Wikipedia talk:Community portal/Archive 13

message: Can we please remove the word "community"? Boguscommunity 17:49, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, because then it would just be called "Portal", which would be confusing, because we have an entire namespace called that – Qxz 05:00, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comment from [[User:Boguscommunity|Boguscommunity]] 

message: Sorry for the no-summary, no-change edit I just made. I was trying to use the search function in WikiEd. Instead I'll be using the delete button in Firefox and going back to ordinary editing. Cynical 23:14, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure you actually did make an edit (at least, I can't see one in the history). If you click "Save" without changing the page it doesn't actually save an edit. You have, of course, made an unnecessary edit now, but on this talk page instead :) – Qxz 12:31, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Sorry!

message: I think what we could really use, in addition to a Peer Review section, is a Grammar Review page. If an article is of solid quality, but the writing is somewhat less than adequate, it would be a handy place where wikipedians with strong grammar skills could give a PR'd page a good polish (prior to moving forward for FAC). Any thoughts on this? — RJH (talk) 17:35, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds fair enough to me. If you think there should be a page, by all means go ahead and set one up; once you have done so, you may wish to let people know about it by posting a message on the noticeboard. This page, though, is intended for discussion of the Community Portal page itself, so is probably not the best place to discuss new projects. The Village pump has a section for discussing proposals, which may be of use – Qxz 08:11, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We actually already have Wikipedia:WikiProject Grammar. -- Beland 09:35, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grammar editing 

message: Over the last few days, someone's been futzing with the template that contains the links into Wikipedia such as Recent changes, Random article, etc. Now the link to Community Portal has vanished -- which is one of the principal links I follow. Who is playing around with his & where are they discussing these changes so I can add my input? -- llywrch 22:17, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It appears to be there now, in the "interaction" section.  Have the headings there always been uncapitalized?  Huh.  --Maxamegalon2000 00:26, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I still don't see it; I don't see an "interaction" section. I'm using the Classic skin; before I start griping, can someone direct me to the proper place to ask about this? -- llywrch 00:55, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I use the MonoBook skin, and I see exactly what Maxamegalon saw. The sidebar's location is MediaWiki:Sidebar, so the best place for questions is probably MediaWiki talk:Sidebar. Picaroon 01:09, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

text: welcomed. --Quiddity 20:03, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Navigation template question 

message: *User:Blaxthos/Research requests
In my spare time, I am offering my services to perform research requests.  I'm just kinda doing a trial run right now, to see if anyone is interested in utilizing the resources I have available.  Basically, I'll run requirements through a rather thorough academic search engine (encompasses JSTOR, EBSCOhost, others) for peer reviewed reliable sources (I will not provide the actual article, but it could be a good way for researchers to find starting points when working on articles).  I have no idea where to float this service for community reaction/feedback/interest levels, so I'm posting it here.  Check it out, leave me a note on my talk page if anyone has comments/concerns/questions.  I'm not opposed to this notice being moved or re-posted in a more appropriate place, if there is one.  Thanks.  /Blaxthos 08:37, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There are 3 places related to your offer. Wikipedia:Research resources, Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange and Wikipedia:Newspapers and magazines request service. They're all in the need of a good merging though (along with related pages like Wikipedia:Library), so I'm not sure beyond that. --Quiddity 18:30, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yea, that's exactly why I'm keeping this as a single-person userspace project.  Those both look like ambitious undertakings that went nowhere (offense not intended).  Is there some way we can get a bullet point thrown up on the BB or CP or PUMP just to let people know?  Is that a good idea or not so much?  /Blaxthos 16:02, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Research requests (tentative offering) 

message: The above eds are gems for keeping the Coolac Massacre discussion humming.  Thanks guys.  Its this alternate side of wik that, through the aggro of eds, ensures stuff continues to be discussed, wik has some use.
Stay cheerful as its better for your stress level. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Itsmuriel (talk • contribs) 23:48, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi, this is the discussion page for Wikipedia:Community Portal, and is intended for discussion of the layout and content of that page. This is probably not the right place for your comment; if you wish to recieve a response, I recommend you post your comment at Wikipedia:Village pump, or find a more specific page which suits your intention. Thanks – Gurch 18:19, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: ManyThanksToWattle VS Longhair et al

message: Why does Community 'P'ortal have a different naming convention to every thing else? I don't see Featured content have a second capitalisation, nor Current events. This should be changed really. Thoughts? Jaser 12345 14:10, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I suppose they treat the "Community Portal" as a "place"(kind of) while "featured content" isn't. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by -Ozone- (talk • contribs) 04:40, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A "Portal" is a special kind of page, it's not a regular article page. There are many of them. You can read about it here:  Wikipedia:Portal. --Parzival418 20:48, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Naming Convention 

message: Does anyone know how to access the page listing the 100 most frequently accessed articles? I remember seeing it but can't for the life of me find it right now. Thanks in advance. John Carter 15:08, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: , "Wikicharts" is the name. —Centrx→talk • 17:59, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Most accessed articles 

message: There is a problem with the site page for Master of Puppets (song).  The Trivia section of the page has something there, it just won't show up.  I don't know how to do cleanup so could someone get that for me.  I appreciate it.  Thanks.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Merc 354 (talk • contribs) 
:This page is for discussing the Wikipedia:Community Portal page.  For unrelated questions, you should probably go to the Wikipedia:Village pump.  Thanks. --Maxamegalon2000 14:39, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Obey your master 

message: According to User:Penubag, there is a color caled "Pastel green" with the hex triplet #77DD77. If these colors could be added to the templates on the title, it would be very helpful. Thanks, †Sean gorter† 14:52, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ask at their talkpages. This page is just for discussing the Community portal. Thanks. --Quiddity 18:02, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Template:Shades of green]] and [[Template:Shades of cyan]] 

message: Wikiproject Birds's colab of the month has been bird for two weeks but I don't know how to change it on this page. Sabine's Sunbird  talk 03:28, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There should be a current collab page in WP Birds which automatically feeds there. I'll have a look on my watched pages. cheers,  Cas Liber | talk  |  contribs 03:31, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: here it is. cheers,  Cas Liber | talk  |  contribs 03:35, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  How do you update the collab section? 

message: I'm trying to standardize social networking terms, iron out the difference this and a random web community, etc.  Mathiastck 09:58, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you mean the difference between the Wikipedia project and a random web community, then there are many differences, but by far the biggest is that we are here to make an encyclopedia. This is not MySpace, or a community for its own sake – Gurch 14:03, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Social Networking Terms 

message: some collaborations aren't on your board thingy such as the NZ one. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 130.195.86.37 (talk) 
:The New Zealand Collaboration of the Fortnight is currently inactive. Inactive collabs gets removed. Ask at the talkpage, and/or at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject New Zealand, to help restart it. --Quiddity 17:31, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: collab

message: In Wikimedia.org, I am trying to upload a file, but after I'm finished, the Upload File is disabled!!!! Will you PLEASE help me?   PNiddy  Go!  0 03:15, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ask at Wikipedia:Help desk, this is not the right place to ask for help. And give them more details, such as the name of the file you're having problems with. Thanks. --Quiddity 17:35, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WTF?? 

message: Can someone move "Religious persecution" away from "Expand" to avoid ambiguity. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.198.250.72 (talk) 
:Ha! I moved it one over. (The bot that maintains the list changes it all every 24 hours) --Quiddity 17:27, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Presentation

message: I have been working on the wiki page for my old man, the journalist Alex Shoumatoff.  Here is the page.  A few days ago it searched well under his last name "Shoumatoff" with 100% relevance.  Someone moved the title name of his page and it does not show up in searches any more under his last name even though it is spelled correctly, and only shows up when his full name is entered in the search field, when it showed up as 100% relevance a few days ago...   Does anyone have recommendations on how to fix this or what is going on?    --Dieselcruiserhead 21:22, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Need help with a page and searching

message: Since this is the Community Portal, why is it in the Wikipedia namespace, and not the Portal namespace? I guess Portal:Community would be a bit weird, but it seems more in line with the styles and naming conventions, and the purpose of portals. Matt/TheFearow (Talk) (Contribs) (Bot) 09:35, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Portal:Community leads to a portal about Community; portals are for article-space. This page is centered around the project-space, and hence belongs in project-space. :) --Quiddity 17:34, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Namespace 

message: Please see a merge discussion thread, at Template talk:WP nav pages (header bar). Thanks. --Quiddity 17:25, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge

message: While there was good reason for bringing to an end the BJAODN pages as they were - there should be a redirect to the relevant "pages for amusment" from the acronym. There is a case for "a discussion page for articles, snippets and fragments" which are deliberately or unintentionally funny.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.83.240.26 (talk) 16:54, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: BJAODN

message: I see a French flag being displayed at the top left corner of the page? I don't see where it is coming from? Am I missing something? Shushruth \talk page  \  contribs 21:41, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It was being transcluded onto the page through a template. Should be fixed now. --Farosdaughter 21:53, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  French flag at the top? 

message: Does anybody know what's up with the flags on every article. There are only 2 or 3 flags that show up on the articles and the rest appear as 
FifaEditor 09:16, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've noticed it too.  Is there something wrong with the images on the commons? Coemgenus 00:18, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Loads of images (particularly flag images) not showing. --Quiddity 04:47, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Country Flags 

message: Wikipedia:Templates with red links is an inactive project. How about removing it from the community portal page?
--65.78.215.202 02:31, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. --Quiddity 04:09, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia:Templates with red links 

message: ...No-bid contract to spanish (only the title). I didn't found it on WR or similar :(
Thanks.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.78.182.165 (talk) 21:35, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Need help to translate... 

message: Should image captions have periods? What if they have several sentences? Beast of traal T C _ 00:58, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See Wikipedia:Captions. (yes, if they're full sentences.) --Quiddity 18:19, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "."s 

message: I can't edit this page (apparently I am not an "established editor"). Perhaps another editor can change "in to" to "into" here: "Merging is the process combining two (or sometimes more) articles in to a new article"? Thanks. Mira Gambolputty 08:06, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: done– Gurch 15:33, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request 

message: I think I remember hearing that only active collaborations are on the Community Portal. I think there are a few inactive ones on the list. I 'm going to remove some of them if no one objects. . .--Banana 04:34, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Collaborations 

message: Hi. I'm a total idiot. I have no idea how to add the Wikipedia:WikiProject Lutheranism/Collaboration to the list of collaborations. If anyone else does, I would be most appreciative if they were to do so. Thank you. John Carter 21:39, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. --Quiddity 00:47, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lutheran Collaboration 

message: Greetings. I used a perl script to make a list of articles listed as "core topics" that are also tagged with cleanup messages. It's at Wikipedia:Core topics - 1,000/with problems. FYI. – Quadell (talk) (random) 15:25, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Core articles with problems 

message: Aren't both 'Good Article Collaboration of the week' and 'Core Topics Collaboration' dead? They seem inactive and should be removed. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast 05:45, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. --Quiddity (talk) 06:17, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would have liked to have been told about this at the core topics talk page!  It's now more like monthly rather than fortnightly, and the last collaboration was extremely quiet, it's true - but the Sept/Oct one on fuel was in fact very successful.  I'll keep updating the community portal subpage anyway, and if you want to add us back in to the portal, please do.  Walkerma (talk) 04:17, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Egads, most sorry. I'd checked Core topics COTF, and saw all the "Nominations & votes" were from June/July, so assumed Wassupwestcoast was correct. I've added it back. -- Quiddity (talk) 06:34, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's true about lack of recent voting.  I suspect this portal provides most of the "new blood" for votes, so I appreciate you restoring it!  For some reason we've had very few votes recently, and you're right, I do need to get a few people energised!  People often lose interest on collaborations after two years or so. Walkerma (talk) 04:48, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Collaboration redux

message: Can the discussion for a potentially big "event" be added? --Howard the Duck 13:59, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's already mentioned in the Community Bulletin Board, if that's what you mean? Otherwise, what do you mean? ;) --Quiddity (talk) 19:13, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:Today's featured list]] 

message: The bulletin board is actively maintained, but the other parts of this page have issues.  I would like to only talk about the "Help out" section right now.  The main issue with the section as a whole is that the left side needs trimming and/or the right side needs expansion to bring a more balance to the "white space".  I am breaking this into the three respective sections to talk about exactly where to trim/expand and of course to update.--BirgitteSB 21:58, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Help out 

message: The recent changes to the newpages specialpage involving the patrolled/unpatrolled status of articles shows an enormous backlog on patroling new pages. Could patrolling new pages be made part of the open tasks of the community portal? Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 15:08, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I added it to the bulletin board for a week.  The open tasks feature is more complicated.  I am honestly not sure how it works but you might be better asking at Wikipedia talk:Community Portal/Opentask.--BirgitteSB 15:41, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  patrolling newpages 

message: When I click Wikipedia:Articles written by a single editor, which is linked from this article, I get a blank page. Not a typical "not found" error, just blank. Art LaPella (talk) 04:27, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a really really big page ("This page is 238 kilobytes long.") I've been getting that blank page problem recently too (in various places), I think it might be related to size? Refresh page cache (ctrl-F5 or shift-F5) usually works to fix it. I've looked around WP:VPT, but couldnt find anything recent or in the faqs, so I guess it's just a normal WP:SIZE#Technical issues thing. I've left a note at Wikipedia talk:Articles written by a single editor asking them to split it. -- Quiddity (talk) 06:13, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Yes, it is the size. I fixed it a little bit so it it is now about 160 kb. It might work now.--ZooFari (talk) 15:54, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Blank page

message: One of the things a lot of people do around the beginning of a year is review the previous year. I wonder if it might make sense to perhaps place on the community portal a note indicating that maybe any developments in wikipedia over the past year might be included in the History of Wikipedia article, or maybe a separate article on 2007 in Wikipedia. If that would be agreeable, please respond below so that I can try to rejuvenate the Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedia and maybe get some more input on whether or not establishing some sort of informal hall of fame of retired editors at Wikipedia:WikiProject Hall of Fame which probably makes more sense as a work group of the above project anyway. John Carter (talk) 14:32, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: nobody here but us bears. (do what thy will ;) -- Quiddity (talk) 06:38, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Auld Lang Syne 

message: I have no idea if this is the right place to bring this up, but:
On the wikipedia edit page (ex. here), the text "... license your contributions under the GFDL*," uses an asterisk to denote the footnote at the bottom of the page, "^ GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2... ." Is there a reason the footnote uses a asterisk/caret combination instead of the number/caret one used in most of the articles? Just for consistency's sake, should this be changed, or is this just because there is only one footnote?  Beast of traal T C _ 02:56, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You want to ask at MediaWiki:Edittools. -- Quiddity (talk) 20:03, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. Beast of traal T C _ 04:00, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Editing interface 

message: any help please  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rice92 (talk • contribs) 15:49, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: See Wikipedia:Your first article. More at Help:Contents/Editing Wikipedia#Creating pages - how to: :) -- Quiddity (talk) 19:56, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  how do I start a new page? 

message: Umm...I'm a noob and I need to know how to create an article without searching for an article name that doesn't exist. Anyone know how? Jaewonnie (talk) 19:29, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: replied at usertalkpage. -- Quiddity (talk) 21:27, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  I need some help 

message: EEK! Help... someone do me a huge favor and post this picture: http://becomeabetterfather.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/scott.jpg on the Scott Hammond (author/speaker) page.
Please?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by EloraC88 (talk • contribs) 06:18, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Cheek

message: Many of the filmarticles here lack the information about which country movies have been made - or the information is hidden in the article. Such a basic information should be in the top text. Something like this: Rambo is an american action-movie from 1985 starring Stallone. Basic information on a movie is: 1: Title - orginale title - country og orgin - category - year of release - starring actors/directors--Ezzex (talk) 20:26, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The place to discuss that, would be Wikipedia:WikiProject Films. This is just the page for discussing the Community Portal. Thanks. -- Quiddity (talk) 17:53, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  country of orgin on film here on english wikipedia is poor ? 

message: Wikipedia is getting so boring. A lot of the pages are too rich in text. There should be a bigger fair use policy for pictures. Furthermore, every time I edit something, whether it be a wrestling personality or somebody, a mod just reverts my contributions for no reason. Also, I made a page called Jack Deth about a character who appears in multiple films. There are far worse articles on here that have nothing, but are still remaining. What gives? This has to be said. Beyond a joke, well and truly.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.235.160.40 (talk) 08:39, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Replied at user talk. —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξφ 18:05, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

text: I concur! I used to enjoy just reading articles. Something happened to suck all the life out of the place. It pretty much sux now.198.208.159.17 (talk) 16:05, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Unimpressed

message: Czech:Doporučuji vám přidávat do vašich šablon takzv. interwiki, což jsou mezyjazykové odkazy. Wikipedie je MNOHOJAZYČNÝ projekt, takže interwiki slouží jako zobrazení onoho článku v jiném jazyce. Tady máte návod, jak interwiki dělat:
 #Category:Lesotho-stub
 # 
 # 
 # 
 #cs:Šablona:Lesotho-pahýl
Napíšete to pod kategorii a když si ukážete náhled, tak se to objeví v levém rámečku dole. Příklad je zde.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Turbo4000 (talk • contribs) 13:50, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  INTERWIKI 

message: Hi, Please delete the Users with less than 10 edits (or so)and are absent in Wikipedia for more than a year.Today I saw the IDs such as {!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!}and so on..... with no records Hope you understand--Raunak'  ' ( .:: Raunak Roy ::.. ) 07:52, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi, the village pump would be a better place to discuss this. However, a very similar proposal (WP:DUU90) was suggested a while ago - I was involved with it, and while it got more support than opposition (by a large majority), one of the developers of MediaWiki (User:Brion Vibber) didn't feel like doing it. I personally think that his only consideration of the project (a post of "Why?" followed by "Not really, no.") was quite insulting to those of us that began the proposal and gave it support, but we must honour our devs. —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξφ 14:18, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: My experiences of Bugzilla have been similar (and with the exact same dev, as it happens, though I wouldn't want to make it a personal issue since I know he and other devs do do a lot of positive work). I often feel there needs to be more integrated communication and cooperation between the major project communities (like WP) and the developers (or maybe more people allowed to be developers, if the current ones don't have time to deal with all the incoming requests).--Kotniski (talk) 10:59, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Anyone can be a "developer". If you write the code (and it's well written), they'll implement it, and they're usually happy to have any good help. But the "wishlist" is hundreds of items long, which is why they tend to ignore the more "wouldn't it be nice if" type requests. Personally, I would rather they spent their time on m:wikidata and suchlike, instead of the less urgent/valuable items like this. Ramble ramble :) -- Quiddity (talk) 20:52, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not too sure about the first point - I've seen people post patches on Bugzilla and been told where to stick it. And the question of what they should be spending their time on is one that would be better answered if there were active discussion (not just the formalized feature request system) involving both the editing and developing communities coming together as one.--Kotniski (talk) 07:58, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

text: Voting, though, is not a substitute for discussion (as I think has been said before in another context;) )--Kotniski (talk) 07:58, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Delete 

message: Per previous discussion, I moved Wikipedia:Community Portal to Wikipedia:Community portal yesterday.  This brought it in line with our naming conventions, but a remaining issue is the confusion with the "Portal" namespace (which didn't exist when the "community portal" was created).  As our usual connotation of "portal" refers to pages intended for use by readers (as opposed to the community portal, which is intended for use by editors), I propose that we select a different name.  Wikipedia:Community gateway is a possibility; it means the same thing and would eliminate the aforementioned confusion.  Opinions/alternative suggestions?  —David Levy 07:35, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I see what you mean in terms of conflict of namespace. On the other hand, I'm not clear that "Community portal" does in fact create any confusion - have you seen anything to suggest there might be? It's certainly possible that someone would want to set up a portal for the term "Community"; I don't know how likely this might be, but if it occurred there would certainly be confusion. (At best, we'd have something like "Community portal" vs. "Communities portal". Yuck.) So I don't necessarily see a pressing need for the rename (absent evidence that the word "portal" is in fact confusing people), but if a new name is strongly desired, how about "Wikipedia community" or something similar? -- MatthewDBA (talk) 13:41, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: On several occasions, I've seen users state that the community portal must be a "portal" (the connotation used in the Portal namespace) because it has "portal" in its name.  Some have asked why it's in the wrong namespace and why it isn't listed with "the rest of the portals."  I posted the above when I encountered a proposal to move the community portal to Portal:Wikipedia community, with one user supporting the idea because "the Community Portal is a portal by its own admission."  —David Levy 14:19, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting. I didn't realize there was that sort of confusion (it seems obvious to me, but I've been around for a bit. There's something odd-sounding about "Community gateway" in my ears, though; that's why I suggested something like "Wikipedia:Wikipedia community". Now that I'm looking at that, though, I'm seeing it's already taken. Something else might work equally well; I'll see what I can think of. -- MatthewDBA (talk) 12:36, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Rename

message: If anyone has any suggestions for simplifying/reducing the 4 huge boxes advertising the 4 podcasts (wikipediaweekly, notthewikipediaweekly, radiowikipedia, wikipediaupdate), that would be helpful... (Or if you can get some of the contributors to cooperate on programs, instead of "competing" with each other...) -- Quiddity 17:35, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I say remove all but the Signpost, and just have the others as small links. Until they establish a listener-base they should not be prominently listed. Otherwise, there is no limit to the number of topic specific, niche catering podcasts that could adorn the Community Portal. 79.75.155.198 (talk) 20:44, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: In terms of listener-base Wikipedia Weekly is likely the most established of the bunch (having been around for almost 2 years and with a very solid listener base), Not The is a little newer but still fairly old (a year or so), Radio Wikipedia seems dead from their page.. something about a computer blowup, and Wikiupdate is pretty much brand new.. it seems to be going for a short but frequent release schedule. a bit different than the older two podcasts.  As usual, we have our standing offer out at Wikipedia Weekly for anyone who wants to join in.  I think all the podcasts serve slightly different niches.. that being said, the space thing is becoming a bit nuts. -- Tawker (talk) 05:45, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Four Podcasts 

message: The fabulous Interwiki Link Checker, which has helped to create hundreds of thousands of interwiki links between different language editions of Wikipedia, is now back online. This needs to be publicized widely among the Wikipedia community, so users can start matching articles, allowing the flow of IWLC-created interwiki links to begin again. -- The Anome (talk) 12:56, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interwiki Link Checker 

message: I am a newcomer into SUL (does it mean Single Unified Login?) and I appreciate it, being a contributor in it, en and fr, plus some local. What I discovered is the fact that voices with the same content are extremely different in different wikis. Chech for example Centrifuge in English, Italian and French. Honest, I have no clear ideas, but there should be a system to align, at least in quality. This is different from the classical request of translation; it should be something like taking in charge of an article in different wikis, and use several hands to pick the best from each version, to have a series of elite articles, not necessary similar in appearance, rather in contents. This is probably feasible in technical and scientific articles or in biographies, surely not in a voice like English language or of the kind. Comments?--UbUb (talk) 16:48, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this kind of cross-language collaboration is something that has been lacking traditionally between our projects. Heck, we've got relatively poor collaboration between projects in the same language let alone across different ones... I would have thought that one of the best ways of leveraging SUL would be to have a global userpage and global talk-page actually. This would centralise communication greatly. However this is a technical solution to a social problem. Collaboration will probably work best if it comes from the wiki-projects (such as military history, or micro-biology) and their equivalents on the other language editions. Witty Lama 17:04, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Like I just wrote somewhere else, it was a misconceived idea (with hindsight) to allow the creation of separate Wikipedias in different languages. Since we're all working towards the same idealized product, just in different languages, there should have been a single project from the start, with different-language versions of pages within it... Oh well, we've got what we've got, but I certainly support the idea of increased collaboration by whatever means, and things like unified user and talk pages, and more especially unified watchlists, would be a very positive step. Not sure it's going to happen anytime soon though:( --Kotniski (talk) 17:22, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Afaik (not much here), we simply don't have enough multilingual people volunteering yet, and the ones we do have are already overworked. See Wikipedia:Translation and Wikipedia:WikiProject Echo for everything relevant. -- Quiddity 18:31, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually I would guess that the vast majority of people volunteering with wikipedia are multilingual - it's generally only people who come from anglophone countries that are monolingual. Especially given that the average demographic for users of wikipedia is 20s and 30s, educated and from developed countries, there is a very high likelyhood that people are multilingual. The problem, I believe is not that we don't know the languages, but that we don't use those languages to our best advantage. Witty Lama 04:43, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: A naive idea

message: User:Centrx decided to delete the RFC templates.  The "failure-to-have-a-discussion" is here.  Based on the section head, I believe the deleting admin's justification is the fact that the RFC bot wasn't reprogrammed to his specifications within a week.  If you have an opinion (either way) on this subject, please consider centralizing the discussion on the other page.  WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:52, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redlinks  under [[#Discussions]] 

message: Does Wikipedia have either of these?  I'd like to have a place where I can ask questions without havinbg to use the MediaWiki interface, because as awesome as it is, when used as chat or a forum, it gets confusing.  Thanks in advance!
Draconiator (talk) 17:47, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: See WP:IRC. —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξφ 17:58, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Forum/IRC chatroom? 

message: What happened to the contributing section? Now it's barely a stub and the sub page doesn't even have the peer review link. I'd like it back please; it doesn't help at all to add another hop to reach those links.—RJH (talk) 19:06, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know what User:Voyaging thinks he was doing. I've reverted. -- Quiddity (talk) 19:49, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you.—RJH (talk) 22:07, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  What happened 

message: i just wanted to say the new DONATE NOW extremely MASSIVE template that appears on EVERY page is extremely annoying... and very ugly looking... the previous cycling sentences that where in italics where much nicer and inspiring....
cheers guys! thanks for all your hard work!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.104.67.154 (talk) 10:54, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It's the donation-drive time of year. Main discussion at meta:Talk:Fundraising 2008/design drafts. -- Quiddity (talk) 19:55, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  sorry probably not the place to put this, but i dont know where...