Template talk:Website

Tab and Content Revamp
I’m planning on changing the layout of the tabs and content using some feedback from my friend Garrick.


 * Overview
 * logo
 * sitename
 * name/url
 * rights
 * language
 * description
 * tags
 * timezone
 * Current activity
 * Users
 * Active users
 * Admin:
 * Articles
 * Edits
 * Images
 * Jobs
 * Pages
 * Views:
 * Last updated
 * Semantic statistics
 * Technical
 * mw version
 * extensions used
 * php version
 * timezone offset
 * db type
 * db version
 * wiki id
 * Apiary settings
 * validated
 * active
 * check every
 * collecting


 * I agree, this wiki is still in the making so some big changes are likely to happen. I would however suggest to change the second group "Current activity":


 * Usage
 * Users
 * Users
 * Active users
 * Admins
 * Contents
 * Articles
 * Images
 * Pages
 * Activity
 * Edits
 * Jobs
 * Views
 * Last updated
 * Last updated Semantic statistics


 * Actually I tried to embed a table like this into the parser function yesterday, but I forgot about the pipes. O_o The rest looks very ok to me. --&#91;&#91;kgh&#93;&#93; (talk) 05:54, January 1, 2013 (CST)


 * I like that better. Thanks! The tables have to be extracted from the template and move to a pure  approach. Thingles (talk) 07:49, January 1, 2013 (CST)


 * Until now, I did not see that you already replied to this. Still perfections is possible. The changes can be done step by step. One big change would be to spit up the general information and allocate it to the new sections. Hmm, querying and setting the results would be one way to do it. --&#91;&#91;kgh&#93;&#93; (talk) 18:04, January 4, 2013 (CST)


 * I just had my battle with the  approach and lost. I changed it to pure wikitext for the time being to make it look ok again. I think I should leave this revamp to you since you have a much better idea of were you would like to get to with this. Apparently, this lies it the nature of things. :) Cheers --&#91;&#91;kgh&#93;&#93; (talk) 19:06, January 4, 2013 (CST)


 * Nice improvements either way... it looks better already. Thingles (talk) 22:28, January 4, 2013 (CST)


 * I could not resist and did some other changes to the Usage section. Cheers --&#91;&#91;kgh&#93;&#93; (talk) 07:05, January 5, 2013 (CST)

I think this could be a nice improvement of the update info section. Cheers --&#91;&#91;kgh&#93;&#93; (talk) 19:15, January 4, 2013 (CST)
 * 1
 * 2
 * Views
 * Last update
 * Regular statistics
 * Semantic statistics
 * I am having second thoughts about this. :) --&#91;&#91;kgh&#93;&#93; (talk) 07:05, January 5, 2013 (CST)

Has bot segment
✅

No SMW reporting message change
"| This wiki does not use Semantic MediaWiki." is misleading, should be "| This wiki does not use Semantic MediaWiki 1.8+." or something which clarifies that it may indeed have SMW, just not a recent version.--Ete (talk) 01:20, 22 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Predominantly (99%+) this statement is correct. Well, do wikis using SMW <1.6 still count as semantic wikis. ;) I will do a change. Cheers --&#91;&#91;kgh&#93;&#93; (talk) 01:30, 22 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Beat ya to it &#91;&#91;kgh&#93;&#93;. :-) I just made it not put anything if semantic stats aren't being collected. Much easier. 🐝 thingles (talk) 01:33, 22 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Yeah, good on ya! --&#91;&#91;kgh&#93;&#93; (talk) 01:48, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Typo
The wording "So far not description has been added for this wiki" should be "So far no description has been added for this wiki". Philip J. Rayment (talk) 06:02, 6 April 2013 (UTC)