Talk:www.wikipedia.org template

←Project portals

www.wikipedia.org — live

Staging area→

www.wikipedia.org template contains the actual, raw HTML code that is displayed at http://www.wikipedia.org/. It is protected to prevent the insertion of malicious scripts or objects. Changes to the template will be displayed to visitors within one hour, but you can usually see them immediately once you clear your browser's cache. Though www.wikipedia.org template is protected, the staging area is not: anyone can propose changes and updates there (detailed instructions). Administrators: Always make your changes to www.wikipedia.org template/temp before copying them to www.wikipedia.org template, to keep the two pages in sync (see current differences).

edit
Archives
By topic: Requests to update the page Discussion on how to sort the language listings Discussion on the Top Ten in particular (poll) By year: 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Re: Multiple updates needed

I am going to edit Www.wikipedia.org template/temp per Talk:Project portals#Multiple updates needed. Please check for any errors and changes that need to be made. – Allen4names (talk) 19:32, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Note that the section title was changed to Update project icons. – Allen4names (talk) 19:20, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, synced. Thehelpfulone 01:55, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

It's unclear why the other projects aren't using <li>. And the id "otherprojects-div" is pretty silly. It's also not clear why there are all of these HTML comments about style attributes (e.g., "Use style parameter in HTML until these rules can be made to work"). The code seems messy and I'd like to see it cleaned up (and made to work, if necessary...) before being synced live. --MZMcBride (talk) 02:06, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

McBride. If you are going to use list markup you may want to edit MediaWiki:Gadget-wm-portal.css. The various logos are of different dimensions so the style sheet need to be tweaked so that the text will line up. I did not want to start this myself because of my inexperience so I left a message at Talk:Project portals (see link above) but I started after Wikivoyage launched. I hope you will be able to do a better job then I have (see my user page). Thank you. – Allen4names (talk) 05:29, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Wikivoyage has been officially launched since January 15, but it looks like the edit to add it to this page was reverted on February 10. Similarly, Wikidata was also removed. Is there a simple solution that would allow re-adding these, or does the entire page's CSS really need to be cleaned up as a prerequisite to making the change? I'm fairly new to the processes on meta (I'm mainly active on Wikivoyage) but would very much like to see the new projects reflected on this high-visibility page. -- Ryan • (talk) • 23:31, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

After a bad page move the HTML code at Www.wikimedia.org template/sandbox (Allen4names) can now be viewed using the Wikimedia Portal Preview gadget. Please feel free to make any edits that you feel would improve this as an example for the other project portal pages. – Allen4names (talk) 02:55, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Allen - the template in your userspace is actually for http://wikimedia.org rather than http://www.wikipedia.org. Is there a corresponding template for www.wikipedia.org? Alternately, if the idea is to duplicate the sister project links at the bottom of the wikipedia.org page it looks fine to me, although Wikipedia would need to be removed. -- Ryan • (talk) • 05:34, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

I intended that page (in mainspace by the way) to be either the basis for a true sandbox portal template or the sandbox itself. The Www.wikipedia.org template/temp page can be used as a sandbox but you should be prepared to revert your edit(s) if things do not work out. The "Custom margins for project logos" style rules and all but the Wikipedia, Incubator, and Foundation otherprojects-items can be used and with some care the "For testing only" in the subpage only. I have been busy editting items at Wikidata so I am not likly be be of much help. Good luck. – Allen4names (talk) 06:04, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Update: See Sandbox below. – Allen4names (talk) 00:27, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't see anything to do in this section. --MZMcBride (talk) 02:19, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Wikidata and/or Wikivoyage in the other projects section

Hi all. Is there any plan to incorporate either of our two newest projects into the section at the bottom? On en we've added both, along with MediaWiki to balance things out. I haven't been keeping up to date with the status of Wikivoyage, but since Wikidata will be going live on all 'pedias by the end of the month, I figure it could be useful to include a link to it, at least. — PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 13:04, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

See the section above. – Allen4names (talk) 19:18, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Oh ok. Sorry 'bout that. — PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 01:05, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

 Synced as per above. Thehelpfulone 01:55, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Update

Galician Wikipedia (gl.wikipedia.org) has reached 100,000 articles. Needs update. Thanks! --Toliño ^{Fala aquí comigo} 08:42, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Have you updated www.wikipedia.org template/temp? --MZMcBride (talk) 02:16, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Please update www.wikipedia.org template/temp and I'd be happy to sync this for you. --MZMcBride (talk) 02:30, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

I've made the update on www.wikipedia.org template/temp. Regards! --Toliño ^{Fala aquí comigo} 08:51, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Toliño! I compared those two pages and could not find differ difference. so I suppose this had been synced. -Mys_721tx(talk) 03:39, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Indeed. Danny B. did it on March 15. :-) --MZMcBride (talk) 05:24, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

┌─────────────┘
The temp page should be checked and updated again. I may do it later but I don't have the time to do it correctly now. – Allen4names (talk) 17:28, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Www.wikipedia.org_template/temp&oldid=5358217 202.127.20.56 13:17, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Www.wikipedia.org_template/temp&oldid=5362699 202.127.20.56 15:43, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Www.wikipedia.org_template/temp&oldid=5368849 202.127.20.56 05:54, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Www.wikipedia.org_template/temp&oldid=5375929 202.127.20.56 07:27, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

{{editprotected}} Please sync. with /temp. See request on my talk. As I'm not expert in this page I preferr if somebody with more experience could handle this. Thank you. -- MarcoAurelio (talk) 11:04, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Www.wikipedia.org_template/temp&oldid=5474326 202.127.20.56 08:30, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Sandbox

I have created Www.wikipedia.org template/sandbox to allow experimental edits without interfering with update edits at Www.wikipedia.org template/temp. Currently this sandbox differs by listification of the language list (langlist) and other projects (2nd list), using classes to allow JavaScript to be added later to sort the langlist by the rough number of articles, and comparing two different styles for other project lists. – Allen4names (talk) 00:24, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

I can't see this ever being synced live. You're making a lot of changes for completely unclear reasons. --MZMcBride (talk) 02:17, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

At this point, if I just wanted to update the existing HTML of Www.wikipedia.org template to add Wikivoyage and Wikidata without making any other changes, should Www.wikipedia.org template/temp be reverted to match Www.wikipedia.org template and the new projects added, is Www.wikipedia.org template/sandbox the right page to update, or is some other process appropriate? Any info would be appreciated. -- Ryan • (talk) • 05:23, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

The sandbox subpage is not for updating the main template, if updates are needed the temp subpage should be updated first. The sandbox version uses HTML list tags whereas the main template as of yet does not. I am hoping that future updates need only change a class value instead of moving code around but I have almost no experience writing JavaScript. Is there anything that remains unclear to you McBride? – Allen4names (talk) 06:10, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

{{Editprotected}}

OK, I've restored Www.wikipedia.org template/temp to match Www.wikipedia.org template and then added updates to include Wikivoyage and Wikidata. I've also included MediaWiki so that there are three items in all columns - this matches w:Template:Wikipedia's sister projects, so hopefully that makes sense. Please let me know if anything else is required. -- Ryan • (talk) • 06:39, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

I think I've followed the steps required to get Www.wikipedia.org template updated with the (new) contents of Www.wikipedia.org template/temp, but if anything else is required please let me know. -- Ryan • (talk) • 23:37, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Synced. --MZMcBride (talk) 02:29, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! -- Ryan • (talk) • 02:32, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

W3C found errors while checking www.wikipedia.org as HTML5

W3C Markup Validation Service found 6 Errors and 26 warnings at Wikipedia when I open this website. I figure it could be resolved.--Great Brightstar (talk) 15:45, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Are you familiar with the HTML5 spec? If so, try out changes to the raw HTML code on Www.wikipedia.org template/temp (the "preview html" button) and validate by direct input. PiRSquared17 (talk) 15:52, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Fixed by User:Putnik. PiRSquared17 (talk) 17:16, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

add new section for Wikipedias with more than a million articles

{{editprotected}} See Talk:Www.wikipedia.org template/2012#Request to add a new 1 million section - Wikipedias. There are from today on (with es-WP at the least and a few days ago the ru-WP) 7 Wikipedias with more than a million articles, and one of them, the nl-WP has now more than 1.5 million articles, but isn’t listed in the Top Ten because it still has much less views per day (about 250,000) than zh-WP (about 400,000). So, following the proposal of 2010 and the discussion about this of 2012, I propose that now a new section with the 7 Wikipedias with more than a million articles should be listed, because it looks odd to list nl-WP with 1.5 million articles in a section with more than 100,000 articles, but not on top of the page. It looks like there ain’t no update of the page and big WPs like this were forgotten at all. Also sv-WP (974,213 articles and also not in the Top Ten) and pl-WP (967,547 articles) won’t need very long to reach this, so the section would get bigger from now on. Please add the new section in the template now – and despite the fact, that sv-WP and nl-WP both have more than 40 percent articles created by bots, that shouldn’t matter for this, because it looks very odd to the readers like it is now. --– Geitost ^diskusjon 12:27, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Do you want to add this to Www.wikipedia.org template/temp and preview it? PiRSquared17 (talk) 12:38, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

I can try, let’s see. :-) --– Geitost ^diskusjon 12:56, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

I updated the page. But I can’t see how it looks now, how can I see the result? Is there any special page for it? --– Geitost ^diskusjon 17:14, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Is there a tab on the top next to "Diskussion" and the edit button that says "Preview HTML"? If not, then go to Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets and check "Wikimedia Portal Preview". PiRSquared17 (talk) 17:17, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

No, I don’t have such a button, maybe it’s only there with JavaScript? The gadgets are all only to use with this, so I can’t do that now. I’ve switched off JavaScript cause my browser makes nothing senseful with that and only produces further errors. I think the JavaScript is just too old for all the gadgets here. But at least, other things go faster without all that scripting. ;-)

I wanna add something else about the changes, perhaps you can check that, too?:

Since the first two sections for WPs with over 1 million and over 100,000 articles are now both in the size very large, I’ve set the next section for WPs over 10,000 articles the same size as the ones with over 1000 articles. Also, the section for the WPs over 10,000 articles is getting bigger and bigger. So, I hope it looks ok this way.

The bookshelves are very wide now also, but in the now-being version there’s no problem with it, if you shorten the window, so I don’t think, there will be any problem with that. Just see, how it looks like. Maybe it could be a better idea for all sections to put less of the bookshelve images to it, don’t know. The way it is up to now, it should be better this way. But that could also be changed later, if people think that it gets to wide.

I also wondered about the fact that the language names here differ from the ones at List of Wikipedias/Table, so I changed a few names the way they are named there, cause I think that they can be changed easier there and therefore should be right there, but I could be mistaken. Perhaps there’s also a list anywhere how the WPs name themselves? --– Geitost ^diskusjon 17:47, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, the gadget works only with JavaScript enabled, sorry for not clarifying that. You can just save the raw HTML as a file on your computer with the extension "html", and open it in a browser. I'm not sure about the language names and the images of bookshelves, but feel free to try anything. PiRSquared17 (talk) 18:03, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Ok, I tried that way. I don’t see any of the images, when opening the local saved file in my browser, and all the text is at the left side instead of centered as here. Which also means, that the Top Ten are at the left side of the page, but not around the image that I can’t see. And then, the changed sections have all the same letter size, so I don’t see any difference between the different sizes. Assuming that these things only are due to the fact that I don’t see the result immediately but just indirect, I suppose that the page could be ok this way, but I just can’t say. So please take a look at it, and if you see images, text in the middle instead of at the left side, all languages around the puzzle ball, and if you think the size of the text in the sections is ok this way, then you can save it the way it is. I assume I can see the result tomorrow on the other page and can then see there, if anything could look even better (and perhaps think about the bookshelves or sizes once more). --– Geitost ^diskusjon 19:38, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Can you just enable JS for the gadget and then disable it? Saving the HTML locally isn't the best way to test this kind of stuff. If you really want to try stuff, paste the HTML code in the top left box of http://jsfiddle.net/ and press "Run" at the top. Sorry for not being able to come up with a better solution right now. PiRSquared17 (talk) 23:14, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps I haven’t explained it right: It doesn’t matter at all, if I have JS enabled or not (and the button in „Wikimedia Portal Preview“ is already enabled), there’s never such a button at the top, so it’s better to let JS away, because it doesn’t do anything else but errors that I don’t have without it. And with or without it, there is something missing (perhaps also something else), because I can’t write or copy any text into the top left box on http://jsfiddle.net/. Perhaps I should just revert everything again. I only said I can try, but if it doesn’t go, then just let it be. --– Geitost ^diskusjon 00:26, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

This might be a silly suggestion, but if you use the Vector skin, then the Preview HTML button is hidden under the arrow button next to the search box. (You have to enable JS first, of course.) odder (talk) 01:01, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

(unindent) I personally think it looks great. The problems you mentioned (alignment) don't occur when I try it. There is definitely a font size difference between the text used for the first two, including "100 000+", and "10 000+", etc. PiRSquared17 (talk) 00:43, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Looks OK to me, too, and as far as I'm aware, the font size difference is intended. odder (talk) 01:04, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, sure intended. If you take a look at the actual version, there are 3 different sizes:

• langlist-large for 100,000+ and 10,000+
• normal for 1,000+
• langlist-tiny for 100+

If it wouldn’t be changed for 10,000+, then there would be one small, one normal and three big sizes. I thought that this would not look very well, therefore the change. Now there are also 3 sizes as before, but (also as before) not 3 sections with the same size, but instead 2 with big and 2 with normal size:

• langlist-large for 1 mio. and 100,000+
• normal for 10,000+ and 1,000+
• langlist-tiny for 100+ (as it were before)

Instead, there could be a bigger size for 1 mio. than langlist-large, but I think that wouldn’t look very well and I even don’t know if there is a bigger size. So I believe it’s better that the 3rd section with 10,000+ is smaller now than before (I had no other idea for that, otherwise there have to be 3 equal sized sections or something else). --– Geitost ^diskusjon 22:43, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Technical details aside, I Support a "1 000 000+" category. Seven Wikipedia editions are enough for it not to look lonely or barren. — PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 10:04, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

I partially updated the portal with this edit (and this edit). However, many of the other changes appear to be wrong currently. Comparing http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/Sitemap.htm with www.wikipedia.org_template/temp, it appears the order of various lists is inconsistent. Please adjust the lists and I'll be happy to take a look and re-sync as necessary and appropriate. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:31, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Remove search box labels

Hi. I think the page no longer needs the search box label. It's grown considerably in size and it doesn't really add much value to the page, in my opinion. Thoughts on removing the search box label? --MZMcBride (talk) 05:52, 24 May 2013 (UTC)