<center>'''This page is now obsolete. It has been superceded by the [http://www.cpcwiki.eu/forum dedicated forum], so please go there!'''</center>
<div style="margin-top:32px;text-align:center;padding:5px 0px 4px 0px;background-color:#ffc0c0;border:1px solid #ffc0c0;">
'''ATTENTION!'''<br />
This talk page should '''only''' be used for discussions about the '''Main Page''' and the '''Side Bar'''.<br />
For general CPCWiki related discussions please use the [[Discussion]] page.<br />
For suggestions of completely new sections and features, please use the [[Suggestions]] page.
</div>
* ''For older talks please have a look at the [[Talk:Main_Page/Archive1|Archive]].''
== Category "News" Forum ==Today the [http://www.cpcwiki.eu/forum Forum] opened its gates. I felt it was necessary because the discussion system of the Wiki is not adequate... It is not meant to replace every talk page, but it's good for general discussion topics :) [[User:Gryzor|Gryzor]] 09:06, 22 November 2006 (CET) == Sidebar links == There is a little problem with the pages linked only in the sidebar: they only appear on the default mediawiki theme...There is a list here: [[special:lonelypages]]Link them from somewhere else :)
If we start to add the news to own categories we should avoid naming the news article with "News:" as prefix:Ah yes, because in the category listing everything you're right and I have noticed it myself - though I don't know why anyone would appear under use some other theme, I think this is the letter best by far :D Anyhow, I'Nm just waiting to move servers, when this is done I'll look after such details. The same problem occurs with programming articles (prefix "Programming:"). Maybe we should remove the prefix from this articles? --. thanks for pointing out!!! [[User:OctoateGryzor|OctoateGryzor]] 10:1203, 28 August July 2006 (CESTCDT) : Uh, good question:There is still 14 orphaned pages... Somehow I like these prefixes, and as there are already sorted lists we even don't need the categories at all, but on the other hand you are also righti prefer using another theme because i use a browser without css support. Don't know... -- And what is the difference between [[User:Prodatron|ProdatronApplications]] 13and Utilities ?:59::You are right, 28 August 2006 (CEST): I think we should keep will move the prefixes at least for Utilities to the news, as the titles of this pages are not terms but small summary like sentences. Apps and mark them to be deleted! -- [[User:ProdatronOctoate|ProdatronOctoate]] 1610:4913, 1 September 11 August 2006 (CEST)
== Search ==
::::Ok, have noticed the Wink with the Zaunpfahl :-) and i will do my job tomorrow, if i find time :-)
:::::Ok, I removed it. Happy, y'all? :) [[User:Gryzor|Gryzor]] 20:00, 29 August 2006 (CEST)
:::::Ahh Gryzor did it :) So what? [[User:81.90.35.80|81.90.35.80]] 11:20, 24 September 2006 (CEST)
== Mainpage and Sidebar ==
:::: The Bastard is me, I would guess. As I said, the reason for rolling it back is that under the short form, there is simply NO NEED for the sidebar. The sidebar is there for the reader to be able to navigate quickly to all parts of the wiki without having to go to the main page. It is NOT useless, certainly NOT unwanted (I use it all the time instead of the main page links) and I doubt it's annoying - the space is empty if you don't put links there, so it goes wasted. The Main Page is NOT the place to put links on and is much harder to use than the sidebar. Unorganized? I wouldn't think so - the structure is quite ok right now, if anyone can think of ways to improve it, please do step forward. It's not even wild, since it has been tamed a lot since its first appearance, and definitely not unorganized - see the little boxes that organise it? :p [[User:Gryzor|Gryzor]] 09:49, 30 August 2006 (CEST)
== Discussion, Suggestions, Main Page Talk ==
Now we have:
* [[Discussion]]
* [[Suggestions]]
* [http://www.cpcwiki.eu/index.php?title=Talk:Main_Page Talk:Main_Page]
In the sidebar, "discussion page" is the main page talk, on the main page "discussion" is the discussion page. Maybe we should clean this up a little bit or create some definitions, what to write where? -- [[User:Prodatron|Prodatron]] 22:32, 29 August 2006 (CEST)
== 8bit Wiki leadership ==
Just for your motivation, it seems that very soon we are becoming the biggest Wiki project for any 8bit machine ever! :-) Let's beat this left one: [http://www.c64-wiki.de/index.php/Hauptseite] and then we are the number 1! Thanx a lot to all for your contributions! An especial "thank you" goes to Gryzor (project initiator), Kanagaroo (hoster) and all the very active persons like CPCLER, Ythcal, etc... (sad, that there is no "contribution top 10" as a "special page"). Did you ever think, that this great project would become SO sucessfull? -- [[User:Prodatron|Prodatron]] 00:59, 1 September 2006 (CEST)
:This is bloody amazing!!! Of course in terms of visitors we're wwway behind but in terms of articles we're very near - and the c64 wiki has been around for... how much longer, really? Thanks for pointing out, though I'm not sure which aspect you meant :) Indeed it'd be really nice if we had a special page for top 10 contributors. Since there's no such page built-in, we may as well try and do it manually - we know each other anyway, and it'd be a nice way to acknowledge those who have taken this wiki so warmly... a huge thanks, people, and congrats!!! [[User:Gryzor|Gryzor]] 20:36, 1 September 2006 (CEST)
::Ok, I added [[List of most active contributors]]. Maybe 500 is too much for the beginning? ;-) -- [[User:Prodatron|Prodatron]] 21:14, 1 September 2006 (CEST)
::: But of course this is not *real* contributions - I mean I cannot take credit for a contribution when all I've done is correct a spelling mistake... contributions are all edits, comments and articles; of course, there's no way to distinguish between all this, so let's just make a note...[[User:Gryzor|Gryzor]] 08:39, 2 September 2006 (CEST)
:::: You are right. There are several problems. Manually it's too hard to figure out, what are new articles, big modifiactions, small modifications, image uploads etc. On the other hand a "new article" contribution doesn't mean a better contribution than a modification, if the new article is only a stub. So I think it can stay like this - it just shows who is active, that should be enough. I will add a note now. -- [[User:Prodatron|Prodatron]] 12:49, 2 September 2006 (CEST)
::500 currently seems to be too hard to reach, so I set the limit to 250 -- [[User:Prodatron|Prodatron]] 21:30, 1 September 2006 (CEST)
== New main page ==
:::: Regarding the news I will write a suggestion for the guidline how to insert new news. In general you have a headline, which have to be placed to the news (max 10 entries), the news archive (unlimited) and the main page (max 3 entries). The headline is the article name where you write the news itself + links to the source and the category (month). -- [[User:Prodatron|Prodatron]] 20:58, 1 September 2006 (CEST)
== Linking to WIKIPEDIA Main picture of the main page ==Gryzor, why have you modified the photo of the main page with the ancient one ? If this wiki is related to cpc, i guess it's not only the cpc 464 and the whole cpc range is concerned...Almost the 464 photo seemd truncated and overlayed by a line. Longshot --[[User:195.154.167.66|195.154.167.66]] 14:53, 23 November 2006 (CET) You have reverted modification without any answer about my contrib here about that...I won't to waste time to update this picture again. Gryzor, you're the main contributor of this site but i think your method is not fair, especially on a site built mainly by contributors.--[[User:Longshot|Longshot]] 13:17, 24 November 2006 (CET) : Well. I reverted it to the older version because I assumed there is something wrong with the image, that's all. For some reason the "range" photo won't appear, and I tried it fromt wo different computers and different browsers. Can you try reuploading the image under a new filename and changing the main page? Also, the 464 pic does appear fine for me - tried with Firefox, Opera, IE. As you can see it's not a matter of being 'unfair' - it's a technical issue, despite the fact that I like the 464 one better :):PS try to remember to log in before doing any changes.... :) [[User:Gryzor|Gryzor]] 19:36, 24 November 2006 (CET)
currently ::Sorry for the tag {{Wikipedia}} doesnt seem misunderstanding. About the range photo it's strange because i've any problem with ie or firefox (my personal pc) or crazy browser on my professional pc. This picture is a scan i'd modified in 2001 and coming from my site. I've compressed the picture with a newer version of image ready from 53kb to work howcome29.2 kb and i try to upload it again under a new name.Please let me know if the problem occurs again. It does over at [http://www.c64-wiki.de/index.php/Hauptseite C64 Wiki] :-) --[[User:CPCLER|CPCLER]] 18:34, 1 September 2006 (CEST):Mmmm..... can you give an example? [[User:GryzorLongshot|GryzorLongshot]] 2011:4146, 1 September 26 November 2006 (CESTCET)
:: Yep: It appears ok now, but I scaled the thumbnail down a bit because it was a big too big.. over at . thanks![http[User://www.c64-wiki.de/index.php/CP/M The C64 WIKIGryzor|Gryzor] under section '''LINK'''. OK i could just link directly!!! But.....] 18:11, 26 November 2006 (CET)
:::: Sorry, I can't follow?! This template doesn't exist yet at all and what do we have to do with the links in the C64 Wiki? -- [[User:Prodatron|Prodatron]] 12:44, 2 September 2006 (CEST)== CPC taking a day off ==
::: YupIs the CPC still in vacation? ;-) Maybe we could remove the picture, confirmed. Am trying to figure it out - sorry for make the lack of support lately, I've been so busy at work I can merely glance at it usually..info boxes below accessible in a better way again. Are maybe someone has an idea for an other cool frontpage motive? -- [[User:GryzorProdatron|GryzorProdatron]]22:36, 18 September 2007 (CEST)