Template talk:Welcome/Archive1

debug
Can someone debug this template so it works well on pages? It makes text wrap to its right, and it shouldn't do that. If one "signs" it, the sig should come out below it. Thanks! human be in 22:51, 7 July 2007 (CDT)
 * Done. The problem was the "float: left" in the outer div style, so I just removed that.  If there'd been a good reason to leave it in, the other solution would have been to add a &lt;div style="clear: both"&gt; at the end. --jtl talk 01:16, 8 July 2007 (CDT)
 * Thanks! I thought was that "float" thing, but wasn't sure how to fix it! human be in 02:07, 8 July 2007 (CDT)
 * Would it work to use in the template, in place of manually entering the username of the person being welcomed? Locke  [[Image:Eye.jpg|10px|User is Vandal/sysop]]  Always Watching...... 04:50, 23 August 2007 (CDT)
 * I don't know, but feel free to experiment in a sandbox (working on the "live" version will do strange things to people's user pages). Also, make sure a "new" version works with the use of the "arguments" in the old version, unless someone wants to edit a zillion user pages to fix them.  It would be nice if there was less typing required.  I'd also like to see it include the time/date stamp of when it was saved (like how sigs work).  It's nice to see when people were welcomed. (ditto the welcome/IP template!). human be in 15:14, 23 August 2007 (CDT)

Edits by 193.200.150.26
They look okay and better even? No? CЯacke ® 22:55, 29 December 2007 (EST)
 * I don't know, I'm horrible with coding crap. I just usually subscribe to the "If it aint broke, don't fix it" ideology for these things, if you want to change it back, go ahead.  22:57, 29 December 2007 (EST)
 * And be careful - some of that stuff is legacy code for versions where people used different options. And that's what it looks like the IP deleted. human  23:11, 29 December 2007 (EST)
 * Some of the wording change in the botton half seemed OK, though. Anyway, will the helpful IP please discuss this here first? human  23:13, 29 December 2007 (EST)
 * Oh, that was me. Not the IP, but the person who first made the change. (If you look at the history, the IP just restored my changes.) Didn't realize there was legacy code in there, sorry if I broke anything. assume a=a 23:14, 29 December 2007 (EST)
 * Thanks for clearing that up. Yeah, that first section is there for when people used (I think) two arguments instead of one.  We could get rid of it if we found those uses and fixed them... And as far as the wording changes (and a bit of code?) in the bottom section, feel free to go back to work if you're making it better! Sorry you got undid completely. human  23:19, 29 December 2007 (EST)
 * Suggestion: We could substitute all the old uses so that they wouldn't be changed with new changes to the template. There would be no need to fix the old uses then. Anyone have a running bot on this wiki that could do something like that? If not, I could just run through the older ones manually. Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Welcome will be quite useful either way. assume a = a 23:26, 29 December 2007 (EST)
 * By "substitute" you mean what? The trouble with "what links here" is that very few uses are in the older, 2 argument form.  Is there a way to figure out when the use was made?  Because it will be the oldest ones, basically.  As far as running a bot to fix the 2 argument ones (delete the first argument), check with user:tmtoulouse, he likes writing them. Of course, there is no harm in the extra code to cover legacies, and it serves to confuse new editors who want to help ;) human  00:04, 30 December 2007 (EST)
 * (outdent) By "substitute", I mean use the  parser function on them. By replacing   with , the MediaWiki software places the actual code of the template (excluding stuff in tags) onto the page, so that if the template is later changed, it won't affect uses of it. For an example of this, see User talk:assume a=a, where I've substituted the welcome template. As for determining the dates in Whatlinkshere... hmm... no idea. The problem with the extra code is that it prevents certain improvements to the template; we can't add a second parameter without the legacy code getting in the way. I'll ask tmtoulouse about a bot then. assume a=a 16:03, 30 December 2007 (EST)
 * Cool, thanks for the explanation. I left tmtoulouse a note already.  I see why you want to fix it - what new second param did you want to add? human  20:10, 30 December 2007 (EST)
 * Check out User:assume a=a/Welcome, my proposed version of the template once we get all this stuff worked out. It lets you sign as the second parameter, putting your signature inside the box. It also allows the second parameter to be used for adding a short personal comment, your choice. assume a=a 20:56, 30 December 2007 (EST)
 * I wanted a way for a datestamp to be included... but what do you enter when using the template to do the sig/date thing? Is it easier than typing:

~

? human  21:23, 30 December 2007 (EST)


 * Basically, if we end up using that second parameter I added, you'll just type:
 * instead of
 * which isn't easier or more complicated, just about the same. The difference is that your signature would then go inside the box instead of outside. assume a=a 21:58, 30 December 2007 (EST)
 * which isn't easier or more complicated, just about the same. The difference is that your signature would then go inside the box instead of outside. assume a=a 21:58, 30 December 2007 (EST)
 * which isn't easier or more complicated, just about the same. The difference is that your signature would then go inside the box instead of outside. assume a=a 21:58, 30 December 2007 (EST)

I tried it in some sandbox somewhere, and it sure as hell wasn't intuitive. And didn't work. For instance, this did not produce results:  I'm all for getting rid of the legacy crap "just in case", though. So we can add, say, comments, like "uh, not really" to vandals - mebbe you can work on to that effect? Oh, and sigs "inside the box", while a great idea, might create user sig silly color scheme conflicts? human  23:20, 30 December 2007 (EST)

image size
Why the tiny 60px image? The bigger image looks a lot clearer. (asked assume a=a in an edit comment)
 * Because the template used to take up less space, and that was the largest that fit it nicely.
 * Also someone deleted the first section - did they take care to fix the old iterations they just broke? Come on folks, let's use this talk page to coordinate what is happening to this thing. <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms">human  03:52, 2 January 2008 (EST)

Image size: One reason is that bigger images -> more download time & more download bytes - not a bother for most I agree but ... Susan  purrrrr ...  04:00, 2 January 2008 (EST)


 * K.I.S.S. - I've stopped using it - you don't know from 1 day to teh next what you're supposed to do. It's all rather confusing, really. Susan  purrrrr ...  04:04, 2 January 2008 (EST)
 * If you're referring to the first section, it was put back in (just some revert war). It doesn't matter if we don;t use it anymore, it's out there on the wiki.  If we fix those uses to just have one argument, we can delete it.  When Trent gets back I'm putting him on bot patrol to get that done, so just hang in there. <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms">human  04:09, 2 January 2008 (EST)
 * Trent ain't coming back. I emailed him, he said he was done with this wiki.  And he called you ugly. user talk:Bohdan 04:10, 2 January 2008 (EST)
 * I hope I didn't break anything this time. When I switched to the other image, I left the first section (unlike last time I broke it) to avoid breaking the older versions. If I broke something again, I'll stop messing with this template for good... a  ssume  $$a=a$$ 14:09, 2 January 2008 (EST)
 * No, it's all good. Back whent he template was new, as I said, it was a smaller box (only 3 lines of text and a very small "buffer"?), so I tweaked it until the image didn't "leak" out of the box.  Over time the box got bigger, so now there's room for the bigger brainz.  Thanks for catching it! <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms">human  15:09, 2 January 2008 (EST)

Intercom
Is it worth directing people to the list sign up on the template? 20:58, 25 August 2008 (EDT)
 * I dunno, maybe? What we should do is add it to the newcomers' guide. <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  21:05, 25 August 2008 (EDT)

Saloon bar
What about a link to the saloon bar? Totnesmartin 13:49, 9 February 2009 (EST)
 * Might be useful... <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  15:26, 9 February 2009 (EST)
 * I would agree with that. How about "ask me on my talkpage|newcomrs guide, then a link to the saloon bar, worded to fit with either case? Aimless Blaster 15:27, 9 February 2009 (EST)
 * Anyone receiving a welcome is VERY likely to have been lurking for awhile & will probably already know about SB, Anyhow there's a link in the Comunity sidebar. Don't overload the template. 15:34, 9 February 2009 (EST)
 * Or they might be a complete noob, not a lurker, and joined? That's how I joined most wikis I'm "on". <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  03:20, 12 April 2009 (EDT)

Proposed changes
Reasoning: Discuss. --  Nx / talk 16:48, 12 March 2009 (EDT)
 * less links, TOC doesn't seem useful, newcomers guide and guidelines are more important.
 * last sentence felt tacked on, plus it was repetitive (please see...)
 * shorter -> less likely to be ignored
 * talk page link with optional parameter removed, I don't think it's useful to point someone to your talk page instead of the newcomers guide, plus you should sign anyway
 * I agree with removing the parameter. Furthermore I think the only thing we need to link to is the newcomers' guide.--Bobbing up 16:51, 12 March 2009 (EDT)
 * If nobody else has a comment, perhaps you should just go ahead and make the change?--Bobbing up 18:05, 11 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Although now that I look at it again, I'm not too sure about "Welcome to Rationalwiki, Welcome" Perhaps a bit "welcome" heavy?--Bobbing up 18:07, 11 April 2009 (EDT)
 * The second welcome is PAGENAME, it will be replaced by the user's name if placed on talkpage (confused me too the first time). I'll go ahead and make the change, that way at least people will notice and discuss :) --  Nx / talk 18:15, 11 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Cool.--Bobbing up 02:27, 12 April 2009 (EDT)
 * So what does it say, now? Less than it used to? (Wow, I just noticed that English sucks - someone tell Andy!) <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  03:17, 12 April 2009 (EDT)

Before
<div class="noprint" style="border: solid #000 1px; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; font-size: 100%; background: #fff0ff; width: 480px; padding: 5px; spacing: 0px; text-align: left; "> Welcome to RationalWiki, !!! Please see our table of contents and guidelines. Pull up a goat and have some fun! Any questions? Please see my talk page.

or

<div class="noprint" style="border: solid #000 1px; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; font-size: 100%; background: #fff0ff; width: 500px; padding: 20px; spacing: 0px; text-align: left; "> Welcome to RationalWiki, !!! Please see our table of contents and guidelines. Pull up a goat and have some fun! Any questions? Please see

After
padding 20, width 600

padding 20, width 540

padding 0, width 540

padding 5 + border-spacing 5, width 500

padding 0, width 500

OK, I like the link to the noob guide better than TOC. But what's with all the white space? Can it be "tighter" like "before version one" above? <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  18:47, 14 April 2009 (EDT)


 * It's bigger because the alternative versions (Welcome/IP and Unwelcome) are bigger too now (I turned them into a wikitable but didn't change the text) and I wanted them to be the same size. Here's one that should be the same size as the old templates. --  Nx / talk 18:55, 14 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Added third one with zero padding like before version one. I don't really like it... --  Nx / talk 19:03, 14 April 2009 (EDT)
 * There's certainly no reason for them to be the same size - it's not like they are ever in the same place (not often, anyway). The "middle" one above still has too much whitespace.  How about just adding 3-5px or so to the bottom one? <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  19:57, 14 April 2009 (EDT)
 * I know, I just like things to be consistent. I've added a 5px version. I prefer more whitespace, but 5px is ok. --  Nx / talk 03:35, 15 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Yeah, 5px looks a lot better than 10... and 500 wide balances things quite nicely. <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  15:38, 15 April 2009 (EDT)
 * What do you think of these (for the other two templates)?--  Nx / talk 16:29, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

Changes running a bit ahead of discussion it seems
Proposed 4/12, done almost right away? By the way, Nx, there is a legacy version of welcome that was supported, I think - are we just dropping support for the parameters people used to use? (And perhaps still do?) <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  20:16, 14 April 2009 (EDT)
 * No, proposed 3/12, completely ignored by everyone except Bob, who told me to implement it. I dropped the parameter because I think a link to the guidelines is more useful than a link to the welcomer's talk page, but I can restore the legacy version (the one with two parameters where the first one is the welcomed user's name). --  Nx / talk 03:09, 15 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Whoops, misread the month on that, sorry. And, yeah, I know it's ugly when editing, but the legacy version should be supported (the "if $2" etc. chunk) <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  15:35, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

Idea for additional cruft
Maybe we should add a link to "how I found RW"? (And remove it from the RC/WL template! I'm so bored of being asked how I found RW!)  03:49, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I kind of agree. It's probably the best place for it. 12:34, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh dear Zeus
Someone just changed the welcome template....tmtoulouse 00:59, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Yup. Problems? For problems come to Mei. -- <font color="#000000"> = w =  01:01, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Go here. Look at "Job queue length" server resources....better to replace the image than update a high use template. tmtoulouse 01:02, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
 * (EC)You could have used the actual logo rather than the one you preferred. You wouldn't happen to be able to spare us some CPU cycles so we can deal with the rethinging that has to take place? 01:03, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Ah sorry. I'll leave templates alone now. -- <font color="#000000"> = w =  01:07, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Welcome3
Would anyone but Human care if we changed it? 08:55, 21 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Only that we will create a huge job queue if we do it. I'll make a few changes to Welcome3 and then we will move it over. 09:46, 21 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Actually Nx has already did it, move Welcome3 to here if you want to changes it. 09:49, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

So why isn't this whore also based on messagebox? Why does it not look like the rest of the site?
 * It is based on messagebox. Learn to wiki. 12:17, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Image
Do we actually need the site logo on the welcome templates? It seems to me like excessive branding. This pretty much always goes at the top of talk pages, where the logo is already there immediately to the left. I think it would be interesting to have something else on these templates. 12:07, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Well what would you like to see then? Fireworks might be nice. Or one of those large animated smileys waving. Something about 50x50 to 75x75 px I think will be about the right size. 12:10, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Maybe. I quite like the idea of having a randomised image, like the thing I did with smileys.  Maybe we could collate a few possible images & put them in a welcome-picture category, & set it up so a random one appears each time.  If people like the smileys idea, we could subcategorise them into friendly & unfriendly smileys, for the welcome & unwelcome templates.  They are mostly a bit small though, & look weird when they're enlarged.  12:17, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
 * There are larger version available some over 100px. What we need is a large smiley cat. 12:20, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

See. 12:26, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Yeah. Personally, I prefer the small animated ones. Small ones might still look OK, especially if box templates are getting phased out in favour of banners (although I'm not entirely keen on that either). Anyway, let's wait for some feedback from other users before we make major changes. One thing we could easily include is the option for the welcomer to choose their own image - e.g.  - it would probably need a constraint on image size built in. 12:33, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
 * π, no offense but that picture is creepy. 12:50, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Smileys are a little creepy in general. 13:07, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Plus, it's a jpg. 13:10, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
 * You people are so fussy. It is better if we wait before editing the template as there are still over 7,000 jobs in the queue. 13:13, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
 * How many jobs in the queue is average/acceptable?  13:16, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
 * We normally have zero. 23:21, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Here are a few images I would like to (randomly) put on welcome templates. I'm sure there are many others, but hard to find as so few images are categorised. Ideally they should be amusing (at least at some level), inoffensive, safe in terms of copyright, & not too in-jokey (goats is an obvious exception). 14:20, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Lol cats are too meme like for my taste and I am actually finding the whole goat thing wearing. I like the brain using the computer. 08:39, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I think SVG smilies will be our best friends here. 10:10, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
 * 4Chan smileys?! Are you kidding??  20:22, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Why is this template wider than all the other messagebox-based ones? I agree on the logo, it's redundant. In absentia 01:26, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
 * It has the class fullwidth. 01:27, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, I can see that, but "why"? Why not let it be the same width as all the others? In absentia 21:03, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Because that's the way I made it and because the text should be left aligned, making it 80% wide is essentially like indenting it, and it just doesn't feel right. -- Nx  / talk 14:09, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

I like this gif, but we'd need to ask permission from the artist to use it. 20:49, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

I think we should use balloons.jpg or whatever it's called. Also, what's with the hr in the text? I thought we were striving for consistency, we tend not to use them in these boxes. 21:23, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Because that's the way I made it. I don't know why. Before you attack me, I never meant to replace Welcome with Welcome3. In any case, Welcome3 is now auto wide, so it looks more like the old one. I'm not going to stop you from removing the hr or making this one auto wide too. -- Nx  / talk 14:09, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

New and improved
The warning says to discuss on talk page first... I want to tweak what Pi just did, but the job queue is now about 2800 and I don't want to make it worse. 01:44, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Go ahead. Our job queue is never normally that long and looks like a quiteish day so shouldn't take long to get through. It would only really be a problem if you edit Template:!, Template:Messagebox and Template:CP screenshot in the space of 5 minutes. 01:50, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks, I get nervous about stalling the wiki to a crawl. I suspect editing the same template will not double the job queue? 03:09, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
 * The job queue is intended to prevent the wiki from being reduced to a crawl by working on jobs asynchronously in batches. It is just that if you put things in faster than they are going out, it will never get to the end of them. Imagine a bank queue where people are arriving quick than the tellers can serve them. 03:24, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Cheat sheet
Could we add a link to the wikipedia wiki markup cheatsheet, for all the new users who don't know how to do wikicode? Peter Monomorium antarcticum 03:46, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
 * ^^YES.  04:22, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I would say that's a very good idea. 04:57, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
 * yes? Peter Monomorium antarcticum 05:16, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
 * We should make it clear that we're linking offsite. 12:54, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
 * In fact, I reckon it should be an external link in the Newcomer's Guide, not in the welcome template. 13:03, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
 * True, but how many new users read the guide, do you think? We could always make our own cheat-sheet. Peter Monomorium antarcticum 22:12, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Probably not many. But why are they any more likely to read any of the other links in the template?  If they do, it should be our own content.  I don't think we should be giving out a welcome message that says "if you want to know how to edit this wiki, go read a page on another site completely".  01:20, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

New link
Before I brutally torture the job queue into submission, does anyone object to adding and how they should be written or somesuch after the "If you are interested in contributing, please read what our articles are intended to be"? Тy Complaints 14:21, 2 May 2012 (UTC)