Template talk:Help pages header

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
See also: Template:WP nav pages (header bar)


I do think it looks good in small-caps but why does that signify that they are shortcuts? WP:HELP_DESK doesn't redirect, for example. Not sure what you're trying to say there --frothT 03:28, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It seems they used to all be written in shortcut form but that was changed to make it less confusing – Qxz 18:05, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Questions on media copyright link[edit]

This seems a bit irrelevant in the introduction header - maybe change to a link to Wikipedia:Questions LeeVJ (talk) 21:50, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Header bar change proposal to include IRC help channel[edit]

Anyone who's watching this template might want to look at Wikipedia_talk:Help_desk#Adding_.23wikipedia-en-help_to_the_header and give their 2 cents on the concept. JoeSmack Talk 02:29, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

discussion on renovating the header bar[edit]

There is some discussion on updating the header bar at Wikipedia_talk:Help_Project#.7B.7BWP_help_pages_.28header_bar.29.7D.7D_overhaul. Lee∴V (talkcontribs) 21:54, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This bar is getting way too long again. Any suggestions (or boldness) for restructuring would still be appreciated. -- Quiddity (talk) 18:24, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Does it really need the "help chat" external links? --Funandtrvl (talk) 19:48, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Could those links be added more prominently to the very top of WP:IRC? -- Quiddity (talk) 17:10, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That's a good idea, and it wouldn't clutter up the navbar. --Funandtrvl (talk) 17:58, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Done. --Funandtrvl (talk) 18:26, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think WP:IRC still needs prominent links to IRC Tutorial and Webchat somewhere near the top. I'm not sure how best to work them in (in prose, or in hatnotes, or other) though. -- Quiddity (talk) 19:48, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've added the Tutorial link to the hatnote, but the other to freenode is an external link, and is one of a couple of different ways that you can access IRC, and how to use it is already present in the instructions or tutorial. I don't think an external link should be in the hatnote or opening paragraph. Unless readers know what they're doing, they won't know what it's for anyways, and people who already use the IRC link would usually have it bookmarked in their favorites. --Funandtrvl (talk) 21:39, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Someone else added it, but I used it... :( -- Quiddity (talk) 21:43, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not clear on whether you want it in the header template or somewhere at the top of the WP:IRC page. Maybe you can do it, or let me know what you'd like?? --Funandtrvl (talk) 21:48, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Either, (or somewhere on Help:Contents), it just needs to be accessible. Simply because not everyone has an IRC program installed, and it isn't necessary to have one in order to access our incredibly helpful IRC help system. -- Quiddity (talk) 22:30, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've added it to the header navbar. Hopefully, that'll work! --Funandtrvl (talk) 00:26, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Should work for the moment. Thanks for the tweaks :)
The link I'm currently least happy with, is "Editor's welcome". If we removed that (and/or overhauled it, or redirected it, or something) we could save a lot of room... Hmmm. -- Quiddity (talk) 01:34, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
In the course of trying to makeover these header navbar templates, I've noticed that the links that they contain don't necessarily follow logic (!). The links on this template seem to come from both Category:Wikipedia help and Category:Wikipedia basic information. In trying to make some semblance of organization, could you look at both those categories and see if we're missing something important in this navbar? I don't mind if Editor's welcome gets deleted, but maybe something else should be in its place, I'm just not sure what that would be, and would like your opinion! --Funandtrvl (talk) 16:36, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]