MediaWiki talk:Sidebar

I'd like to capitalize the headers of the sidebar but that seems to a) not work and b) cause the search bar to disappear. Does anyone know why or have a solution? —ConcealedLight (talk) 03:33, 19 December 2018 (MST)

Did you try typing it like the other topics ie navigation|Navigation? ~ BigShotFancyMan (talk) 12:43, 28 January 2019 (MST)

I don't remember what I did but I do remember giving up and I edited my custom wiki skin to capitalize the sidebar text. —ConcealedLight (talk) 13:15, 28 January 2019 (MST)

Community Section

Really big fan of the change and I assume it is a matter of time before it is brought up; can we add the Discord link to that area? I will further ask if the Facebook page could be added too?   ~BigShotFancyMan   talk   11:17, 13 September 2019 (MDT)

I support this; and maybe could we move it to be directly above the searchbar so that it's more visible? — Geodude (talk | contribs | email)‎‎ . . 11:39, 13 September 2019 (MDT)

I like Geodude's idea for the location as well.   ~BigShotFancyMan   talk   12:46, 13 September 2019 (MDT)

I don't think so since you can't add external links into the sidebar page syntax. Please correct me if I am wrong. --Green Dragon (talk) 01:49, 14 September 2019 (MDT)

This page suggests it is possible. - Guy 07:35, 14 September 2019 (MDT)

You can; I did it when we first added the official Discord. — Geodude (talk | contribs | email)‎‎ . . 09:19, 14 September 2019 (MDT)

Since it's been a bit and no one's objected, I'm going to go ahead and make the changes proposed above. — Geodude (talk | contribs | email)‎‎ . . 08:25, 15 September 2019 (MDT)

The position for the community tab should be at the bottom. The majority of D&D Wiki's currently 60k users a day use the sidebar for homebrew or SRD links. The community links are simply used much less. In addition we are now linking an additional time to discord and FB, which is totally unnecessary from the previous sidebar. --Green Dragon (talk) 08:44, 17 September 2019 (MDT)

I feel there is a lot of conjecture to be made; would the majority of users visit community pages more if they could see the links for those pages? Are they visiting links more because they are more visible? I dunno. But D&D Wiki is already more than known for its content, what about its community page though. I like the idea of trying to draw more people into the community via links being visible.   ~BigShotFancyMan   talk   21:28, 17 September 2019 (MDT)

D&D Wiki should serve it's base. And no, there are never going to be 60k users on discord or the tavern a day. Why do we even need two links? Most users are simply not looking for community pages. I look at it like websites are about offering content, and not about tricking their users. --Green Dragon (talk) 23:09, 17 September 2019 (MDT)

With utmost respect, GD, how are the proposed changes tricking our userbase? Based Quincy (talk) 23:15, 17 September 2019 (MDT)

If a person is looking for community pages, it's not hard to find them. If you are a majority of our userbase, navigating the site, prominent and simple links to the most accessed pages are what you are looking for. Making the majority of people use less prominent links is tricking them. It's just like putting the homebrew links above the community links would be tricking a majority who uses the link. Of course the mobile users already have a discord app, so they don't even use the link. The desktop users will also have the discord app and just open it instead of using their web browser. It's just a useless link, on the top of the sidebar for a userbase which doesn't click on it much at all compared to the other links. --Green Dragon (talk) 23:32, 17 September 2019 (MDT)

Oh, I see where you're coming from now. You're right. My apologies. Based Quincy (talk) 23:39, 17 September 2019 (MDT)

If it isn't hard to find, I am not sure why so many are surprised when they discover the wiki has one.

We don't have anything that references "most accessed pages". We have simple links to editions. In order to achieve what you are saying, you need something to detect articles with most hits and then you'd need to post those results somewhere. I'd conjecture most users already have an idea what they are looking when they visit.

I fail to see ordering the links as tricking users and is almost insulting that Geodude or myself would be trying to trick anyone. No one is forced to click on the social media links and the links are not disguised as anything except what they actually are.

Just because you have a discord app or profile, doesn't mean you know what servers exist. A google search might find a server you are looking for, or something close.

Also, you can remove the pretty link and then there's no argument about the number of links offered to reach Discord. I am little befuddled about the apprehension of making community links more visible. The server has been good. I see a lot of chatter from people. It has numerous users. It makes sense the link isn't used as much the others because it should be a "one & done" thing but I don't think that detracts from its value of being more visible. I don't see where you're coming from at all on this. Maybe I am bias, so I done a google search "where to place your social media links on website" and one article out of six had suggested "top, left side, bottom". The other five said at the top. Your site man. Still #1 for d&d homebrew searches. Place things where you want but I don't want to let you think anyone is trying to trick users or that this some how hurts the site because people coming to a homebrew website might think there isn't homebrew since the links are just below the community links.   ~BigShotFancyMan   talk   08:30, 18 September 2019 (MDT)

Imagine I'm pointing to BigShot to indicate our 100% congruence of opinion. — Geodude (talk | contribs | email)‎‎ . . 09:47, 18 September 2019 (MDT)

←Reverted indentation to one colon

Here is some Google Analytics information about certain pages from the sidebar.

5e Homebrew, currently the second most viewed page, gets around 80,000 page views a day.

The 5e SRD:System Reference Document, the 8th most viewed page, gets just over 20,000 views a day.

The Main Page, the 16th most viewed page, gets 16,000 views a day.

The SRD:System Reference Document, the 32nd most viewed page, gets over 7,000 page views a day.

This shows me that most users do not go to the Main Page to navigate around D&D Wiki.

Here is some information from Google Analytics about Discord.

Acquisition channels currently place 3rd for user activity, totalling at a minimal 2.7% of the total users.

In this category,

Discord currently places #25 in Acquisition channels, transferring 32 users yesterday.

For all sources, it's currently the 41st most used source.

For a reference, YouTube transfered 30 times more users yesterday than discord. Facebook 15 times more.

I agree that a link to discord on the sidebar is important, since discord is a part of our community, but I do not agree that it should be above the other pages for the reasons I mentioned above. --Green Dragon (talk) 02:26, 20 September 2019 (MDT)

sigh. all you Geodude. Really tired of trying around here.   ~BigShotFancyMan   talk   12:35, 20 September 2019 (MDT)

I think maybe you're not understanding what Bigshot and I are arguing. I'm not arguing that the content lists aren't high traffic; they definitely are. I'm arguing that the social media links should be higher up because doing so will help to drive more traffic to our social media. Users know that we have the SRD and that we have homebrew content, but they might not be aware that we have a Facebook page, or a Discord server. It's about growing the community, and getting users more engaged in the site, which reduces the relative number of "drive-by users." If there's something I'm missing here, please say so. — Geodude (talk | contribs | email)‎‎ . . 19:42, 21 September 2019 (MDT)

I assume when you say "drive-by user" you mean that D&D Wiki's userbase are mostly users who come from a search result or something, and then leave right away. Google analytics offers us insight into this type of user behavior.

Over the course of 1 day just about 60% of the userbase are returning users. They make up almost 70% of the daily traffic. Over the course of 1 week it's 51% returning, over the course of a month it drops to 42%. In the last 6 months it drops down to 32%. This shows me that users have a goal on D&D Wiki, and instead of just "driving by" they are browsing the site with certain expectations and goals in mind.

The third largest user group per session, are users bouncing around on D&D for less than 10 seconds. Making up 21% of the traffic. Users on D&D Wiki over 1801 seconds (the largest group), make up 25% of the traffic. The other categories cascade downwards from the longest users by session.

I do not agree that users find it difficult to find the community pages, if they want to. Simply being on the sidebar is a crowd magnet, and with two links you have to be pretty oblivious to not see it. Posturing that pages which people don't use the sidebar for should be more prominent than the pages which the sidebar is designed for, doesn't make sense to me.

Yes, growing the community is important, but efficient, targeted, and attractive navigation is simply way more important. Without decent navigation D&D Wiki would potentially get less users, ergo also less users involved in the community. --Green Dragon (talk) 10:12, 25 September 2019 (MDT)

Yes, nice addition to the side bar. However, can we get the facebook and discord buttons at the bottom to be aligned to the right side as oppose to the current centering? —ConcealedLight (talk) 09:39, 21 September 2019 (MDT)