Talk:Home Page

From Festipedia, hosted by the FR Heritage Group
Jump to: navigation, search

Picture of the Month February 2016[edit]

This picture of Glan y Môr Yard is dated 1932, but from memory, the setting was just the same in 1948 except that the place was covered in excellent blackberries. The Fairlie cab was, I think, from James Spooner whose tanks were also lying nearby. Little Giant's nameplate had disappeared - perhaps it is now above the bar in Spooners? PedrPnjarvis (talk) 23:55, 13 February 2016 (UTC) 13 Feb 2016.

Picture of the Month: Old Moelwyn Tunnel[edit]

The rock is syenite not cyanite; I have changed the text in the definitive article but cannot find how to correct the text with the Picture of the month. Pedr.Pnjarvis (talk) 23:55, 13 February 2016 (UTC) 28 Sep 2015


New Design?[edit]

I'm pretty much new here on the wiki, but I was almost scared away by the text only Home Page. Perhaps something more "friendly" to first time readers should be put forward? I'm not an expert in Mediawiki table design, but some of the other language Wikipedias manage to have some really nice and friendly designs, I especially think the Polish and Dutch ones look nice. Perhaps there could even be an "Article/Image of the day"?. Born_Acorn 19:44, 27 April 2007

Having looked at it, very very Fair comment. (It is, I believe, the original V.00 edition, and nobody has looked at it since the year dot!!).

It would depend if Festwiki software could support the sort of page like the Polish or Dutch versions - which are very pleasing to look at. However, we are currently in a software freeze as our "man in charge" on that side is undertaking a bit of "personal development plan" at the moment --Keith 21:17, 27 April 2007

A belated answer to Keith - it should be possible to do something like the Polish or Dutch Wikipedia home pages. I started following through the templates used on the Dutch one to see how it worked but gave up. However, the only thing I found that we don't support was the inputbox tag for the form. Feel free to have a try. --Peter_Harrison (talk) 01:03, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

As you will now see - the home page has been redesigned and will have some constantly changing material on it (well once a month anyway!!) --Keith (talk) 2007-12-27T08:28:12

Technically, shouldn't it be "Festipaedia", here in the UK? :p 78.32.103.125 (talk) 21:14, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

We did also consider a double f but this is the Heritage Group! Seriously, I checked several recent UK dictionaries and they all indicated that both spellings are current with the e only spelling becoming preferred. Of course, as we are a heritage group, perhaps that means we should go for ae! Views? --Peter_Harrison (talk) 01:03, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Definitely NOT ae - the potential for the paed bit to be hit upon by the wrong type of search is to be avoided. Adrian Gray

Just the issue Britannica has had for years. 78.32.103.125 (talk) 19:41, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Horse Drawn[edit]

I thought the early pictures show one horse pulling six or two pulling ten waggons. Are there really pictures of one horse pulling eight?

Jatibarang No.9 picture - its not it's.

Pedr

Festipedia looks like Wikipedia[edit]

I'm afraid the look and feel of Festipedia looks like Wikipedia. Should this belong to the Wikimedia Foundation? 99.121.210.109 (talk) 03:07, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Any site that uses MediaWiki will resemble Wikipedia to a greater or lesser extent. We have chosen to stick close to the MediaWiki standard look and feel rather than adding large amounts of customisation. I'm not clear why you think that is a bad thing. No, this site should not belong to the Wikimedia Foundation. They would have no interest in running a specialist site such as this. --Peter Harrison (talk) 05:37, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

I think that 99.121.210.109 considered that the style might be copyright not that Wikipedia ought to run Festipedia. As Peter says it is almost impossible to make it look anything else using the MediaWiki software. Heritagejim (talk) 08:56, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Yes, Jim, you could be right. In that case the response is that the basic look is that of MediaWiki which is the software both we and Wikipedia use. All content on Wikipedia including user interface messages (where they differ from MediaWiki defaults) is available to be used freely under the Creative Commons license. So, to the extent we use such content, our use is covered under the terms of that license. --Peter Harrison (talk) 13:11, 20 March 2015 (UTC)