Wikipedia talk:2008 main page redesign proposal/88wolfmaster

From the author[edit]

My proposal draws inspiration from ChyranandChloe, Pretzels, and Wintran. Each section is a standard subheading, so users can bookmark their favorite feature to skip directly to it.

Do to the recent overhaul of my proposal I have archived the previous comments to make room for new discussion. --88wolfmaster (talk) 03:23, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments[edit]

Background image[edit]

Hi, interesting proposal! Could you tell me where you defined the id (css) for your header's background image? Many thanks Pretzels^chatters 17:10, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I believe you are looking for this line:

< div id="EnWpMpBook2" style="padding: 1em 0 .6em; background-repeat: no-repeat; background-position: 0% 20%;" > --88wolfmaster (talk) 23:04, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

small items, commented[edit]

Finally someone who points out that the statistic 2.5 million articles refers only to those in English. That's always looked ambiguous to me. (2.5 million articles spread out over 250 languages would not be nearly as impressive.)

What is a new person to make of FA article and FA picture at the top; they look meaningless. I'd suggest putting the "featured" star in place of the letters FA there, and also in place of the paintbrush in the heading for the featured picture. Only a small portion of our featured pictures/images are painted; they're all featured. Help people learn what featured means. Thanks, --Hordaland (talk) 19:39, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done Spelled out Featured in the header box and switched the paintbrush to the featured star.--88wolfmaster (talk) 23:08, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Always wondered why the article, but not the picture, deserved that star. --Hordaland (talk) 23:29, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Time[edit]

Lose the time at the top right. It can't possibly be up to date (would have to be constantly refreshed) and is redundant to the time on the computer. --Pwnage8 (talk) 15:28, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki goes by UTC which can be different than one's local time. I personally like having the time, and having it at the top right is fairly out of the way. Its not meant to keep time (merely inform users of the approximate time on wiki when the page was loaded) so constantly refreshing is unnecessary.--88wolfmaster (talk) 09:02, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]