Alternative designs Edit

Please link any alternate designs you make here...

  • User:Watchout/My_Main_Page – same design like here for Monobook skin, I know it looks bad in default style, it's really just for the coloring for Monobook -watchout 14:31, 1 September 2006 (EDT))
  • My Main Page Basically because we now have a sponsor I moved the selected article index to the middle. Why? To show the ad and encourage more ads later on. To make the news, which changes, more likely to be viewed expanding its use versus the selected article index which rarely if ever changes SharlinTalk / Did 10:44, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Comments or Changes to Main Page/Main Page Dev Edit

Please put any comments or changes you made here...

Link to WoWWiki in Portuguese(BR) Edit

Hi, first sorry for my english. Im here to announce the newest wiki page about world of warcraft. This time in portuguese. The site have articles translated from the wowwiki, and another sites, to portuguese. At this moment we have few articles, but at least one for day is put in it.

The site have a Portal (in few months we will put an db site, like wowhead, allakhazam and others) and the wiki. At the portal you can find some news about warcraft. So, is this. It link: (portal) and (wiki =O)

--GraBR 18:29, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Colourful WoW Edit

Made WoW in WoWWiki more colorful and push it down a bit; move intro text to right a bit. Mostly just to see how it looks... any comments appreciated. --Fandyllic 9:32 PM PDT 25 Aug 2006

Hmm, bit too colourful for my taste - some colour may be nice though, just not clown colours :) -- Kirkburn 06:21, 26 August 2006 (EDT)
I agree with Kirkburn. Also, colouring texts inside the design might cause more work when we try CSSing it. This design would basically be inverted, brightness-wise, for Monobook --Mikk 06:22, 26 August 2006 (EDT)
Agreed, quite clowny. -- Gryphon 20:40, 5 September 2006 (EDT)
I just edited it to make all page text white - with monobook, it was unreadable. Can that change be implemented pretty much immediately please - we're likely to get complaints otherwise :) (Compare Monobook to Monobook) But not the colourful title, obviously, since we need to discuss that further ... -- Kirkburn 07:23, 26 August 2006 (EDT)

Could someone remove that rediculous infernal from the front page? It's not got transparency (white background) and seems obviously broken. Qii 13:09, 16 January 2007 (EST)

No, your browser is broken - or rather doesn't support transparent PNGs. You are using Internet Explorer, right? --Foogray 13:19, 16 January 2007 (EST)

Interface Customization menu Edit

We shouldn't make this too long as the most important link on that list is the 'Interface Cust. Main Menu' link - I've made a minor edit to make it stand out a bit. Opinions? -- Kirkburn 07:52, 27 August 2006 (EDT)

I changed the order of the links in there (Moved wowapi-link down) it looks more of a "workflow" now. The ordering makes more sense now imo -watchout 09:47, 27 August 2006 (EDT)
The original comment I posted here was posted in the wrong place ;) Mikk is best to answer specific queries on that menu, but to me the change makes sense :) -- Kirkburn 10:25, 27 August 2006 (EDT)
It's a bit confusing to have two talk pages about the same topic, I tried to keep the topics separated, but since I was changing the page here I thought I should leave a link... Mikk will find this discussion... maybe :) (We could also just move this discussion to the main page talk) -watchout 11:47, 27 August 2006 (EDT)
Yeah that order makes sense to me. --Mikk 13:50, 27 August 2006 (EDT)
Made "Interface Customization Menu" white to be consistent with other bulleted subheadings. --Fandyllic 6:13 PM PDT 28 Aug 2006
Implemented on Main Page. -- Kirkburn (talk) 19:55, 2 September 2006 (EDT)
We should add a link to the LUA functions as described on the Lua_functions page there aswell IMO, it would fit in with the rest. --Tularis 10:38, 5 October 2006 (EDT)
And further devalue the whole point of the Interface Customization menu? Especially seeing as how Lua info is not even World of Warcraft specific?   --Mikk (T) 11:11, 5 October 2006 (EDT)

Arrows for white headings that are links Edit

I put link arrows (with default link color) to the right of white headings to indicate they are links. Comments? --Fandyllic 9:38 PM PDT 31 Aug 2006

Awesome idea! I definately think it should go on the main page -- Kirkburn (talk) 10:40, 1 September 2006 (EDT)
Okay, talked a bit about it with Mikk - he suggested changing it to a slightly simpler character just to reduce any clutter: »
Look okay? I also did a few minor other changes such as slightly separating the sections to help with clarity. -- Kirkburn (talk) 13:59, 1 September 2006 (EDT)
I like the arrow idea. though the 'new' arrow looks a bit too small, making it bold makes up for it I think -watchout 14:46, 1 September 2006 (EDT)
I've implemented this idea now -- Kirkburn (talk) 19:54, 2 September 2006 (EDT)
I like the arrow idea. This should be possible to use for other headings and sub headings, and I tried it on the Warlock#Curses_.C2.BB header. Nice, but the table of contents will also get the arrow, which does not look good -- LarsPensjo 00:29, 4 September 2006 (EDT)

More guides link Edit

I'm not a big fan of the More guides.. link. It seems to be special casing. --Fandyllic 9:48 PM PDT 31 Aug 2006

Now that you've added those arrows, I see no need for that extra link (it was only ever going to be a temporary measure anyway). Removing it from the dev page now... -- Kirkburn (talk) 10:40, 1 September 2006 (EDT)

Expansion Edit

Please add section called Expansion with a link to World of Warcraft: The Burning Crusade. This is really one of the more interesting subjects, with new information frequently. LarsPensjo 07:26, 1 September 2006 (EDT)

Hmmm.. We do have that one in the "popular pages" toolbar to the left...   --Mikk (T) 07:28, 1 September 2006 (EDT)
Not a bad idea. Remember, any user can edit WoWWiki:Main Page Dev, so if you want to see a change... make it. Just try to explain why you did it on this page. --Fandyllic 8:54 AM PDT 1 Sep 2006

Vertical Alignment Edit

I changed the vertical alignment of the `Official Sites` and `Forum Trackers` part to bottom align, I think this looks much better, thoughts? -watchout 14:36, 1 September 2006 (EDT)

Implemented on the Main Page, although not noticeable at the moment. And yeah, much better like that! -- Kirkburn (talk) 19:57, 2 September 2006 (EDT)

Highlight tip-of-the-day Edit

I figured if we're gonna hide the tip-of-the-day at the bottom of the page, the background-color could be given a bit more contrast and a border added. Hopefully, everyone likes it. --Fandyllic 8:09 PM PDT 12 Sep 2006

Hmm yeah, something like that might work well imo. The color scheme went a bit off though, but I assume Kirkburn will tweak it =)   --Mikk (T) 01:28, 13 September 2006 (EDT)

Link Tip of the day to all tips page Edit

I made Tip of the day link to all tips page, in case someone clicks it and thinks of a tip to add. --Fandyllic (talk) 1:28 PM PDT 19 Sep 2006

Table Colors Edit

The spectrum of mulitple shades of reds, pinks and purples in the second table clash horribly. Is there an alternative color combo that Mikk and Kirkburn approve of that will pass more than an eight minute review? =) Umbra 15:27, 22 September 2006 (EDT)

Just cause you started when we were chatting about the page anyway :P To your question - I'm not happy with them either tbh. -- Kirkburn (talk) 15:37, 22 September 2006 (EDT)
Okay, I've started an attempt to clean it up a bit - User:Kirkburn/Dev. Any thoughts on it so far? I don't really want to use the purple, but I'm not sure there's much else to use :/ -- Kirkburn (talk) 21:59, 22 September 2006 (EDT)
Try splitting the bottom two sections into two standalone sections. As for colors... Umm.. Try a dark yellow perhaps? (A.k.a sort-of-brown :-)) Or perhaps going blue again might work. It has the red section in the middle as a separator.   --Mikk (T) 04:34, 23 September 2006 (EDT)
You know how 'browny-yellow' normally turns out :/ I've split the sections - how about now? -- Kirkburn (talk) 10:22, 23 September 2006 (EDT)
Myeah I do :<   Ooooh hey nice. I like it. Think you could tweak the main menu color a bit though? It's got a slightly toxic greenish tint at the moment. Maybe aim a little more for turquoise? (Dunno, just a thought)   --Mikk (T) 10:29, 23 September 2006 (EDT)
Sure, go ahead :) One thing I want to do overall is lighten it up a bit -- Kirkburn (talk) 10:31, 23 September 2006 (EDT)
The main menu top table should complement the Logo. Since there is a lot of blue in the logo, the General Info table should be a matching blue since it dominates the page. Umbra 13:53, 23 September 2006 (EDT)

User:Kirkburn/Dev Edit

I've got the minor redesign to a good place now, and I think it's good enough to go on the front page. The main points are:

  • Colour simplification and better highlighting
  • Incorporated alternative language wiki links into section two
  • Banner simplifying - to allow logo to be placed in the (near!) future, and to make the design clearer
  • Cleaned up the Tip of the Day section

Any comments or show-stopping problems? -- Kirkburn (talk) 22:16, 26 September 2006 (EDT)

I like it.   --Mikk (T) 10:16, 27 September 2006 (EDT)
Not bad, but I don't like the WoWWiki title taking up more space on top. I hate anything that makes me have to croll down more to see stuff. I do like the Alternative language wikis part and suggest you add that to WoWWiki:Main Page Dev and then Main Page soon after. --Fandyllic (talk) 5:38 PM PDT 27 Sep 2006
I just altered it to make the header take the same room as the current version (the dev page has the breadcrumb which pushes it down a little) - how about now? I've also reduced the spacing in a couple of other areas to shorten it a little more. :) Edit: after some more tweaking, it's now the same height as the Main Page Dev -- Kirkburn (talk) 20:59, 27 September 2006 (EDT)
Better, but it still takes up more space on my browser (Firefox) than the Main Page or WoWWiki:Main Page Dev. Also, the vertical space at the top of Main Page or WoWWiki:Main Page Dev still has an unusually large gap that could esaily be reduced, whereas further ruducing the vertical space on your page would require some extreme cleverness or actually reducing the size of the title image. Not that I don't like your page... it's just that it's not such a dramatic improvement that I feel the need to make the switch. --Fandyllic (talk) 7 PM PDT 27 Sep 2006
Ok, I liked your Alternative language wikis links, I added it to WoWWiki:Main Page Dev. --Fandyllic (talk) 5:32 PM PDT 28 Sep 2006

Changed top header back... sort of Edit

I don't like the design with WoWWiki on the top, it just takes up too much vertical screen room. I reverted back to the older style with the WoWWiki title on the side, but I used Mikk's fancy image (not the latest one). Besides, Mikk made his most recent changes with no explanation here... which is a no, no. If you make a change to WoWWiki:Main Page Dev without any explanation here or in your change notes, you're asking for a reversion. --Fandyllic (talk) 5:50 PM PDT 27 Sep 2006

Reduced the vertical space used by the top part of the page by about 20px (guessing). --Fandyllic (talk) 7:04 PM PDT 27 Sep 2006
I'm very soon to copy the new design over - it is okay to use Mikk's excellent header text? It's perfectly fitting for a WoW wiki, I think. -- Kirkburn (talk) 23:27, 30 September 2006 (EDT)

News bar Edit

I've added a bar so we can put important news bits on the front page - given the change in policy for BC content recently, something like this would be incredibly useful. Also, I've edited a few links for grammar consistency :) -- Kirkburn (talk) 11:04, 18 October 2006 (EDT)

Currently, does someone manually edit the News bar on the front page every time they want to change it? For my Wiki I set up at work, I use a simple technique where I have a news page with <noinclude> tags around everything but the latest change, that way, if someone edits the News page, the front page (which includes it like a template) gets updated as well:
 == December 2006 ==
 </noinclude><includeonly>[[VersionLog|Latest Update:]]</includeonly>'''Full Release: 12/28/06'''
 * Fixed a problem that would keep charts from showing up in reports
 * Improved some of the screens to not allow KeyStrokes when not actually active.  Should prevent some Run Time Errors...
 * Charges no longer automatically sets Responsibility Back to Primary when you change the DOS if Autocoverage is disabled.
 '''Full Release: 12/19/06'''
 * Minor statement changes to fix date formatting.
 * Fixed Price List Screen to not RTE when you use a function key from the Abbreviation field.
 * Fixed Global Days to improve speed.
 * Fixed a problem in the Price List screen that would not let you F12.

Perhaps my method is a little crude, but works great for our purposes. Would something similar be useful here? --SeiferTim 22:03, 5 January 2007 (EST)

Move Search Box Higher Edit

Please move the search box higher on the left column. I know that it's just a scroll down, and I know that there's a search button at the top right... but this two step action is kind of a pain. Just below the navigation box would be ideal. I suspect that if you looked at your site statistics carefully you'd see that the majority of users do a search first... rather than click a link. It's just much easier to come to the page and be able to execute a search immediately. Thanks for the consideration. -- PuP 8:10, 2 December 2006 (PST)

Amen. This really needs to be done. It's a pain to consistently have to scroll down to get the search box. I would actually put the search box ABOVE the Navigation box. Search is probably the most important feature of this Wiki -- mgg4 16:13, 20 December 2006 (EST)
Good points, but changes like that occur rarely - the guy who can change that stuff is very busy and rarely around :) Note the Internal search in the nav box, however. It's better than the Google search box :) -- Kirkburn (talk) 12:28, 23 December 2006 (EST)
I'll try to bug Rustak about this. Should be easy. Can't guarantee when he'll get to it, tho. If you don't see any indication of change in a week or so (like me not replying in this thread or the search moving higher), complain here and I'll resend an e-mail to Rustak. --Fandyllic (talk) 11:04 AM PST 24 Dec 2006
This has still not happened, and I think it should be easy and a high priority. Move it at least above "popular pages". Thanks from UncleVinny
I vote for this also, it's a bit frustrating when visiting WoWwiki from other PC's with resolutions lower than 1280x1024, can't even see the search box on the main page, have to scroll down for it. --Daeveren (talk) 10:01 AM PST 06 Feb 2007
Yes! Please! Moving the search box above Navagation would be awesome... --sorenth 19:08, 19 February 2007 (EST)
Agreed. I tend to use WowWiki on a 1024x768 laptop beside my desktop pc, so have to keep scrolling down to get to the search box. It's the sole reason I registered here, so I could add it as a suggestion :) Moving it to either directly above or below the Navigation panel would be much better placement. Alternatively/additionally, emphasise the 'Internal Search', possibly by highlighting it in some way, or giving it a text entry window beside it for default 'Main' searches directly from the front page. (Also, is there a firefox search plugin for WowWiki?)
I've removed the now outdated dev box - the search box should be a little higher now. Kirkburn talk contr 15:30, 21 March 2007 (EDT)
There is a Firefox search bar plugin here. Also, I think the "Search" link on the front page should be changed to "Advanced Search", and a simple search box should be added in it's place... this couldn't be hard to do, would take but a few minutes.Rohane 10:40, 29 March 2007 (EDT)
Would take longer than that - you can't add in that sort of HTML code to the Wiki. So we'd have to get the techie guys in to be able to work some sort of magic, or something. It's not possible. <Kiltek> blah / spam 11:25, 29 March 2007 (EDT)

Cosmos Edit

Is it worth mentioning Cosmos on the front page so prominently? As far as I know Cosmos is quite dated. It seems like a section on Ace would be more beneficial. --Patchtimer

Cosmos is still alive and well, it is only 'dated' by those who choose to slader. Cosmos articles are among the oldest on the Wiki as the Wiki was started by people close to the Cosmos dev team. --Gryphon 17:30, 19 December 2006 (EST)

In comparison to other prominent UI packages like Ace or CTMod, Cosmos is just not getting much use. While the loyalty to the Cosmos package is admirable, if you are trying to present an unbiased and informative site about WoW UIs, you shouldnt favor Cosmos just because some of the Wiki developers are/were involved in it. --Patchtimer 09:30, 21 December 2006 (EST)

You don't know how much use any of them get. I can tell you that Cosmos is getting plenty of use. --Gryphon 11:56, 21 December 2006 (EST)

What is the criteria for inclusion on the front page then? Any UI package that gets considerable use? If so, at a minimum CTMod and WoWAce should also be included. --BladeBreak 10:44, 23 December 2006 (EST)

Cosmos has a special place on this wiki as it was the reason for many of the hits early on, and a *lot* of the info about the addons still resides here. Ace has its own wiki, and we carry little info about it, and the same goes for CTMod, we carry pretty much no info about it (because we don't need to). We only link pages with substantial info from the front page, for simplicity. If we link everything, there no point having an interface menu sub-page :) -- Kirkburn (talk) 12:25, 23 December 2006 (EST)
wtf... Where did the Cosmos link go? The Cosmos Team helped start the wiki! Hell, I even worked on the last main page revision. And I don't even see a vote for this latest change, nor did I hear anything about it. I can't even find a vote on the latest redesign... I thought we worked this out last time? What the hell is going on? April fools is not a good excuse to introduce a new design and default it onto the front page. The only thing I can find is that there was a link on the main page on march 27 till the page changed on the 31st. That is not long enough...
It looks liek the Cosmos link disappeared March 31 when Kirkburn committed the new cat page and was never readded when Adys committed his "Back to normal design" on April 1st. Frankly, I'm disgusted. Don't make me go bug AlexanderYoshi to have him modify the page...
--AnduinLothar 12:50, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

Jump link to What is a Wiki? Edit

It annoyed me that at the top of the Main Page it says, "New to the wiki? Scroll down!", but you would actually have to scroll down even though there should be a way to figure out how to just have alink to jump down for you.

I think I figured out a way to do this, but it may not look right on all browsers. I made the "What is a Wiki" enclosed in <h1></h1> which appears to get the wikiengine to generate a <a name="What_is_a_Wiki.3F"></a> set of tags so you can jump to it. For some reason if you put <a name="What_is_a_Wiki.3F"></a> in wikicode it gets parsed to &lt;a name="What_is_a_Wiki.3F"&gt;&lt;/a&gt; rather than just passed through. Argh. I also suppressed the automatically added underline lower border that usually gets generated by <h1> by overriding it with an in-line style.

So the Scroll down now is a jump link to "What is a Wiki?".

So please reply here if you see any issues on other browsers. I only tested this on Safari and Firefox 2.0, so far. --Fandyllic (talk) 10:34 PM PST 26 Dec 2006

It's white (on white background...) in Monobook, though thats probably acceptable since everyone who reads wowwiki in monobook should know what a wiki is, except when he follows a link like this so ... I dont know ;)
I tried it with IE5.2mac and its broken from the start - some script is irritating it, but that seems to be on every page. so else... white text, blue hover underline like in firefox -watchout 13:36, 27 December 2006 (EST)
Okay, it should look better in monobook skin (WoWWiki:Main Page Dev with useskin=monobook). But still looks generally icky. --Fandyllic (talk · contr) 7:22 PM PST 10 Jan 2007

Category: WoWWiki Edit

Someone please add this to the Main Page so that it doesn't appear on the Special:Uncategorizedpages :) Jeoh 19:36, 29 December 2006 (EST)

Done! -- Kirkburn (talk) 18:35, 30 December 2006 (EST)

hic Edit

Why is there hic! after stuff on the main page? is it someone causing trouble or is it ok? --Jammidodger 16:24, 1 January 2007 (EST)

The front page has been converted to slurred speech in celebration of the New Year --Gryphon 16:35, 1 January 2007 (EST)
As funny as it is, I would have preferred using new graphics rather than replacing the existing ones... :-P --Fandyllic (talk · contr) 11:26 PM PST 1 Jan 2007
Haha! That'sh funny...hic! --Varghedin (talk · contr) 06:06, 2 January 2007 (EST)

HEHE....... HIC and i ain't even allowed alcohol. --Jammidodger 06:35, 2 January 2007 (EST)

you drunk asses, get some sleep! :D

In my book, all these changes count as vandalism.--Odolwa 20:08, 2 January 2007 (EST)

Cheer up, it's just a bit of fun :) --  Kirkburn talk contr 16:11, 2 January 2007 (EST)
K, the hangover is over, back to normal! :D --  Kirkburn talk contr 17:08, 2 January 2007 (EST)

Zomg icon! Edit

It has arrived! Praise be to User:Rustak. Smiley --  Kirkburn talk contr 17:08, 2 January 2007 (EST)

Praise be! // Montagg (talk · contr) 20:30, 2 January 2007 (EST)
Huh? This site still has no icon! checked with firefox 2.0/IE6 --Jonus 14:55, 11 January 2007 (EST)
What are you talking about? You don't see the WoWWiki icon stamp on the left? (Also using Firefox). --SeiferTim 15:41, 11 January 2007 (EST)
I think he means favicon/bookmark icon -watchout 17:00, 11 January 2007 (EST)
Rustak knows. I did give him one :/  Kirkburn talk contr 18:56, 11 January 2007 (EST)
Did it look like this: WoWWiki icon stamp (but better)? --Fandyllic (talk · contr) 4:50 PM PST 11 Jan 2007
Yes, much better =) Since it has to be an ico (afaik), meaning no true transparancy, I made it with a bg colour the same as the wiki's, but Rustak complained :/  Kirkburn talk contr 21:43, 11 January 2007 (EST)
Ok i don't care at all how good or bad the icon looks, i just want to have anything else instead of "nothing". I identify my bookmarks mostly with the favicon. --Jonus 17:03, 15 January 2007 (EST)

Removed Game Controllers... Edit

I removed Game Controllers from WoWWiki:Main Page Dev for the following reasons:

  • From what I can tell, the script mentioned in Game Controllers is not an AddOn but a third-party script that requires a PC-only scripting language to work.
  • Because it isn't an AddOn, it shouldn't be a listed as a Hosted AddOn.

--Fandyllic (talk · contr) 9:14 AM PST 12 Jan 2007

Battles, could they be expanded? Edit

Moved to Battles, could they be expanded? on WoWWiki talk:Bookkeepers where it probably belongs. --Fandyllic (talk · contr) 4:04 PM PST 13 Jan 2007

Major text updates Edit

I've rewritten the whole second section to be more useful and clearer, and modifed the text in a few other places to make it more accurate.  Kirkburn talk contr 19:11, 15 January 2007 (EST)

More text and link updates, improved code a little. If no objections, I shall move this over pronto-ish :)  Kirkburn talk contr 23:41, 16 January 2007 (EST)

Infernals Edit

The location of the Infernals is causing sidescroll here, at 1600x1200. Jeoh talk · stalk 

Causing a scrolling bar to appear, or actually making you need to scroll the page? The former really doesn't bother me, but the latter would. We appear to have had a little edit war over the placement, I'm hoping it doesn't occur again.  Kirkburn talk contr 02:38, 16 January 2007 (EST)

Seems to me that the Infernals block a couple of things on My Comp window. The Logo in the top left corner and some text in the top right corner are blocked. Maybe just my settings? (Using IE, Window Resolution of 1024x768). Not to mention, it looks really bad, with the White & Grey Backgrounds. Then again, thats just my opinion. Why Are they there, anyways? For the BC expansion? Daragoth 08:41, 17 January 2007 (EST)

IE <v7 is crappy with PNG Transparencies, it would have been less problematic for some users if the Infernals were GIFs - or perhaps the Legion is trying to tell you to switch to Firefox. Not using Firefox? YOU ARE NOT PREPARED! ;) --SeiferTim 12:12, 17 January 2007 (EST)
IE7, however, is fine. IE6 or less is crap. Warning, FTP is a pain in IE7... otherwise it is better than IE6, if you're forced to use IE. --Fandyllic (talk · contr) 4:23 PM PST 17 Jan 2007
Y'know, I didn't think about the fact they were PNGs. Nevermind - most sane people visiting here will have a good browser by now, and IE7 is being pushed out to the less knowledgeable all the time via Windows Update. Ayway, Hobinheim added them as a little surprise for the release of TBC. I've told him to dev page such a change first next time, even if it is very cool :)
In other news, I've pushed in my latest dev page text updates.  Kirkburn talk contr 19:49, 17 January 2007 (EST)
Tried it on my home computer (I had the infernals error when i tried it on the old school computers that only had IE 6) with Netscape 7.2, and the things looked great. Like I mean, really good. Daragoth 09:19, 19 January 2007 (EST)
Dont know if Im adding this to the correct section. This is actually my first add to a Wiki. The reason for my joining is that I love this site so I figured I would lend a hand. The first thing I would like to see fixed is the main page, and as I do not have access to do so, I am reaching out to an Admin for help please. The Infernal1 and Infernal3 images are very large and obstructing the text on the main page. --Mechicago 13:56, 19 January 2007 (EST)
Oh, you scared them away :( Come back Infernals! We won't hurt you! We luv u!!!!!! {cry} --SeiferTim 15:46, 19 January 2007 (EST)
I moved the infernals around a bit. Add complaints below. ;-) --Fandyllic (talk · contr) 11:27 AM PST 19 Jan 2007

Guild articles Edit

We need a spot on the main page to direct people interested in starting guild articles to the right places. There's some development happening on a guild page boilerplate to give editors a good idea of how to start, but we need to catch them before they can do too much damage. =c) Not sure exactly where this should go, but a link that says, "Looking to start an article for your guild? Check here first" would be extremely helpful in directing traffic to the right spot. This should be a permanent addition to the front page as well. // Montagg (talk · contr) 16:02, 9 March 2007 (EST)

*sign* -watchout 14:24, 21 March 2007 (EDT)
I redid the links on Guilds (disambiguation), the Guild link on the front page, and also at the top of Guild. Perhaps also as a news story at some point? Kirkburn talk contr 17:22, 28 March 2007 (EDT)

"Number of Articles" statement is meaningless and imprecise. Edit

The statement " now has over 25,316 articles" is essentially meaningless, over X articles could mean any number of articles from 25,317 up to infinity! I cant believe no-one else has noticed this or is happy with it? The obvious suggested corection is that this statement should read " now has 25,316 articles". Daos 21:16, 8 March 2007 (EST)

To say it has that exact number of articles would be more incorrect - Special:Statistics shows why. If people are really confused as to why it's 'over', they will find out when they click the link. Kirkburn talk contr 21:53, 20 March 2007 (EDT)

Featured Article Edit

Perhaps add a tooltip-like portrait around the image? Currently it doesn't look very good, in my opinion. Jeoh talk · stalk 

Good idea, I'll see what I can do. Kirkburn talk contr 19:25, 27 March 2007 (EDT)
Is it an idea to put it further up in the page? At the current state, people won't notice it when opening WoWWiki. --Tinkerer 05:36, 31 March 2007 (EDT)
I can't put it above the 'article index' bit, but I've spent a little while attempting to reduce the page spacing. Kirkburn talk contr 06:37, 31 March 2007 (EDT)

Illidan has been around for sometime as a featured article. --Spitfireleet 08:40, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

See WoWWiki talk:Featured article. Pzychotix 13:03, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Upcoming redesign Edit

As you can see on the Main Page Dev, it consists of:

  1. Addition of a WoWWiki:Featured article (FA) section
  2. Larger area for news
  3. Simplified design, especially the content box
  4. Reformatted help and info box

More feedback is appreciated :) Kirkburn talk contr 17:20, 28 March 2007 (EDT)

As I've said in previous feedback - we really could do with having a search bar on the main page. How that could be implemented I'm not to clear on... yet.
I agree. This is a reference site, and the first thing 99% of people do is search for something. Having to click a link or scroll down is a needless nuisance for an action that is clearly more important and relevant than the other actions presented. Also, the old (current) page seems less cluttered and therefore more usable. "Featured Article" and "WoWWiki news" is nice for insiders, but again not terribly useful to the mainstream user. At least it's on the bottom, below the fold.
These are minor quibbles. I wouldn't complain if the new front page were used. But frankly a big search box at the top of the screen where we can easily reach it would be the single strongest improvement you could implement.
Chrazriit 09:04, 31 March 2007 (EDT)

Anychance we could also get the "WordArt" logo taken away and replaced with something that wasn't drawn with a chunky crayon? :) <Kiltek> blah / spam 05:00, 29 March 2007 (EDT)
I've just tested to see if it's possible to just rip the HTML code from the google bar at the side - it's not. Seems Wiki is blocking certain HTML anchors, which is crappy because I still believe not enough people know how to use the search function here (since pretty much any one with a screen smaller than 19" can hardly see the google box :( <Kiltek> blah / spam 05:06, 29 March 2007 (EDT)
Can easily be seen with 1600x1200. Perhaps switch the search with the ads? Jeoh talk · stalk 

Orginal Non-Cat Page Edit

Can you add a like to the orginal WOWWIKI Page? This is humorous but please add a link to the orginal page. --Ramming pure 11:11, 31 March 2007 (EDT)

A link is at the bottom of the page. Kirkburn talk contr 11:21, 31 March 2007 (EDT)

By the way, note the sentence: MeoWWiki is a wiki dedicated to cataloguing the cats of Blizzard Entertainment's Warcat Universe (with a focus, though not priority, on World of Warcraft)...

Clearly this should read "World of Warcat". Mike 10:00, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

LOL are you gonna take that Meowwiki pic off? I mean I'm cool with it.. just thought it was forgotten. ;)

I borrowed 2 pictures, one accidently came up since one of my pictures I got permission for has the same name but I still kept it. The other one wasfrom the Pandaren article. Can someone here give me permission please? Mr.X8 02:07, 12 June 2007 (UTC) Fr0 00:25, 5 April 2007 (EDT)

Nope, it stays :) It links to the MeoWWiki page. Kirkburn talk contr 08:11, 5 April 2007 (EDT)

The meowwiki page was cute. I didn't notice that the entire page was permeated with it, because I was focusing so much on the 'gullible' new message link that I thought was vandalism. Only after I'd removed it, did I see the crazy cat stuff and go "aaaaahhh... it's April 1st." --User:Varghedin/Sig 09:08, 13 April 2007 (EDT)

Goldseller ads Edit

I realize that this is a Google ad, but it looks bad. WoWWiki is a site devoted to the survival and enhancement of the game, and goldsellers destroy the same game we love. Allowing goldseller ads on the site gives a tacit approval to the practice. It's tantamount to a site for abused womens' resources having an ad for porno videos.

There are other search engines; perhaps one which allows more control over ad content would be a better choice.

ClemSnide 15:56, 12 May 2007 (EDT)

This point is answered (positively!) on WoWWiki talk:Village pump#Blocking Gold Selling Ads Kirkburn talk contr 22:51, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Ad blocker interference detected!

Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.