Talk:Wikimedia Blog/2011 overhaul
Add topicThis page collects feedback on the April 2011 overhaul of the Wikimedia blog, and serves as a place to share your ideas on how to improve the blog further.
Archives:
Translations[edit]
Is there anyway we can add a feature to support blog post translations? I thought there was a recent mailing list discussion about this, but I can't seem to find it. Cbrown1023 talk 19:05, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
Post authors[edit]
It seems the post authors' name doesn't show up any more on individual post pages, but it does on the main page.--Dami 16:24, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
- It never has, but I agree with you, and I want to add it to individual posts (maybe at the bottom, with a short bio). guillom 19:33, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
- Strange... For consistent design (among the main page, the post page and the archive pages) I would keep the author name in the same place under the title, regardless of any additional steps to provide a signature, bio or longer byline at the bottom. --Dami 18:32, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
- See also bugzilla:28932. guillom 12:30, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
From wmf:Template_talk:Blogbox#Full_names: it would be nice if the username followed some guideline (full name, probably), because they're shown as they are at least in feeds. Nemo 07:51, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
- *shrugs* I like the fact that they can pick what they want. It's the wiki-way! ;-) Cbrown1023 talk 14:54, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
wpstats image[edit]
The WordPress stats image (a tiny smiley face) is appearing at the bottom left in Firefox 4 and IE9, haven't tested in anything else. It should probably be hidden or moved elsewhere to fit in better with the theme.
The overhaul looks really good, its nice to have things in one place. Is the Vector-like WordPress theme available for others to use? the wub "?!" 21:03, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
- Actually, the bottom left corner is probably the least obnoxious place for the stats image. The theme is available on GitHub, but I modified it for our purposes; you might prefer to download the original version from the history. guillom 07:09, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
Only logged in comments?[edit]
What is the reason of allowing only logged in users to comment? Does this mean that the blog is no longer moderated and anyone can comment as long as they register? --Dami 17:58, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
- I asked around, and it seems it was always the case. The Wikimedia blog is very visible, and requiring registration before commenting lowers the amount of spam we get. The blog is still moderated, and these two measures help maintain the quality of the discussions. guillom 18:21, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for looking into it; I ask, because I clearly remember commenting without logging in. (I get the idea of fighting spam, not sure, this extra required registration step on top of moderation is the best compromise in ease of contribution vs. ease of keeping the comments clean.) --Dami 18:29, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
- Yeah, personally I would prefer to have no login required, but the fact that we have 3,460 comments over the whole history and a stunning 2,958 have been approved kind of speaks volumes about the effect it has. Steven Walling at work 00:00, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
- Erm ... as recently as 2 May, I posted a comment without registering or logging in [1]. I just entered name, URL, email address and comment. It would be much better to leave that option open, as I expect it will put off a lot of people either directly ("oh, I have to log in - never mind then") or indirectly ("I can't spot the box to leave a comment ... guess I can't leave one."). Plus, there's this whole you-don't-have-to-log-in-to-edit philosophy about everything Wikimedia... ;-) Mike Peel 15:34, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
- I don't understand Steven's comment. Such numbers seems to show that we don't receive many spam or unhelpful messages and hence login is not useful. Nemo 18:07, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
- Erm ... as recently as 2 May, I posted a comment without registering or logging in [1]. I just entered name, URL, email address and comment. It would be much better to leave that option open, as I expect it will put off a lot of people either directly ("oh, I have to log in - never mind then") or indirectly ("I can't spot the box to leave a comment ... guess I can't leave one."). Plus, there's this whole you-don't-have-to-log-in-to-edit philosophy about everything Wikimedia... ;-) Mike Peel 15:34, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
- Yeah, personally I would prefer to have no login required, but the fact that we have 3,460 comments over the whole history and a stunning 2,958 have been approved kind of speaks volumes about the effect it has. Steven Walling at work 00:00, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for looking into it; I ask, because I clearly remember commenting without logging in. (I get the idea of fighting spam, not sure, this extra required registration step on top of moderation is the best compromise in ease of contribution vs. ease of keeping the comments clean.) --Dami 18:29, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
- Quick update: This morning, I enabled comments for logged-out users after discussing with a few people. This is an experiment to see if we can handle the amount of comments. guillom 07:38, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Suggestions: follow-up comments by e-mail[edit]
It would be a cool feature if commenters could choose to receive follow-up comments in e-mail. (Also the option to sign up for updates in e-mail would be cool; this latter might be easily done with Feedburner if there is no such built-in feature of WP.) --Dami 20:29, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
- Added as bugzilla:28934. guillom 12:30, 11 May 2011 (UTC)