Return to article

Talk: Wikimedia Australia/Archive 1

< Talk:Wikimedia Australia
m (→‎web page speed times: Seems fine for me.)
Line 37: Line 37:
# <-- Served in 21.650 secs. --> - still slow - will try and raise the matter again :-) [[User:Privatemusings|Privatemusings]] 13:35, 30 April 2010 (EST)
# <-- Served in 21.650 secs. --> - still slow - will try and raise the matter again :-) [[User:Privatemusings|Privatemusings]] 13:35, 30 April 2010 (EST)
# <-- Served in 22.751 secs. --> - still slow. Heading to the mailing list :-) [[User:Privatemusings|Privatemusings]] 14:36, 29 May 2010 (EST)
# <-- Served in 22.751 secs. --> - still slow. Heading to the mailing list :-) [[User:Privatemusings|Privatemusings]] 14:36, 29 May 2010 (EST)
# <-- Served in 0.062 secs. --> Logged in with Chrome and a Ctrl+Refresh [[User:Markhurd|markhurd]] 21:49, 29 May 2010 (EST)

==Main Page shuffling==
==Main Page shuffling==

Revision as of 11:49, 29 May 2010

thought I'd kick off the main page talk page by wondering why it's protected? - I've no particular idea in mind for changes (yet!) - but thought I'd ask this first :-) Privatemusings 04:24, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

ah... it's not! doh! - I think it looked that way to me a) because I'm stupid and b) because I wasn't logged in ;-) Privatemusings 04:25, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

weird image behaviour

could someone else confirm that the topographic map of oz appears as a redlink non-image when viewing this page from an IP? - that's what's happening for me, and it's odd! Privatemusings 01:44, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

I am seeing the same problem, and only when logged out. John Vandenberg 02:53, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Same here, but it worked after I purged the page. The wiki uses InstantCommons which has not been widely tested yet. Angela 05:06, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
just confirming it's fixed for me too... prolly the purge thing? Privatemusings 02:32, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

frontpage redesign

After grumbling a bit, and then announcing my experimentation on the mailing list yesterday, I felt 'bold' this morning, and have gone ahead and dun it! It's a 'copy and paste' move, which I sort of vaguely understand creates some problems - I've referred to the page history here, and welcome ideas or technical means to ensure that we're fully compliant with whatever 'history' requirements are in vogue :-) Comments / tweaks / merciless editing of the mainpage is also most welcome... I hope this represents a modest improvement over the previous, and will of course continue to improve etc. over the next few days etc. cheers, Privatemusings 21:55, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Seeking inclusion of a bookmark icon

Is it possible to have the source code for pages at include a bookmark icon? I am asking because I think there may be others (like me) who maintain bookmarked pages as small icons in their bookmarks toolbar (without addition of description) and which can then be clicked on by site. Such an addition will also add further professionalism to the site - similarly to English Wikipedia. I think a *.ico image (being a miniature of our Wikimedia Australia logo) at the start of the source code will be particularly appropriate. At this stage the icon is just the generic dog-eared plain paper icon which does not provide any clue as to the bookmarked link. With thanks. VirtualSteve 23:31, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

You're taking about a favicon.ico. The detail is here: [1] Simply we need a that is a small version of File:Logo.png.
Alternatively another location can be specified using mw:Manual:$wgFavicon. markhurd 04:07, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Will bring this to our technical people's attention :) Thanks Mark. Orderinchaos 06:40, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Nice work on getting this finalised. Thanks to those involved. VirtualSteve 07:44, 11 February 2010 (EST)
yeah - that's nice! :-) Privatemusings 09:35, 11 February 2010 (EST)

web page speed times

I think we have a problem with the speed of page rendering - drop your times in here if you get the chance;

  1. Served in 24.664 secs Privatemusings 13:18, 25 January 2010 (EST)
  2. Served in 27.211 secs Privatemusings 11:22, 2 February 2010 (EST)
  3. fwiw, times improve vastly after you've been at the site for a while? - Served in 0.062 secs Privatemusings 20:25, 2 February 2010 (EST)
  4. Served in 30.394 secs - except the site seems much much quicker now? Privatemusings 09:35, 11 February 2010 (EST)
  • is it possible the site is slow for logged in users? time was from an IP, and now it's dead slow again! ho hum.... Privatemusings 09:38, 11 February 2010 (EST)
It seems to be that subpages are served quickly but the main page is served slowly. Maybe it's something to do with the handling of either table rendering or transcluded templates? I notice also we're using "1.16 alpha" rather than a stable version, I wonder if this could have something to do with it? Orderinchaos 00:44, 12 February 2010 (EST)
  1. <-- Served in 22.373 secs. --> - once again the site seems fast when not logged in (though the 'served in' time was 30secs+), then slows to a crawl when you log in. This is getting a bit embarrassing - just had (another) 'gosh that's slow' type comment - not a great look. Privatemusings 13:03, 25 February 2010 (EST)
  2. <-- Served in 21.549 secs. --> - still slow t'would seem :-( Privatemusings 15:48, 1 March 2010 (EST)
  3. <-- Served in 21.832 secs. --> - still seems to take an age for me - I'll try to remember to poke werdna :-) Privatemusings 11:09, 25 March 2010 (EST)
  4. <-- Served in 21.172 secs. --> - haven't poked anyone, but the frontpage particularly is still very slow. Privatemusings 13:11, 21 April 2010 (EST)
  5. <-- Served in 21.650 secs. --> - still slow - will try and raise the matter again :-) Privatemusings 13:35, 30 April 2010 (EST)
  6. <-- Served in 22.751 secs. --> - still slow. Heading to the mailing list :-) Privatemusings 14:36, 29 May 2010 (EST)
  7. <-- Served in 0.062 secs. --> Logged in with Chrome and a Ctrl+Refresh markhurd 21:49, 29 May 2010 (EST)

Main Page shuffling

I removed the news and events sections as being in danger of getting embarrassingly out of date (probably should have left a note here) - I noticed Orderinchaos' edit summary indicating that the 'main page should be left alone unless absolutely necessary' - I don't really agree with this - I think editing the main page should be encouraged by more folk to try and ensure we stay up to date and dynamic - it's great to see a new listing in the news section (although the promise of exciting events to follow may seem a little light to some, and mightn't be the best we could do?) - however I don't think the inclusion of the 'planned events' section at this time represents us in that great a light - it looks a bit bad to have a 'happy birthday wiki' from Jan as the lead. I think it'd be best to remove the 'events' for now - the page will still look ok then, I reckon :-) I'll probably reshuffle the page in a couple of days barring further discussion..... cheers, Privatemusings 13:11, 21 April 2010 (EST)

Strongly disagree - the main page should pretty much never be modified by anyone short of a redesign or a genuine need, and it probably should be indefinitely protected. Keeping the page "up to date and dynamic" does not in any way suggest the template should be edited. The main page also, for the same reasons, should never contain content, just a whole bunch of includes - which I note is the present situation. This is the same as every one of the Wikimedia projects presently does. Simply "removing" news and events for reasons that boil down to personal opinion does noone any favours. I'm happy to see some of the old news items disappear or be replaced personally, but individuals undertaking such without consultation with anyone else, especially when the site is so low-traffic, actually creates more problems than it solves. Orderinchaos 13:07, 27 April 2010 (EST)
Well no worries - though I'm not sure the design which I bunged up there ages ago would've ever seen the light of day under those terms - I'll leave well alone - I do think the appearance of the main page is a bit below par though - the balance of left and right isn't very good, and it's not a good look to have what amounts to legacy information on such a high profile page - that combined with the continued very long load times make this for me, an area I recommend attention to. OTOH - you could be right about the low-traffic situation making the point moot, unless you consider this to be causative - I wonder if it might be.... Privatemusings 13:38, 30 April 2010 (EST)
heh.. I notice I said I'd leave well alone, but I'm afraid the left / right imbalance is now even worse, and it's visually illiterate ;-) - I'm going to fix it up as best I can sometime next week barring any further input here.... cheers, Privatemusings 18:38, 16 May 2010 (EST)
next week.... two weeks... what's a few days ;-) - I'm going to make some small changes now.... Privatemusings 14:25, 29 May 2010 (EST)