Should Wikinews add this technical solution? - Amgine / talk 05:40, 4 May 2005 (UTC) When a user selects 'compare versions' on the history page, the resulting diff page should show at the top the comment field(s) associated with the page diff. This will be very helpful, particularly it means one can give a url to a diff and have the readers see all the associated comments from the changes in the diff, very useful. - Simeon 09:36, 14 May 2005 (UTC) What do you mean with comment? The Summury entered with that editing? This is show AnyFile 20:31, 14 May 2005 (UTC) If the summary: is what he is talking about, I think this a great idea. You may consider posting this to MediaZilla at URL --Cspurrier 20:40, 14 May 2005 (UTC) The edit summary of the first and last pages in the diff are already shown. So, I'm not sure what is being asked here. - Amgine / talk 23:12, 14 May 2005 (UTC) I guess they are, I never noticed it before, thanks. From rereading what he asked for it sounds like he wants the talk page to be displayed. --Cspurrier 23:23, 14 May 2005 (UTC) <link rel="alternate" type="application/rss+xml" title="RSS" URL /> Please put this in the head portion of the xhtml... For this feature seen in Firefox. Thanks! Ross Uber 00:12, 17 May 2005 (UTC) I have been unable to find a method to do this in Mediawiki without hacking the software, which I do not have access to do. There are a couple Mediawiki feature requests which may be related to this, especially Bug 522, so this may be added to the system at some point. - Amgine / talk 16:44, 18 May 2005 (UTC) For me, I really like all of the layouts. I particularly like the idea of reducing the daily news to 1 or 2 days, and bringing back topical sections. Here are a couple my nit-picky comments, minor things you might consider implementing: As shown with the current lead article, many images use a white background instead of transparent background, and they consequently show very poorly against a colored back ground. For the lead article boxes, perhaps it would be better to have only slightly off-white background. As a resolution for the multiple latest days, a small menu to the last three days archives might be used? I'll see if I have time to put together a 2.5 column layout, with a different approach to some of items you have in the right column. And thanks again for pushing forward with main page layouts! - Amgine / talk 00:40, 9 May 2005 (UTC) You should add this to the design contest I'd like to add that Sandbox two doesn't use DPl for the latest news left hand column, but instead uses the {{LatestNews}} currently used in the Main Page. DPL might be perfected in the future (I've heared of plans to use publish date in stead of latest edit date), but the page doesn't rely on it completely. As for the other commoents: thanks for the input, I'll try and work it in as best I can. -- Redge (Talk) 18:00, 9 May 2005 (UTC) I've added in some links at the top and brought the color back to more white. Any other comments? -- Redge (Talk) 08:51, 13 May 2005 (UTC) I like the changes you made a lot --Cspurrier 23:31, 13 May 2005 (UTC) I realise this is more suited for Talk:Main Page, but the discussion seems to die down there on a periodic basis, so I'll move it here untill it's resolved. I still think the new layout is ready to be used as Main Page. -- Redge (Talk) 16:56, 23 May 2005 (UTC) I like the colours and the boldness but think there's far too many categories & headlines - prefer the style where categories or places are in a box and you follow them if you want to. The frontpage should be for the top/breaking news stories, this looks too much like an automated news sorting service. Isn't it also likely to get rather repetitive? ClareWhite 14:14, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC) It may be kind of repetitive, but it also complete. It gives al kind of readers the news they want on a single page, encourages them to find out more. I've wound it down a bit by bringing the DPL count back to 3. -- Redge (Talk) 15:18, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC) Completeness is all good but not for the front page. It's overwhelming. The front page should be the shop window that makes people want to explore more. Stories should be ranked by the interest people show in them and when the contributions get too big to display everything there will need to be some creative ideas about ranking them. I think the rest of the design is great, but I just think it's too much like a portal rather than a living news beast :) ClareWhite 09:27, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC) Not too fond of the yellow boxes. Anyway, in the U.S. "yellow" and journalism have bad commmonations. See: yellow journalism. -- Davodd | Talk 21:47, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC) In the meantime, having looked over the automated article listing program it appears to me to not actually reduce the amount of workload (the same number of edits need to be done, although to fewer pages), while at the same time complexifying the system - making it significantly more difficult for people who do not wish to use the new system. - Amgine / talk 21:21, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC) MediaWiki upgrade Well, we're running on MediaWiki 1.5 beta 1, and the DPL still works. That's a good thing :-) -- IlyaHaykinson 26 June 2005 17:50 (UTC) What kind of cool new features does 1.5 bring to the average editor? --Chiacomo (talk) 26 June 2005 18:37 (UTC) I cannot say the same thing at the Spanish-language Wikinews. Julián Ortega 26 June 2005 19:33 (UTC) What does not work on es.wikinews? Ilya: w00t! great job! The RSS feed / <catnews> died with the upgrade. - Amgine / talk 26 June 2005 19:57 (UTC) Whats with the print tab? I thought printing already worked with stylesheets. The show changes button when editing looks cool. thats about all I noticed so far. oh, and image pages look more organized which is good. Bawolff 26 June 2005 20:54 (UTC) Yeah, the print tab just makes it explicit. A lot of people didn't realise it went to a 'printable' page upon printing straight from the page. Perhaps in the future you could make it possible to let DPL generate a list with dates, formatted for instance like this: June 30: Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales announces cooperation between KDE Group and Wikimedia April 26: Wikipedia founder speaks at US law school May 10: Craigslist founder ponders open journalism -- Redge (Talk) 30 June 2005 11:46 (UTC) Possibility for DPLs on Main Page As IlyaHaykinson points out above, the issues the community was concerned about with DPLs has been fixed with MediaWiki 1.5. Now, Sorting by category addition is available, as well as an option to not display an error message if no articles fit the description. Because of this, there is no need to maintain the system any more than is currently done when we add a new day to the top of Latest news. I would like to hear what the community has to say about this before implementing it. The system can be previewed at Main Page/Temp. -- NGerda June 27, 2005 21:28 (UTC) So will the last edited article still be at the top of the list? --Chiacomo (talk) 27 June 2005 21:34 (UTC) Nope. They are listed by category addition :) NGerda June 27, 2005 21:43 (UTC) A demonstration in your user space, perhaps, is in order -- the coolness factor may be overwhelming. --Chiacomo (talk) 27 June 2005 21:45 (UTC) I'm an idiot and didn't read all of NGerda's comments in the original message above.. --Chiacomo (talk) 27 June 2005 21:50 (UTC) The upgrade to DPL by Ilya actually allows the list to be sorted a couple of different ways. Check out the documentation at DynamicPageList on meta. Amgine / talk NGerda: There are many other issues involved in modifying the main page to use DPL, as has been a running discussion on Talk:Main Page since the inception of Wikinews. I believe the current state of the discussions is to add back some level of the topic-based main page with the latest news (but reduced in length) at the top of the page. That said, there are still considerations for ease of integration to be made. - Amgine / talk 27 June 2005 21:45 (UTC) There are two primary reasons I oppose the automation process under the current proposal: There is no way to create the initial article link using an automated process. Although it is possible to use the "manual entry" nested template, this creates two lists, and (assuming the process is integrated, and each file then gets the correct category applied) the resulting article will be listed in both. Which then requires going back and editing the manual list so the automated list will work by itself... In short, exactly the same number of edits as the current system. Plus the additional level of complexity. And the need for extra watchfulness to make sure newbies are following the process. And offending people who prefer to work manually. To accomodate manual entry there will be two lists. Because there must be a way to manually enter initial links, there will always be two lists. Two places for articles to be found. Multiple ways to initiate errors. A top list and a lower list. New potential vandalism exploits. More-deeply nested templates, where subtle vandalism will be more difficult to detect or revert. These are not my only objections to the proposed system, but I do not see how these can be overcome. - Amgine / talk 28 June 2005 06:52 (UTC) I think that Developing Stories etc should continue to be manual, but that the listing of published stories should be converted to automatic. The only time we edit those pages is when we publish stories. It'd be easier to do that via the publish template inclusion only. -- IlyaHaykinson 28 June 2005 06:56 (UTC) On this we are in complete agreement. - Amgine / talk 28 June 2005 07:00 (UTC) Ok. So let's change the Wikinews:YYYY/Month/DD pages to have the DPL, as NGerda has been using them, and then talk about automating other parts after the dust settles? -- IlyaHaykinson 28 June 2005 07:04 (UTC) As I have explained to you in other venues, it is my opinion that there should be no requirement to use this system in order for an article to be listed on the developing stories template on the main page. Furthermore, it is an unnecessary additional step which does not actually save any edits. Whether the initial link is created on the story upload system or on the developing stories template makes absolutely no difference to the amount of actual work involved in creating an article, and eventually removing it's initial link. Furthermore, this system will result in articles which are not linked anywhere on the site, relying on their membership in categories to get them listed anywhere. If those categories were removed from the articles (by, as an example, a vandal) they would all become instantly orphaned. It can also be used to mess with the category-added date, in ways I'm sure you can figure out (especially consider the vulnerability the published template will engender.) Consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds... or some such famous phrasing. Inclusivity is one of the standards of Wiki. - Amgine / talk 29 June 2005 00:03 (UTC) Until there is some consensus on this proposal, could we avoid changing the template to avoid edit/revert wars? - Amgine / talk 29 June 2005 00:28 (UTC) I would prefer not running both systems in parallel, as you describe it, for the simple reason that the main page will regularly carry duplicate links to articles in the Developing stories template. If an article is created using the DS, and the author then adds the developing template, it will be listed twice. But I'm not interested in edit warring about it at this moment. - Amgine / talk 29 June 2005 09:21 (UTC) I've discovered one minor drawback to using exclusively DPL for the daily archives: the mediawiki software flags all the articles as orphans since nothing links to the articles. There is a solution which can work around this - use the DPL in the latest news template, and someone volunteer to manually update to the archive page from the latest news template. This will create at least a single link to each article. - Amgine / talk 30 June 2005 17:53 (UTC) There are, undoubtedly, dozens of articles which are not categorized in the article namespace. I'm willing to clean up the backlog if this will resolve the issues we're currently facing. - Amgine / talk 30 June 2005 21:51 (UTC) Using the developing tag would still be possible, and might be used for contributors to specifically request attention by editors, but would not be required (or even necessary) for an article to be listed on the developing stories template. - Amgine / talk 30 June 2005 22:06 (UTC)
Should Wikinews add this technical solution? - / 05:40, 4 May 2005 (UTC) When a user selects 'compare versions' on the history page, the resulting diff page should show at the top the comment field(s) associated with the page diff. This will be very helpful, particularly it means one can give a url to a diff and have the readers see all the associated comments from the changes in the diff, very useful. - Simeon 09:36, 14 May 2005 (UTC) What do you mean with comment? The Summury entered with that editing? This is show AnyFile 20:31, 14 May 2005 (UTC) If the summary: is what he is talking about, I think this a great idea. You may consider posting this to MediaZilla at URL --Cspurrier 20:40, 14 May 2005 (UTC) The edit summary of the first and last pages in the diff are already shown. So, I'm not sure what is being asked here. - / 23:12, 14 May 2005 (UTC) I guess they are, I never noticed it before, thanks. From rereading what he asked for it sounds like he wants the talk page to be displayed. --Cspurrier 23:23, 14 May 2005 (UTC) <link rel="alternate" type="application/rss+xml" title="RSS" URL /> Please put this in the head portion of the xhtml... For this feature seen in Firefox. Thanks! Ross Uber 00:12, 17 May 2005 (UTC) I have been unable to find a method to do this in Mediawiki without hacking the software, which I do not have access to do. There are a couple Mediawiki feature requests which may be related to this, especially Bug 522, so this may be added to the system at some point. - / 16:44, 18 May 2005 (UTC) For me, I really like all of the layouts. I particularly like the idea of reducing the daily news to 1 or 2 days, and bringing back topical sections. Here are a couple my nit-picky comments, minor things you might consider implementing: As shown with the current lead article, many images use a white background instead of transparent background, and they consequently show very poorly against a colored back ground. For the lead article boxes, perhaps it would be better to have only slightly off-white background. As a resolution for the multiple latest days, a small menu to the last three days archives might be used? I'll see if I have time to put together a 2.5 column layout, with a different approach to some of items you have in the right column. And thanks again for pushing forward with main page layouts! - / 00:40, 9 May 2005 (UTC) You should add this to the design contest I'd like to add that Sandbox two doesn't use DPl for the latest news left hand column, but instead uses the {{LatestNews}} currently used in the Main Page. DPL might be perfected in the future (I've heared of plans to use publish date in stead of latest edit date), but the page doesn't rely on it completely. As for the other commoents: thanks for the input, I'll try and work it in as best I can. -- Redge (Talk) 18:00, 9 May 2005 (UTC) I've added in some links at the top and brought the color back to more white. Any other comments? -- Redge (Talk) 08:51, 13 May 2005 (UTC) I like the changes you made a lot --Cspurrier 23:31, 13 May 2005 (UTC) I realise this is more suited for Talk:Main Page, but the discussion seems to die down there on a periodic basis, so I'll move it here untill it's resolved. I still think the new layout is ready to be used as Main Page. -- Redge (Talk) 16:56, 23 May 2005 (UTC) I like the colours and the boldness but think there's far too many categories & headlines - prefer the style where categories or places are in a box and you follow them if you want to. The frontpage should be for the top/breaking news stories, this looks too much like an automated news sorting service. Isn't it also likely to get rather repetitive? ClareWhite 14:14, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC) It may be kind of repetitive, but it also complete. It gives al kind of readers the news they want on a single page, encourages them to find out more. I've wound it down a bit by bringing the DPL count back to 3. -- Redge (Talk) 15:18, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC) Completeness is all good but not for the front page. It's overwhelming. The front page should be the shop window that makes people want to explore more. Stories should be ranked by the interest people show in them and when the contributions get too big to display everything there will need to be some creative ideas about ranking them. I think the rest of the design is great, but I just think it's too much like a portal rather than a living news beast :) ClareWhite 09:27, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC) Not too fond of the yellow boxes. Anyway, in the U.S. "yellow" and journalism have bad commmonations. See: yellow journalism. -- Davodd | Talk 21:47, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC) In the meantime, having looked over the automated article listing program it appears to me to not actually reduce the amount of workload (the same number of edits need to be done, although to fewer pages), while at the same time complexifying the system - making it significantly more difficult for people who do not wish to use the new system. - / 21:21, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC) MediaWiki upgrade Well, we're running on MediaWiki 1.5 beta 1, and the DPL still works. That's a good thing :-) -- IlyaHaykinson 26 June 2005 17:50 (UTC) What kind of cool new features does 1.5 bring to the average editor? --Chiacomo (talk) 26 June 2005 18:37 (UTC) I cannot say the same thing at the Spanish-language Wikinews. Julián Ortega 26 June 2005 19:33 (UTC) What does not work on es.wikinews? Ilya: w00t! great job! The RSS feed / <catnews> died with the upgrade. - / 26 June 2005 19:57 (UTC) Whats with the print tab? I thought printing already worked with stylesheets. The show changes button when editing looks cool. thats about all I noticed so far. oh, and image pages look more organized which is good. Bawolff 26 June 2005 20:54 (UTC) Yeah, the print tab just makes it explicit. A lot of people didn't realise it went to a 'printable' page upon printing straight from the page. Perhaps in the future you could make it possible to let DPL generate a list with dates, formatted for instance like this: June 30: Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales announces cooperation between KDE Group and Wikimedia April 26: Wikipedia founder speaks at US law school May 10: Craigslist founder ponders open journalism -- Redge (Talk) 30 June 2005 11:46 (UTC) Possibility for DPLs on Main Page As IlyaHaykinson points out above, the issues the community was concerned about with DPLs has been fixed with MediaWiki 1.5. Now, Sorting by category addition is available, as well as an option to not display an error message if no articles fit the description. Because of this, there is no need to maintain the system any more than is currently done when we add a new day to the top of Latest news. I would like to hear what the community has to say about this before implementing it. The system can be previewed at Main Page/Temp. -- NGerda June 27, 2005 21:28 (UTC) So will the last edited article still be at the top of the list? --Chiacomo (talk) 27 June 2005 21:34 (UTC) Nope. They are listed by category addition :) NGerda June 27, 2005 21:43 (UTC) A demonstration in your user space, perhaps, is in order -- the coolness factor may be overwhelming. --Chiacomo (talk) 27 June 2005 21:45 (UTC) I'm an idiot and didn't read all of NGerda's comments in the original message above.. --Chiacomo (talk) 27 June 2005 21:50 (UTC) The upgrade to DPL by Ilya actually allows the list to be sorted a couple of different ways. Check out the documentation at DynamicPageList on meta. / NGerda: There are many other issues involved in modifying the main page to use DPL, as has been a running discussion on Talk:Main Page since the inception of Wikinews. I believe the current state of the discussions is to add back some level of the topic-based main page with the latest news (but reduced in length) at the top of the page. That said, there are still considerations for ease of integration to be made. - / 27 June 2005 21:45 (UTC) There are two primary reasons I oppose the automation process under the current proposal: There is no way to create the initial article link using an automated process. Although it is possible to use the "manual entry" nested template, this creates two lists, and (assuming the process is integrated, and each file then gets the correct category applied) the resulting article will be listed in both. Which then requires going back and editing the manual list so the automated list will work by itself... In short, exactly the same number of edits as the current system. Plus the additional level of complexity. And the need for extra watchfulness to make sure newbies are following the process. And offending people who prefer to work manually. To accomodate manual entry there will be two lists. Because there must be a way to manually enter initial links, there will always be two lists. Two places for articles to be found. Multiple ways to initiate errors. A top list and a lower list. New potential vandalism exploits. More-deeply nested templates, where subtle vandalism will be more difficult to detect or revert. These are not my only objections to the proposed system, but I do not see how these can be overcome. - / 28 June 2005 06:52 (UTC) I think that Developing Stories etc should continue to be manual, but that the listing of published stories should be converted to automatic. The only time we edit those pages is when we publish stories. It'd be easier to do that via the publish template inclusion only. -- IlyaHaykinson 28 June 2005 06:56 (UTC) On this we are in complete agreement. - / 28 June 2005 07:00 (UTC) Ok. So let's change the Wikinews:YYYY/Month/DD pages to have the DPL, as NGerda has been using them, and then talk about automating other parts after the dust settles? -- IlyaHaykinson 28 June 2005 07:04 (UTC) As I have explained to you in other venues, it is my opinion that there should be no requirement to use this system in order for an article to be listed on the developing stories template on the main page. Furthermore, it is an unnecessary additional step which does not actually save any edits. Whether the initial link is created on the story upload system or on the developing stories template makes absolutely no difference to the amount of actual work involved in creating an article, and eventually removing it's initial link. Furthermore, this system will result in articles which are not linked anywhere on the site, relying on their membership in categories to get them listed anywhere. If those categories were removed from the articles (by, as an example, a vandal) they would all become instantly orphaned. It can also be used to mess with the category-added date, in ways I'm sure you can figure out (especially consider the vulnerability the published template will engender.) Consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds... or some such famous phrasing. Inclusivity is one of the standards of Wiki. - / 29 June 2005 00:03 (UTC) Until there is some consensus on this proposal, could we avoid changing the template to avoid edit/revert wars? - / 29 June 2005 00:28 (UTC) I would prefer not running both systems in parallel, as you describe it, for the simple reason that the main page will regularly carry duplicate links to articles in the Developing stories template. If an article is created using the DS, and the author then adds the developing template, it will be listed twice. But I'm not interested in edit warring about it at this moment. - / 29 June 2005 09:21 (UTC) I've discovered one minor drawback to using exclusively DPL for the daily archives: the mediawiki software flags all the articles as orphans since nothing links to the articles. There is a solution which can work around this - use the DPL in the latest news template, and someone volunteer to manually update to the archive page from the latest news template. This will create at least a single link to each article. - / 30 June 2005 17:53 (UTC) There are, undoubtedly, dozens of articles which are not categorized in the article namespace. I'm willing to clean up the backlog if this will resolve the issues we're currently facing. - / 30 June 2005 21:51 (UTC) Using the developing tag would still be possible, and might be used for contributors to specifically request attention by editors, but would not be required (or even necessary) for an article to be listed on the developing stories template. - / 30 June 2005 22:06 (UTC)
D
Amgine
D
talk
D
Amgine
D
talk
D
Amgine
D
talk
D
Amgine
D
talk
D
Amgine
D
talk
D
Amgine
D
talk
D
Amgine
D
talk
D
Amgine
D
talk
D
Amgine
D
talk
D
Amgine
D
talk
D
Amgine
D
talk
D
Amgine
D
talk
D
Amgine
D
talk
D
Amgine
D
talk
D
Amgine
D
talk
D
Amgine
D
talk