased that other language Wikipedias are growing. I just don't want to glorify it when when Enwiki gets to 3 mil articles when many are low-quality stubs. Reywas92^Talk 18:13, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually, by 'other projects' I was thinking about all the articles on Wikisource, Wiktionary, Wikibooks, Wikiversity, etc. --AlisonW (talk) 18:46, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm surprised to see that this template is using the Verdana font rather than sans-serif, which is used everywhere else on Wikipedia. The font makes it look awkward in its current position. Gary King (talk) 21:07, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Colors

I have noticed that the color of the notice looks very much like the new messages notice.

Compare the following:

with...

While they are different, the two long, thin boxes look similar for a fraction of a second. Maybe a different color scheme? Soxred93 | talk bot 15:48, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't think it's the color that makes them look similar; it's the format - as you said, they are both long, thin boxes. Only a color that stands out a lot on Wikipedia, like red or green, would vastly differentiate it - and I'm pretty sure that Wikipedia would rather not want to have a brightly colored box on the homepage. Gary King (talk) 19:44, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] How long will this be on the homepage?

I'm just curious as to typically how long these messages are on the homepage? I'm guessing somewhere between 1–7 days at the most? Gary King (talk) 19:45, 30 March 2008 (UTC)