Wikipedia talk:Community portal/Redesign/Draft2a

message: How do we present lists of links? Bullets, like the other collaborations? ·s like the About Wikipedia section? Or just plain, like the Policies and guidelines section?
Some say that we need consistency. Others say that would lead to a dull page. I say that we might as well do a bit of each, because that's how it's formatted right now and I don't want to overhaul it. Your ideas?--HereToHelp 12:57, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that we leave as is. i like the middots. --Quiddity 18:10, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, so long as the community at large does.--HereToHelp 18:39, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Formatting of lists 

message: I'm trying to shorten the 2nd line from the page intro addendum. Options:
#(current)The Village pump is a discussion forum on a variety of topics, including technical issues, policies, assistance, proposals, news, and the concerns of other Wikipedians.
#The Village pumps are our discussion forums on a variety of Wikipedia-oriented topics.
#The Village pumps are our discussion forums for Wikipedians about Wikipedia (News, Policy, Technical, Proposals, Assistance, Miscellaneous).
#The Village pumps are our discussion forums for Wikipedians.
i like #3 or #4. I'm going to put #3 in as my final edit tonight, and remove it from the "Help" section (in "Editorial"), which i think leaves the Help section impressively concise (with just 2 links!). (Is that all the more useful/noticable to the lost people it's essentially there for. or redundant and we should remove it?) --Quiddity 08:24, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that there's enough room to have  (or whatever that template is) in the CBB. We get rid of the other stuff about the signpost there. I'll do that now. I'll shorten the blurb, too.--HereToHelp 11:58, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Intro

message: This redesign is looking good...the only comment I have is that the the browsebar should be before the intro. To look nicer on top, the browsebar could maybe be elongated. I don't know, I just feel that there should be something heading the portal, and the browsebar is a good idea. --Osbus 14:39, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As someone who voted to delete the browsebar, i'm obviously biased against it. However, it's also non-contextually relevant here. The community portal is for wikipedia-related links, whereas the browsebar is for browsing the encyclopedic content. So, i'm particularly against it here. (sorry ;) --Quiddity 19:04, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I see what you mean. But I still think there should be somthing heading the portal. --Osbus 00:22, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: With no other icons until the bttom of the page, I think that Portal.gif would look tacky with the "Welcome to the Community Portal" blurb.--HereToHelp 02:22, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  comment 

message: I like the layout but the table of contents could be improved (by prehaps moving it to the right hand side like the current version)Lcarsdata Talk | E-mail | My Contribs 12:17, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There are a few other supporters of that; if that idea turns out to have a large number of advocates we can change it.--HereToHelp 12:24, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Good 

message: If, as your edit summary says, we are now 100% done, what now? The response has been positive; do we go ahead and upload this? After uncommenting the categories and interlanguage links, will the community really accept the design?--HereToHelp 02:46, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I'm biased, but i would hope that yes and yes. It's very quiet around here with easter weekend, but i think we're good to go. The question is, do we un-fullprotect it at the same time? I havent read the protection rules (not being an admin), so i have no valid opinion on that, up to you, or delegate (hot potato). --Quiddity 03:09, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

text: I'll archive the talk and post the new design. Let's keep it protected for a few days so nobody reverts it or makes crucial changes so we can talk it out. Which brings me to that policy we were going to propose. It got a good response on the village pump, so we should go ahead and write it up. But I have no idea what to call it! Wikipedia:Don't make changes to graphical layout without prior discussion? HereToHelp 12:01, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds good. I'll see what things are like when i wake up. (5am time for bed ;)  I'll try to dream up a title. --Quiddity 12:07, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll work on it in my sandbox. I can have a bunch of stuff there as long as I'm diligent about giving people diffs.HereToHelp 12:10, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Done.HereToHelp 21:29, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Final steps 

message: removed "good article collaboration of the week" subsection as its already listed in "other collaborations" list and nothing makes it more special than anything else in that list (its not policy for example).— Preceding unsigned comment added by Zzzzz (talk • contribs) 
:It's an interesting point, but doesn' that throw off the column balance?HereToHelp 18:13, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Removal of content should be brought up at the Wikipedia talk:Community Portal page so that anyone can discuss it. (We were primarily changing the layout and style, and tried to include almost all of the top and traditional content that was at the CP over the last 6 months of changes.) Thanks. --Quiddity 00:37, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: GAC

message: When it's live, we can begin some of this metacleanup (add anything?): (i dont know much about the deletion process, it's just my urge to clean up things. I think i'll just add cleanup/etc tags from now-on. :) --Quiddity 00:19, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: metacleanup