User talk:DDGuides

Welcome to Wowpedia!

Hello, DDGuides, and welcome to Wowpedia, the Warcraft wiki! Thank you for your contributions, and we heartily encourage you to continue contributing!

Some links you may find useful:
 * The things to do category has lots of things to keep you busy!
 * Check out the Community portal for some useful editors' links.
 * Many Wowpedians frequent our IRC channel, on chat.freenode.net, #wowpedia.
 * Finally, please check out the site guidelines and policies!

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wowpedian! Please remember to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes as this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, or need help, just ask on the relevant talk page, or visit the site forums. Again, welcome! -- 06:06, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Videos
Please don't change the layout of the video sections. We switched to this style for multiple reasons. 06:06, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

I actually wouldn't mind getting a rundown of those reasons. It's just that I've (personally) noticed a massive drop in video clicks ever since we changed it from the old wowwiki format, as if people just didn't even realise they were there. Right now they're buried as icon-less text near the bottom of the screen. At the very least is it possible to add Youtube icons (like the playlist links on raid pages)? DDGuides (talk) 06:14, 6 January 2013 (UTC)


 * I believe many of the main reasons can be found at Forum:Embedding YouTube videos. 06:43, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

I've checked out the link and while I absolutely agree reducing space helps prevent a "Cataclysm page" issue, I'm also very concerned that another problem has been created in doing so - unclear coding. As a couple of examples:

1. I had absolutely no idea clicking the vlink opened it on the page. There's no indication of this whatsoever, no icon, custom text coloring or anything of the type. If my analytics are telling me anything (as compared to wowwiki stats), it's that people are not clicking these links, likely because they're unaware they're even there.

2. If no icon or text, a simple thumbnail would work just as well (small, like the gallery images on your Mists of Pandaria page). If Youtube had no thumbnail, only text, then you can be assured nobody would be clicking links there either (and I only say that as an figurative example, not as a literal comparison).

How would you feel about small/medium thumbnails or icons preceding the vlink codes? DDGuides (talk) 07:03, 6 January 2013 (UTC)


 * There is a play button icon to the left of the link... though I do agree it could be made more noticeable. 07:43, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm not the best coder under the sun; is there anyone you can suggest I message about this? I'd love to find a solution that works for everyone DDGuides (talk) 07:59, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

UPDATE: Worked out a little something:


 * ElinkIcon-youtube.png
 * ElinkIcon-youtube.png
 * ElinkIcon-youtube.png

This seem satisfactory? DDGuides (talk) 08:16, 6 January 2013 (UTC)


 * The play icon already uniquely identifies the link as being special in some way (and the "Videos" section header should be a pretty good hint!). Showing the YouTube logo is redundant, and somewhat misleading if the video is going to open in-line.
 * I agree that there's no indication that the link will open the video in-line, and while this is potentially problematic, that confusion is only going to last until the first time a visitor clicks one of those links. Adding a youtube logo next to the link does nothing to help with this.
 * So: no, adding youtube icons next to  tags is not a satisfactory solution. &mdash; foxlit (talk) 15:30, 6 January 2013 (UTC)


 * You've got to throw me a bone here. Surely it would seem obvious that a thumbnail with that very same play icon in the center would solve this problem? The whole argument for removing embedded players in the first place was because of their player-size limitations and the over-saturation of space on the page (which I agree with).
 * Something along the lines of those gallery images (Mists of Pandaria, Cataclsym concept art) in terms of thumbnail size w/ play icons would solve the whole dilemma, right?
 * The only reason I haven't created an example of what I mean here is because my experience with coding is limited, but if I had your blessing then I could start researching possibilities (and again: is there anyone I might speak to about this if you do?)
 * I really hate being stubborn about this, but I feel that if I don't bring it up, perhaps nobody else will DDGuides (talk) 22:32, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Foxlit and pcj are the ones to refer to about this sort of thing. 03:22, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't think doing something akin to &lt;gallery> thumbnails would be an improvement. The amount of information 120px-wide thumbnails can convey is rather miserable: if they aren't showing a random frame of the video, most of them would be showing the same "Instance Name / BOSS NAME / GUIDE" title information , and that gets repetitive fast. This ends up requiring text labels for distinguishing different videos, only now they're cramped in the narrow space beneath each thumbnail. Ultimately, the purpose of the video sections is to direct readers who want to see relevant videos to those videos. I think the current layout does that rather well -- notwithstanding the one-time surprise at having things open on the wiki page.
 * You're welcome to suggest and demonstrate examples of alternative formatting for the video sections on the Wowpedia forums, but until there's actual consensus, you must stick to the current format (plain #vlink's, no additional youtube icons) in actual articles. &mdash; foxlit (talk) 21:19, 7 January 2013 (UTC)