MediaWiki talk:Sidebar/LQT Archive 1


 * If you're looking for help on editing the sidebar on your project, go to Manual:Interface/Sidebar please.

Restructuring suggestions
Some thoughts, following up on a reply to Rogerhc on Project:Current issues.
 * The SourceForge project page doesn't belong in the "navigation" box, but should rather go in "development" &mdash; even some doc page and not the the Sidebar.
 * The Extensions link should be in the same box as Configuration settings ("resources"). The same goes for the Skins link.

What is the difference between "navigation" and resources". My impression of these words is that navigation should take you around the entire site and resources to other specific ones not covered there. Under that we should have links in "navigation" to the Help and Manual namespaces. --Swift 19:12, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Adding Project:Forum
Could we put Project:Forum in the "resources" box? --Swift 19:12, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Organize
Ideas for organizing the left sidebar

navigation - box shows this wiki's structure through links to *primary* locations in it, not off wiki locations)
 * Main Page - Main Page mediawiki.org's front door to the world
 * Community portal - Community portal front door to site coordination and contributor welcome
 * Help - Help:Contents front door to MediaWiki *generic site user help*, public domain.
 * Manual - Manual:Contents front door to MediaWiki *technical documentation*, GFDL.
 * Extension - Extension:Contents front door to MediaWiki extensions (namespace has not been created yet)
 * Recent changes - Special:Recentchanges

off wiki resources - box for links to developer resource not in the wiki
 * SourceForge
 * Bug tracker
 * Browse SVN
 * Code documentation

Some links to relocate
Some links currently in the lift sidebar can be relocated to within above top level pages as follows:


 * Manual:Contents to contain links including
 * $wg config settings


 * Community portal to contain links including
 * Mailing list
 * IRC #mediawiki
 * Support desk
 * Current issues merged into Forum


 * Help:Contents to contain links including (yes?)
 * FAQ

By target ?
I think it could be good to organize the sidebar with a part for visitors and a part for community, and perhaps development. Something like:
 * MediaWiki: Main Page - FAQ - config settings - help - manual - extensions - skins
 * development: #MediaWiki - SVN - code doc - SourceForge - mediazilla - mailing list
 * community: Community Portal - Recentchanges - Forum

~ Seb35 07:43, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, target audience and contributors, too, with a wiki are important considerations. -- Rogerhc 15:57, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
 * People just curious, site readers and writers on other MediaWiki instances, will often come by clicking the MediaWiki icon at bottom left of the thousands of MediaWiki wikis out there. Some of these will change into developers here over time but most of them wont and are just looking for like the Main Page, About this site, and to see who is behind MediaWiki. This group is large who will spend less time on the wiki per person but lots of time as a reader group, mostly reading the surface into pages, probably editing little but spreading our story elsewhere by 'word of mouth'. Some of these will be writers on Wikipedia and other wikis.
 * Developers of the MediaWiki core software, programmers and project leaders. This group is small but important in determining deeper functioning of this wiki site and community. They may spend lots of time here per person and go deep into the wiki and contribute.
 * Developers of other MediaWiki wiki instances, webmasters and instance system administrators.


 * Rogerhc, just a short note regarding your recent changes to the sidebar: It is absolutely pointless to link pages in the sidebar when there is no proper content yet. The FAQ are on this site, not "off wiki" for a longer period yet. And Meta pages will not be moved today or tomorrow. Please keep our navigation user friendly. -- :Bdk:  13:13, 4 September 2006 (UTC)


 * The point is to show people where to write stuff. This is a wiki with a purpose, not a spaghetti wiki nor an encyclopidia wiki. Having navigation in the left sidebar that communicates that purpose clearly is essencial. We are inviting people to build something specific. So we need to be specific; it is helpful to say, "This page is for such and such; please write it." and put the page in the left sidebar when it is of primary significance to our site purpose and provides structure toward realizing it. Instead of removing such pages, please start writing them or leave them there so others will. To succeed, projects do require some organization and idea of where they want to go, even volunteer projects. Willing volunteers need to see clearly when they arrive where what goes so that they can help. I am one of those willing volunteers. --Rogerhc 22:55, 5 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Please look at your last version of the sidebar and tell me why the FAQ is below "off wiki" while the link actually goes to Help:FAQ (since April ).
 * And no, Roger, it definitly is pointless to link a page like this instead of that from the main navigation - and you did that not only once.
 * You won't bring others to write pages by forcing them to do so ("Instead of removing such pages, please start writing them or leave them there so others will."), only because you removed well known links to proper content on Meta. -- :Bdk: 06:47, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Delineate site navigation from content navigation.
A further structural suggestion:


 * mediawiki.org
 * Main Page
 * Community Portal
 * About the site (new)
 * Recent Changes


 * MediaWiki manual
 * User manual (currently 'help')
 * Technical manual (currently 'manual')
 * Installation/Configuration (new)
 * Extensions
 * Skins

with the rest as above. The main point being to delineate 'using mediawiki.org' from 'using MediaWiki' as much as possible. The actual items that will appear in the 'MediaWiki manual' section will need development once we (a) have content and (b) know what people freqeuently need quick access to. We could also split this into several separate boxes if necessary.

--HappyDog 01:32, 4 September 2006 (UTC)


 * This may be a good idea when we will have developed proper contents for these points ;-) Hm, I'm unsure if "mediawiki.org" or something like "this site" or "site community" as a heading is better (just read such suggestions on IRC), but I'll leave it to the native speakers. But anyway, the "project and community" stuff should go below the software related points, because this site is - more than other Wikimedia wikis - a reader focused one, that means: the main contents of this site serve the actual users of the software, not the "writing community", because once a page is written there is not much need for further editing. (Also note: There were already several suggestions, mainly by developers, to make this a somewhat non-open editable wiki to meet this demand.) -- :Bdk: 13:13, 4 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, the main reason to have the 'mediawiki.org' box at the top is because it has the homepage and recent changes link. Perhaps we can drop the 'about the site' link, as there is a brief intro on the main page, and this will link through to more info if required.  Maybe call the box 'About this site', with Main Page, Recent Changes and Community Portal as the only three links?  Also, I guess that if the wiki was non-openly editable then Community Portal could be dropped as well...  We'd probably still want the page, but it needn't be in the sidebar if the public are not able to get directly involved in this way. --HappyDog 14:44, 4 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Keeping the public out of editing this site would do more harm than good. Bringing the users of meta here by bringing their, meta's, content here and then freezing meta would be a first order of business towards bringing healthy usage and healthy volunteer community oversite to this wiki. An unused building gets vandalized more than a constantly used building and a constantly used building has folks around to fix anything that needs it. :-) Roger


 * * sigh* -- :Bdk: 14:07, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

What does "Delineate site navigation from content navigation" mean? --Rogerhc 22:20, 5 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Good question - and one I couldn't immediately answer, despite it being me that wrote it... What I meant was to separate out the site navigation elements (home/recent changes/community portal) from the content elements (manual/pd help/etc.) in the left navigation. e.g. First box is site nav, subsequent boxes are for content. --HappyDog 23:51, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I think what you mean is, Separate nav box for (a) stuff about the site, and (b) stuff about MediaWiki. (Feel free to rename this section if you agree.) My thought about this is that "Main page", "Community portal", and "Recent changes" are MediaWiki default install navigational idioms that are understood by enough people because they are defaults and also used on Wikipedia's left sidebar. Wikipedia has huge exposure and sets some basic idioms. They are part and parcel of what a successful working MediaWiki is. They are thus top level navigational elements.
 * Main page - first stop to find out what this wiki is for
 * Community portal - first stop to find out how to help write it
 * Recent changes - first stop to find out where the action is and what may need oversite and help
 * ^Fundamental idioms for all comers to find front and center in the navigation aid (left sidebar). Separating them out of their default primary location into a lower box about the site distinct from the site content (stuff about MediaWiki) may or may not actually help, simplify or work well. Don't know. But I think I am understanding you now :-) and it does seem like a logical structure to try out. Let's see it :-) --Rogerhc 12:41, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Reversion by Robchurch
Hi Rob - can you make some comment about your recent reversion. There are clearly problems with the current layout that need fixing - what was your objection to the change? --HappyDog 14:18, 5 September 2006 (UTC)


 * For starters, most of the content seemed to have gone; the grouping of what remained was tight and tenuous, and confusing. The sidebar needs to be clear and accessible and comprehensible to visitors, otherwise the site is going to become difficult to navigate, and therefore useless. "More sections" is better, I think. robchurch | talk 14:35, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * OK - so you're not opposed to changing it, just the way it was changed. That's fine.  Further discussion about the changes will take place on this page, so keep an eye here if you have any concerns. Cheers --HappyDog 14:47, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I feel Rob overreacted to suddenly not knowing already where everything in the left side bar links to. This is exactly the problem newcomers to the site have - they don't know ahead of time where everything is nor the relationship between meta and mediawiki.org nor where the lift sidebar links to. It is very unfriendly to newcomers. The left sidebare must clearly orient them without sending them without warning to other websites. We are all trying to help. Change is uncomfortable but it is essential that the sidebar change for the better. I hope my work is helpful toward a goal of making it better (and usable to folks who don't already know where everything is). Please help make it better. Thanks :-) --Rogerhc 19:15, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * You insist upon re-ordering things without discussion! It is _very_ bad design to have site navigation that changes every couple of hours!  As there are clearly several people interested in this redesign and conversation is actively taking place can you please refrain from making any more changes until some kind of broad concensus has been reached. --HappyDog 19:52, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * +1 (thank you, HappyDog, for these clear words. I was already trying to translate/formulate something adequate, and my words presumably would have been less friendly.) -- :Bdk: 19:58, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * *grin* --HappyDog 20:01, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Proposal for new structure
Following a request on the mailing list to add a link to Download from SVN to the navigation bar, I did so; however, I ended up cramming it into the resources section. This isn't really an appropriate place for it to my mind, but in fact, there isn't an appropriate place for it.

I'm proposing a new structure for the sidebar at User:Robchurch/Sidebar which separates resources into "navigation", "get MediaWiki", "get support", "development" and "communicate", and would like to solicit feedback before anything actually changes on the site. I don't mind where discussion takes place, as long as it all happens in the same place - it might not be a bad idea to hold it on the proposal page itself. robchurch | talk 10:49, 15 December 2006 (UTC)


 * This has now been implemented. See User:Robchurch/Sidebar for discussion. --HappyDog 02:14, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Too long
I have to scroll to find the search bar! I think it's too long.

Some parts could be condensed. e.g. instead of having the section 'Download', make one link to a page called 'Downloads', which then links to MW download or extensions downloads. The same can be done with 'communication' (rather seems like support, anyway?)

cheers --Pfctdayelise 14:50, 13 April 2007 (UTC)


 * This is terribly too long. Can an admin please change it?
 * Is it possible to have an RfC on Mediawiki? I think most people will agree this is too long. Odessaukrain 21:27, 2 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Actually, I think it is good. Groupings are nice and clear, quick links to the key parts of the site people typically require are there. -- Dr DBW  |  talk  01:14, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I just don't see why all of these items are necessary. They can be condensed.
 * It is annoying to have to scroll down to search. Odessaukrain 17:23, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * That all depends on what screen resolution you are using, so I have never had that problem. Suppose it all depends which is more important; easy / quick access to important links on all pages or not having to scroll down on any page to perform a search for something.  Discussions above about the development of the current menu can see reasoning behind what is currently there. -- Dr DBW  |  talk  04:07, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Also, there is currently no way of specifying where the search box is located in the list. See 7493 for some (rather rambling) discussion about this. --HappyDog 15:55, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

The average computer user has a 15" computer screen. Which means the majority of people have to scroll down and search. I think it boils down to which is used more: "Download from SVN", "community portal", "code documentation" or search. I realize there is no way to specify where the search box is. That is why removing three or more of these links, which surely are not used as much as the search bar is, will solve this problem. Another option is to remove three headers, reducing the 5 sections into two.  I have noticed with all wikipedia projects the pages become more and more technical and difficult for new users. Sure, most hardcore wikipedians, who also happen to be the people who can actually edit this page, will use these links a lot. but I would make an educated guess that the search function is probably used more than all of these 5 sections combined. Please reevaluate the layout of this page. Since there is no RfC on MediaWiki, and the two people who have responded thus far are obviously veteran wikipedians who use these links (unlike the majority of users who don't), what options are there now for me? [Later] Gorgeous, there are 28 admins on this site which can actually edit this page, of those thirty, many seem inactive. Looks like your pet idea, no matter how dubious, will stand the test of time gentlemen. Odessaukrain 08:56, 7 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Personally, I wouldn't have an objection to removing the 'development' box, moving 'bug tracker' into 'support' and ditching the other three items. I would change the 'download>MediaWiki' link so it points to Manual:Downloading MediaWiki, which is a lot clearer and neater than the current location (which I would ultimately hope to delete) and which has a link to downloading from SVN.  The other two development links are linked to from the Developer hub so I think we can lose them, but I may be underestimating their usefulness simply because they are not that useful to me.  Anyway - that's just my opinion.  Some more input is required, I think. In ideal world, of course, we would just move search so that it comes under support, as most developers will have larger screens that allow them to see all the links anyway. --HappyDog 13:28, 7 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Good suggestions HappyDog...good luck with that :)
 * User:Krog got a Barnstar from me after giving me a personal solution which will work for anyone who doesn't like this set up:
 * "you may personalize your "monobook" (for example, you can hide the menu "beyond the web" by adding the code  in your subpage User:Odessaukrain/monobook.css), or even the search directly in your browser (depending on its capabilities)."
 * This solution works.
 * I am so grateful that User:Krog was able to assist me, after months of trying to change this on two wikiprojects (meta.wikimedia.org also).
 * From the icy or indifferent reception I got from both projects, everyone else who doesn't like this set up is simply out of luck.
 * Many people who come here probably don't even know that MediaWiki talk:Sidebar controls the sidebar.
 * But at least now, thanks to User:Korg, I'm satisfied. Odessaukrain 11:51, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Request for translation sidebar items on russian language (for use with rus. interface)
Need create mediawiki messages for some sidebar items - for use with russian interface (translating labels & change links on translated pages): I create required text on talk pages MediaWiki messages, will be needs for this. Please remove next "Mediawiki Talk:*" in "Mediawiki:*": ...skip (commented) Thanks. --Kaganer 11:17, 10 May 2007 (UTC)


 * done -- :Bdk: 19:46, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
 * very thanks ;) All OK! --Kaganer 19:57, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

How to add long and complex links to MediaWiki:sidebar

 * Peter Blaise says: Note: I wanted to add traditional "indexes" as links in the sidebar. I found that full-length links or "&" characters in my links caused those links to fail to show up in the sidebar display.  An example goal is to show a link to "All talk pages", for instance, like this raw URL that works on it's own, but not when inserted into the sidebar:
 * http://www.our-mediwiki-url.com/index.php?title=Special%3AAllpages&from=&namespace=1
 * ... but that line just disappeared in the display of the sidebar, as did any iteration of the same, with or without spaces when adding a "|" pipe character after that link to describe it in the MediaWiki:sidebar, and so on. I contacted the mediawikil mailing list http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l.  There, Alexis Moinet and Brion Vibber explored the problem and here's what seems to work for now, see MediaWiki-l Digest, Vol 45, Issue 34 at http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/mediawiki-l/2007-June/021023.html.  Instead of directly using long and complex links, we first created a new "MediaWiki:nnn" page that contains the long complex link for us.  Then, using the shorter, simpler name of that newly created "MediaWiki:nnn" page, we could create a link that does finally work in the sidebar.  When clicked, it goes directly to the target page from the sidebar as intended.  Here are the steps to success:
 * How to add long and complex links to MediaWiki:sidebar
 * Find the intended target page and copy it's full URL address
 * In the "search" box, type: MediaWiki:new-link-page-name (page-title of your choosing), [Go]
 * Create/edit new page "Mediawiki:new-link-page-name"
 * Paste the long complex link of the intended target page into the contents of the new page, such as the one line in our sample:
 * http://www.our-mediwiki-url.com/index.php?title=Special%3AAllpages&from=&namespace=1
 * Save the new page
 * In the "search" box, type: MediaWiki:sidebar, [Go]
 * Edit the Mediawiki:sidebar page, adding a new line at the bottom that reads:
 * ** new-link-page-name|description
 * Save the Mediawiki:sidebar page
 * Note, find all the "MediaWiki:nnn" pages by going to "Special:Allpages" and selecting "Mediawiki" from the drop-down menu
 * This might seem to require a long, non-portable URL, such as:
 * http://www.our-mediwiki-url.com/index.php?title=Special%3AAllpages&from=&namespace=1
 * However predefined variables, such as, can be used to create a portable URL, this way:


 * Which evaluates to:


 * -- Peter Blaise peterblaise 12:39, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
 * -- revisions by AJim 17:31, 15 June 2007 (UTC), with thanks to Alexis Moinet who suggested variables on Mediawiki-l.


 * This can also be done a little shorter if you have a recent enough version of MediaWiki:
 * Caveat: I haven't actually tested this, but I think should work here; perhaps not. Mike Dillon 02:08, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Caveat: I haven't actually tested this, but I think should work here; perhaps not. Mike Dillon 02:08, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

localization of the sidebar
I want to localize the links in the sidebar but they aren't localiszable (however the text can be localized). I propose the following :
 * If the message already exists (example : MediaWiki:Mainpage), use a new messages (like mainpage-url for this case). If the message doesn't exist a specific lang, it'll fallback to english (or to another lang if this is set). If we use the 'mainpage' message, all langs will have a specific main page even if it doesn't exist because that message exists in nearly all Messages*.php.
 * Then open a bug to set $wgForceUIMsgAsContentMsg for these messages :
 * mainpage (already used, use mainpage-url instead ?)
 * portal-url (already used, use portal-url instead ?)
 * mw-download-url
 * extensions-url
 * helppage (already used, use helppage-url instead ?)
 * faqpage (already used, use faqpage-url instead ?)
 * Manual:Contents (not a message, use manual-url ?)
 * Bugzilla (not a message, use bugzilla-url ?)
 * Download from SVN (not a message, use download from svn-url ?)

i Alex  19:56, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Adjusting sidebar
Thoughts the following changes? Happy ‑ melon 16:14, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Moving the search bar to the top
 * Removing the external link icons
 * Moving the "recent changes" link to the toolbox
 * Swapping "download" and "support" sections
 * Removing one out of the "view code changes" and "code comments" links
 * Removing one out of the "get MediaWiki" and "download from SVN" links, possibly merging the two target pages


 * No
 * No: not when they really are off-wiki
 * No: edits come in slowly enough that RC is still very useful
 * Maybe
 * Ask a developer (probably Aaron, since he put the second link there)
 * Not unless we want to present SVN as a standard means for getting MediaWiki, rather than a tool for developers and advanced users; SVN simplifies the upgrade procedure enough that this might not be a bad idea, but we should give it more thought —Emufarmers(T 00:32, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Hmn. My point on moving RC is not that it's not useful, but that it's not a reader-facing page: it's designed for editors here. All the other such links on the sidebar are in the toolbox, as expected. I can guess why you don't want to move the search box to the top (although it would be nice if you would explain :D); how about moving it above the toolbox to separate it from the reader-facing links? Happy ‑ melon 13:00, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Strike the sidebar, I only just realised that I'm moving it to the bottom with my monobook :D Happy ‑ melon 15:14, 23 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure that the "site" section is necessarily designed to be reader-facing; the community portal link seems more for the benefit of editors. —Emufarmers(T 08:14, 24 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Hmm, I would really like to move up the search bar to the top. I did it once in July – shortly after Tim made the feature available – but that was probably too early for some folks ;-) Today this position is much more popular, see e.g. Commons, de.wikipedia, fr.wikipedia, pl.wikipedia and several other big wikis. Even en.wikipedia moved up the search bar, at least a bit *g* Please also note Brion's suggestion (in reply to ).


 * Well, the position directly beneath the site's logo is the most intuitive and visible one, and many other wikis already made good experiences with it (very positive feedback from users/readers).
 * Please also keep in mind, that only a (small) minority of 'visitors' are actively editing here (editors tend to find their way without searching too much, they usually use other navigational possibilities). Around 99% of mediawiki.org's visitors are pure readers who are only looking for something. Search is one of the most prominent targets on this site. The following list is the constant top five for the last months (taken from the hits per day stats):
 * 1. Special:AutoLogin (due to SUL)
 * 2. MediaWiki (the main page, well, naturally)
 * 3. Extension:OggHandler/Client download (linked from UI messages all around on Wikimedia's wikis; numerous visits through Commons' video and audio files).
 * 4. Special:Search (+ subpages hits!)
 * 5. Manual:Configuration settings …
 * Since we have the help, manual and extension namespaces also being searched by default, search became actually useful here, so why should we not move it up? (serious question)
 * Note: The ones who dislike the top position can always scramble their personal css/js to make the sidebar appear differently.


 * I don't have an explicit opinion about the other points apart from the external links (keep them please for transparency). -- :bdk: 07:27, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I made a subtle modification, grouping the support/download/development sections together and reordering them to match the progression on the main page (ie users &rarr; sysadmins &rarr; developers). This has the effect of moving the search bar up one; I actually quite like the divide it now makes to separate 'site' from the rest. Shame we don't have something similar to separate off 'irc'/'toolbar' from the middle 3, but that's no big deal. Happy ‑ melon 23:02, 6 January 2009 (UTC)


 * One point, as I don't think it has been mentioned - we can't modify the contents or position of the 'toolbox', so moving recent changes there is not possible. I am also very against removing the external link icons in the sidebar - it's important for people to know that the link goes off-site.  (In fact, I had to add special CSS to get them there - by default internal/external links are displayed the same...)  No strong opinions about the other points. --HappyDog 01:38, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Language translation
I have customized my sidebar on my personal wiki with additional links. However if the user uses another default language, everything on the sidebar will be translated to the user's preferred language except for the customized links I've added. Where do I exactly add translation for those links? In my case I'm trying to add translation in Korean, I tried making a Sidebar/ko page but that didn't work. Help please--Bluesoju 04:56, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
 * See Manual:Sidebar Happy ‑ melon 10:15, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Custom header sections - Programmatically
I was advised of the available function

but from what i have been able to find on this function (which is rather sparse and no real commenting on use) this inserts the subsets to the sidebar. Is their a reciprical function to add groups (like 'navigations', 'toolbox', 'development') programmatically and then fill that group with a list of associated content.

Reason for this, is to not have ghosted groups that users cant use see the items list of the group.

Goldbishop 19:03, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Display results in alphabetical order on the sidebar
I want to build a kind of online dictionary and I'm trying to build a sidebar which could display results of the words in alphabetical order. In other words, the user search for a word and goes to the definition page, at the same time, the sidebar displays a list of words which come before and after the word the user searched for. To see an example follow these links: wordreference, urbandictionary. Or at least an alphabet list which links to the words like in this page: KOP. Any ideas on how to do that? Thanks!

--Stefano Delle Monache 22:11, 7 July 2009 (UTC)