Talk:Main Page

Dates
Should dates on articles have the rd, th, nd, and st, or should we not do that on articles? Alertfiend - Warning, my comments may appear passive aggressive. (Converse) 21:47, 3 June 2016 (EDT)


 * I don't think so, I don't do it at least. Wikipedia doesn't do it either. -- NightHammer (talk)(contribs) 21:51, 3 June 2016 (EDT)


 * I have noticed a few pages with it, but I do not know if there is a certain occasion one would use it. Oops forgot to sign my comment. Alertfiend - Warning, my comments may appear passive aggressive. (Converse) 23:52, 3 June 2016 (EDT)


 * Here's a guide. So basically, we don't use it at all. -- NightHammer (talk)(contribs) 23:55, 3 June 2016 (EDT)
 * Per NightHammer, dates don't need those suffixes. Please remove them anytime you see them in an article.-- 14:19, 4 June 2016 (EDT)

Navigation section
Hey everyone, I feel like it may be time to update the Main Page navigation, as it's been the same now for a few years. I have two working draft ideas here. Do note the images on layout # 2 are merely placeholders for now. Any feedback would be most appreciated, thanks.-- 18:44, 27 February 2017 (EST)


 * Definitely number one Japeth555 (talk) 19:03, 27 February 2017 (EST)Japeth555


 * Deffo number 1.-CIA391 (talk) 19:24, 27 February 2017 (EST)


 * #1 Lord Susto  21:11, 27 February 2017 (EST)


 * Per above. -- NightHammer (talk)(contribs) 23:18, 27 February 2017 (EST)


 * (reset indent) Agree with everyone else; the icons in the second version just take up space on the page for no real reason. The quotes under each section in #1 (e.g. "Explore the enigmatic universe!") are a bit cheesy, though that's just a minor thing. --Jugus (talk) 23:38, 27 February 2017 (EST)
 * I left those quotes on there by mistake and just forgot to remove them. Just like everyone else, my preference is for the first format, more because it's less images to manage.-- 23:49, 27 February 2017 (EST)

Menu page suggestions
I have a few notes that I thought of that should be relatively easy to make or change. All thanks to Spartacus's idea to change the navi bar.

1. Could we perhaps move the "Did You Know?" to the bottom moving up the "Article Improvement Drive". Makes the improvement area more clear so they ye know get done.

2. Small idea, borrowing it off Halo Nation of all places, a Monthly poll. Seems harmless enough.

3. Another idea, a featured image? Might be cool to start that. I mean we have featured everything else, might be cool to have that.

4. Could we perhaps lower the "Welcome back, Reclaimer!" user count from 16 to 12?

5. We need more Featured stuff to be nominated, that is something we can all work on fairly easy enough.-CIA391 (talk) 19:24, 27 February 2017 (EST)
 * 1) I'd like to do that because of it's importance. 2) I don't know whether or not we have the code to do that. 3) A featured image is something I've wanted to for quite a while but have never gotten around to it. It would certainly be a nice addition. 4) That's fine with me. 5) Yeah, it just needs more promotion which is more or less up to the administration team. Thank you for the suggestions!-- Spartacus  Talk •  Contribs   22:38, 27 February 2017 (EST)


 * As for your fifth point, I think we shouldn't just nominate articles because we need more featured articles. It should be based on articles that are legitimately worthy of it. I've been kinda pedantic with that lately and there is a handful of articles currently "featured" that I think could still use some work (including several I've nominated).


 * I've considered the idea of having a featured content system similar to Wookieepedia, with "comprehensive" (for smaller articles under 250 words) and "good" articles (articles with a word count between comprehensive and featured articles, as opposed to Wikipedia's "good" articles which are simply lower in quality than featured articles). However, I feel like it would be difficult to maintain. And where do we draw the line for articles that can be considered "comprehensive" and articles that contain everything about a subject but are literally just one sentence and hard to consider "featured" worthy (in my opinion, Minister is a good example of a comprehensive article here). -- NightHammer (talk)(contribs) 23:18, 27 February 2017 (EST)


 * The "comprehensive" articles are definitely an idea worth considering. In general, different kinds of projects like this are great as long as they keep getting updated - it's good to keep in mind that Halopedia used to have all sorts of community activities in its heyday (like Halopedian of the Month, etc.) which have since gotten discontinued due to a lack of activity. Then again, our user base seems to have rebuilt itself somewhat after the dip that followed the domain change, so it may be worth a shot to try these kinds of things again. --Jugus (talk) 23:38, 27 February 2017 (EST)