|Please leave your feedback here only about the Outreach main page. General questions should be left at the Village pump. You can use the Add topic tab to start new discussion. Please sign your posts with a "~~~~" string.|
- 1 Enabling an opt-in preference for VisualEditor on Outreach wiki
- 2 "Universities" changed to "education programs"
- 3 Upper right corner of main page
- 4 The video
- 5 Collapsed sections, "more" links
- 6 Training not in an educational setting
- 7 Featured publications on the main page
- 8 Page protection
- 9 Wikidata used as a tool to spread fake information
Enabling an opt-in preference for VisualEditor on Outreach wiki
I have been updating this wiki a lot lately, and I have been using VE elsewhere and find it really useful, and I would like to have it here too. SJ asked about this on Meta and James Forrester has since enabled it there (see discussion). VE tabs would not be visible to editors unless they opt in by turning on this beta feature. Is there any reason not to make VE available as an opt-in beta preference on Outreach? If installed here, will VE break pages? Thanks! :) Anna Koval (WMF) (talk) 13:10, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
"Universities" changed to "education programs"
I changed this because Wikipedia is used in education programs outside of universities. For example there is a biology high school teacher who has his students upload diagrams every year. --Pine✉ 08:47, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks, Pine. :) You're absolutely right. The way it reads now is more inclusive. That's a good catch and a helpful edit. Anna Koval (WMF) (talk) 13:49, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
Upper right corner of main page
We had a logo for Outreach in the upper right corner that was redundant with the logo in the upper left corner in the navbar. I have boldly replaced the logo in the upper right corner with an outreach video. Comments? Pinging user:AKoval (WMF), User:Sage Ross (WMF), and user:Ktr101. --Pine✉ 20:03, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
- Bold indeed! ;) But not bad. Now that you've drawn my eye to this, I realize that I hadn't even noticed that we had the Outreach logo on the homepage twice -- first, in the upper left corner above the navigation and then again on the right inside the text box. Now that I think about it, it is unusual (and unnecessary?) to duplicate it. Good catch, Pine. :)
- That said, there may be those who felt pretty partial to that logo and might not like to see it displaced by anything. There might also be those who don't care to have his particular video on the homepage. No one commented one way or the other over the weekend, so that may not be an issue, but it's worth noting.
- I, personally, like this change, especially the still image that we see, with all the little Creative Commons logos in the background. It looks brighter and more visually engaging. Having a human on the homepage humanizes the wiki more. And using a non-English video exemplifies the international nature of our work.
- 300px was making the intro text wrap. 500px makes the text align or stack in a nice neat column.
- I'm not sure that the video caption is the best place for this sentence: "The Outreach wiki supports Wikipedia and its sister projects like Wikimedia Commons and Wikisource in all Wikimedia project languages." It was also making the caption a little long, in my opinion, so I was bold, too, and edited it out. Feel free to add it back. It might make more sense to include those details in the intro text on the left. But I'm not even sure that it's needed there. I like the intro text being shorter and sweeter. Less is more on a homepage, I tend to think. But it's not up to me, and I could easily be convinced otherwise. :)
- Thanks, Pine, for getting us thinking and talking about this. Anna Koval (WMF) (talk) 16:07, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
The video now placed on Main page is about Wikipedia only. But the wiki is not about just Wikipedia. It's Wikimedia outreach, not Wikipedia outreach. Perhaps the video should be moved to some wikipedia-specific pages? It is really good but it seems to me a bit forgetting about sister projects. --Base (talk) 12:40, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
- +1, The video should be moved to a wikipedia-specific page. --Steinsplitter (talk) 18:53, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
- That said, I still agree with Pine in thinking that the redundant logo should be replaced. And I do think a video is a good idea. Unfortunately, I'm not aware of any (recent) "Welcome to Wikimedia: here's our whole movement in a nutshell" videos -- and if there isn't one, we should make one! Pinging Victor Grigas. ;)
- Nice People, Great Feeling, and Edit Button may be better choices than ¿Qué_es_Wikipedia? if the desire here is to be more broad in scope. If I had to choose one of those three, I'd probably pick Edit Button since it's got a clear call to action, and it's got a great still image in the preview (a young Tim Moritz Hector smiling), which is what people will see every time they load the page.
- Hey all, 18.104.22.168 helpfully pointed out at Talk:Education that W:Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia has gotten quite the facelift lately! And I noted that they're using the same video there that I suggested we use here on the main page of Outreach wiki. It's got a really great caption now, too. :) Anna Koval (WMF) (talk) 13:54, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
- Impact of Wikipedia would be a better choice, as there are at least some videos in there that include mention of sister projects. The video here of Dumisani Ndubane talking about Wikiversity for example:
- Also, I'm currently on a Chromebook and when I played the video no English subtitles were viewable. I'm a bit ignorant of the player controls, but could not see anything other than fullscreen, volume and playbar. Leighblackall (talk) 21:41, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
The collapsed sections, and the "» more" links (aka. w:mystery meat navigation), were frustrating me every time I visited this main page. I've attempted to fix this, whilst minimizing change to all the translated units. Feel free to revert, if my attempt is flawed, but please suggest (or attempt, or draft) alternate approaches. Hope that helps. :) Quiddity (talk) 20:05, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
- That looks fine to me, as I would also suggest making the video smaller and moving it down a bit or into the white section, since it could fill in some of the white space that is there now. Besides, I feel it is too wide currently, but that is just my opinion. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 21:50, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
Training not in an educational setting
We seem to have lost a place to discuss training other than occurs in a context of an educational institution. For example, I would really like to find out about materials for teaching VE and a number of other things, but there seems no place on this outreach wiki for this kind of outreach (or indeed any kind of outreach that doesn't fall under the existing GLAM or Education). Kerry Raymond (talk) 01:38, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
- Yeah I acknowledge the same issue. It is also happening so with Wikimedia Ukraine activities, IMHO: trainings are usually put under either GLAM ("oh we have this workshop in a library so why don't we call it GLAM-Wiki") or Education ("well we are teaching people something here, so why can't it be an Education event") umbrella though it is not always that they actually are about cooperation with GLAM institutions or creating content as part of educational process. Any idea how to wedge it between those? Something like a general Workshops or Trainings portal which will try to summarize practices without specifics connected to working with GLAM guys or students and educators? --Base (talk) 12:25, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
Featured publications on the main page
Hey all. I have been wondering about the main page on this project, and I thought I would bring this up here. My impression is that there might be a case to have the main page feature some of the amazing up-to-date cases, posts, etc. our community produces. For instance, we might want to have a place on the main page to give some visibility to featured articles --that we could agree on-- from the newsletters on GLAM and education, new case studies, etc. I'd love to get your impressions on this. Thanks! --Joalpe (talk) 17:54, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- I think this could be a good idea or alternately have a rotating list of featured use cases and documents. Koavf (talk) 22:11, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- Joalpe, those sound like nice ideas, although I'm not sure how much readership they would get. I would like to see specific proposals before we implement changes. You might want to discuss this on the Village Pump and ping some of the people who organize regular newsletters like This Month in GLAM and This Month in Education. --Pine✉
- @Pine: Our main page had 3,172 pageviews in the past 30 days. — Jeff G. ツ 13:14, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Koavf, Jeff G.: Do you agree this discussion should be moved to the Village Pump, as proposed by Pine? I don't oppose this suggestion. --Joalpe (talk) 13:47, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
- The Pump will have more views. :/ Koavf (talk) 16:51, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Pine: Our main page had 3,172 pageviews in the past 30 days. — Jeff G. ツ 13:14, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Joalpe: I would also like to see specific proposals. — Jeff G. ツ 19:27, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
I increased the permission required to edit the Main page to administrator, because it appears to me that the autoconfirmed requirement did not block a user who had no other edits on Outreach wiki from editing the page. I am thinking that there may be a site configuration problem because that user did not have the autoconfirmed permission and as such should not have been able to edit the Main page. Pinging Koavf (talk · contribs) to ask if he can determine why that user was not stopped from editing the Main page by the autoconfirmed requirement. If we can determine why that user was not prevented from edting the Main page by the autoconfirmed requirement, and fix that problem, then I am open to discussion about whether to continue to require administrator permission to edit the main page or whether to allow all autoconfirmed users to edit the main page. --Pine✉ 07:11, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
- That is very weird: the user only had two deleted edits prior to that. I don't know how that's possible. Sad but I guess necessary step--thanks, Pine. Koavf (talk) 08:29, 18 January 2019 (UTC)