Hi Wendy! Can you tell me about the share icons you added to MediaWiki:Wikia.js? You wrote that they were for SEO, but I don't understand the connection. I haven't seen those on any other wiki -- are they new?
Hi Danny. Yes they are new. There's a blog here. What we were told was that google is giving a lot of weight to google+ shares in their search results index at the moment. I have no idea if that's true or not, but it sounds about as reasonable as anything else I've heard about SEO over the years.
Rappy made some code to give them color if we want to make them "prettier" and there's a light grey color option as well -- I just enabled the default.
And if we find we don't like them after all they are easy to remove :)
I do like the idea of encouraging shares. I don't know if it'll help SEO, but it's a good thing to encourage.
Unfortunately, the new share icons create extra space between the page title and edit button, and the start of the article text. When we did the original Oasis reskin, edits went down quite a bit. We did a lot of A/B testing to figure out why, and it turned out to be the extra space between the edit button and the text.
It's hard to get people to really understand the connection between the edit button and the text. I think having the space in Oasis made people think that the button was there to edit the article title, not the text of the article.
Have you guys added any event-tracking so you could see how the new icons are performing? I'd be curious to know how many clicks they're getting, and if we see any difference in the clicks on the edit button.
Yeah. Unfortunately I have no idea if they are doing event tracking on them. I would hope so, but given that it's just an optional js import, I'm not sure.
It's funny -- I have quick-delete buttons on the edit line that I add with js anyhow, and they tend to wrap around to a second line on longer page names, so I don't even notice the space.
There is an option to put the buttons at the bottom of each page. It's enabled that way on Aion Wiki (eg. here). To me those look very clunky -- I'm used to the share buttons being small and tucked in a corner.
It's not just about shares going up, although frankly I don't see how they couldn't given how hidden the older share menu is, and how much more likely somebody is to just click a button that is right there without thinking too much. But it's also about enabling google+ shares, which are not possible at all with the old system.
When you make a noticeable product change like that, you have to look at the whole picture. If those icons bring 50 more Google+ shares, but the placement of the icons makes edits go down by 10%, then it's not worth it.
Adding more stuff to the page isn't always the correct answer. Maybe you guys could talk to Trevor; he'll be able to help you figure out how to evaluate the feature's success before you encourage people to add new buttons on every page.
Danny, evaluating the success of a feature is not part of community support's job. I have asked and was told that Mark did enable click tracking, so you are welcome to contact him about that. I'm not sure Trevor really was involved much with this feature, but you could ask him instead if you prefer.
In terms of the wiki here, I sent around the email before enabling the icons precisely to see if anybody had any objections; nobody seemed to have any opinion one way or the other. I have no strong attachment to them, beyond feeling that they are an improvement over the existing share menu, so if you want to leave them off, then that's fine with me.
I'm sorry; I think we crossed wires on this. Scott told me that you'd sent an email, but my email address has changed. I'll send you an email with my new address. Sorry for coming at this in a weird way.
Well, after 6 years, I'm finally going to attempt to upload images. Can you help me with it when you have a chance? No rush, but I'm just letting you know that I'll be finally putting up a ton of 45's. Talk to you soon!
Save the images somewhere on your computer. Give them some sort of sane names.
You may want some image software on your computer so you can edit them -- I like the Gimp myself. And then edit them to look how you want them to look.
Then go to the page where you want to add the image. Click to edit and click the little image icon. Click to "browse" the files on your computer and choose your image. On the preview screen you can set it to be 300px wide (our standard) or leave it as-is for a gallery. Then click to add the picture to the image. And it will insert the wikicode (or the image in visual mode)...
If you are adding it to a gallery you will want to edit the code to match the other ones on the page, and then publish.
If you need to do a lot of files at once you can use Special:MultipleUpload, but then you have to go insert the files on the page using either their names or the photo tool when you are done.
If you want to replace a photo you can either just swap it out, or, preferably, go to the file page and click "Upload a new version of this file" and do it there so we don't a) lose the history and b) have to go around deleting unused files.
Those, and a whole lot more. I eventually want to clean up all of the 45's, so that we have the best possible pictures. It's a big project, but I'm kind of at a standstill as far as adding new information, so I want to take a look at record pictures, or at least the ones that will fit on a scanner!
Hey, I had a question to ask you, and I keep forgetting. Do you think it would be overkill to have pictures of the different ways they packaged the Golden tapes? If you look around eBay, you'll see that they either put them in a big box, and you can see the tape at the bottom, or they came in a regular sealed cassette case. I've seen a bunch of them both ways, and I don't know if they were released simultaneously, depending on what kind of shelving a store had, or if one was a later pressing than the other. It's kind of like the big and little booklet variations on the Sony Wonder stuff. Anyway, I was wondering what you thought.
And while I was looking at examples, I ran across a few things. The original tape of Gold! here, and the Australian tape of Born to Add here! I don't know if that's a bad angle, but I wanted to show it to you, since it's cool that they also show other albums that are available.
I think the big box packaging is interesting for the additional artwork, but have assumed the plain cassette packaging was not needed in addition, as it looks the same as the cassette visible at the bottom of the box... Did I miss something? If we could get a handle on what the variations mean it might be more interesting, but as-is I think there isn't a lot of need for both.
Yes, the Born to Add tape is a horrible angle. I'll have to leave it as-is. The Gold tape looks so odd with the blue label rather than normal track info!
I think that's some kind of insert inside the packaging, so people would know that it was a tape of a full-length LP, instead of a 7" book and record set, which might have come in similar packaging. I remember The Story of Star Wars was on tape with a 7"x7" booklet, but it contained the full LP, which had a 12"x12" booklet. Anyway, I'm sure the backing would eventually get lost, so even if all of the song titles were on the back, they would be on the tape label, too.
I'll have to go through the Golden tapes, and see what we have. I would prefer to have them consistent, and then maybe put a variation on the Golden Music page, so people can see both.
Yup! I can't wait to hear it, even though I already have it twice, plus reissues of tracks from it on various formats. The weird thing is that it doesn't come with the 5 picture sleeves that we've found before, that would go to this. So this might be either a later pressing, or a previous owner didn't keep the picture sleeves. I'm guessing this one never had them, since everything else seems to be intact, like the color wheel for Just Three Colors and the map for The Magic Cookie. Can you get any good pictures from it, at least the cover? I wasn't sure about the angle, but at least it's a big picture to work with!
P.S. I think some of the sides have been reversed all this time. It'll be nice to finally fix that!
It looks like I was right on the track listings, except for one label error that I noted on the page. The funny thing is that the box is actually called, "Havin' Fun with Ernie & Bert's Carry About", so I made that change, too!
Hi! Here we go again with a variation I've never heard of before. I give you Canadian versions of some of the first series of Columbia CC 45's here. The funny thing is that they're both orange, which was not only Canada's regular Columbia label color at the time (ours was red), but I guess they didn't bother doing the multi-colored labels for this series like we did. I've still never seen Canadian books and records for the CC series, but now that we know they have the same number, maybe I've been passing them by, since they would look the same on the cover. Anyway, I hope that means they did the first 9, and maybe even more!
One thing that I'm surprised we haven't seen yet is Pickwick editions of the CTW 99000 series of the 45's. Maybe I've been skipping over the picture sleeves that we already have while I'm searching for the last 2. But then again, I haven't run across any when I see one without a sleeve, so maybe they didn't press them right away. I've seen a bunch of the Pickwick variation LP's, though. It's depressing to think that we're only able to document the records by running across copies of what's survived since 1970. I know I broke a few records when I was little, and I shudder to think how many other people did, too!
Hey Ken -- sorry for the long silence. Life has been a bit crazy :).
I broke records too as a child and we lost even more with a flooded basement. It is frustrating.... although it seems like sometimes we can find the information in other places. I am still amazed by what is on the worldcat for example.
And yes, (drat those last two), I never really study the picture sleeves in detail on those any more. Actually, would the sleeves be any different? Or would it just be the fine print on the back and/or the labels?
The sleeves have both US and Canada distributor information, but I've never seen 45's that say Pickwick on the label like the LP's do, except for the few promos we've found. I guess for some reason, they didn't think it was necessary to put it in both places.
Sometimes Worldcat frustrates me, though, because the item's page will tell you that a library has a certain item, but it won't be there when you go to the library's website. Sometimes I have to go all the way in, to see a track listing, catalog number, or copyright date. So if a library discards an item, I wish it would drop off of Worldcat.
Hi! I found yet another version of SS Fever on EMI in Australia here! I made a place for it, plus I made a place for the corresponding LP. It's funny that we found that version on EMI New Zealand, and I always wondered if they bothered to make one just for Australia, and there it is!
Also, I didn't know if you were reading our talk pages (I mean message walls), but thanks to Andrew and Julian, we were able to create pages for The Muppet Show (German album) and The Muppet Movie (German album), which get their own pages because they're in German. They were on the US pages the whole time, and I never knew they were dubbed!
And if you've been reading ToughPigs, you know that The Muppet Movie is back on CD, with the original cover art! (Grover voice) Oh, I am so happy!
Pretty! I've grabbed it :) I wonder if we will ever manage to get all the Fever/Disco variations.
Oh good! I think there is also a Muppet Takes Manhattan German language cassette out there. I remember when I was doing some work on the German Fraggles cassettes I ran across it. Or maybe I am mis-remembering which movie and it is the Muppet Movie one.
I have not been reading toughpigs and you just made my month :) I have wanted that on CD forever (it is very nervewracking having to hand over my 80's era cassette to my children), but could never make myself pay the price for it!
Hey, Wendy! Guess what? I finally found a stock copy of One Good Turn here!
And here's another surprise: This is a copy of the 10th Anniversary Album, but a few things are different: The first edition has a gatefold cover, with 1 record, and the pictures in the other pocket. The later edition has a gatefold cover, but they spread the songs out on 2 records, changed the order, and dropped the pictures. But this one keeps the original running order, on 1 record, but drops the pictures. On top of that, if you look at the label, it's pressed by Warner Brothers, but with the original CTW catalog number! (It looks like they added a "-A" and "-B" on each side.) Even stranger, there is no mention of Warner on the back cover, the way that the Book of the Month Club did for the Christmas album. So I don't know if this is some kind of promo, or variation, or record club edition. As far as I know, Warner never had a record club. But we know that there was a period when Sesame records did a mail-order program, which is where the Sesame Street Music Society Album comes from. I'm guessing this also may have something to do with In Harmony, which also copies the SS label, except for mentioning Warner on the label. As an aside, Discogs also shows a copy of In Harmony with a 1980's white WB label with the shield, so that means it was in print from 1980 to at least 1983, and possibly later.
So as always, just when you think you've seen everything, you never know what you'll run into!
Cool! If there are 12, you have them all. You can tell at a glance because the album mentions the pictures on the front cover right below the street sign, but editions that don't have pictures don't have that. That's why the difference caught my eye, because I saw that it was a 1-record edition.
Yay for "One Good Turn"!!! I've grabbed it and will put it up when I get a chance to crop it. Now if we can just find "True Blue Miracle" :p
That's really strange on the 10th anniversary album. I was going to ask how you knew that there were no pictures inside, but you answered that (it doesn't say so on the cover...). How odd that Warner would distribute this one with so little branding! I wonder what was in the second pocket.... or if it wasn't actually a gatefold cover maybe? (I know the listing says "GF" but it just seems like it would be weird).
Yeah, we only have 2 of the CTW picture sleeves left (that, and Disco Frog), and while I sometimes doubt that they were even made, I've said that before about stuff that eventually turned up. Although they must have pressed a bunch more of the first disco singles, because you can find tons of the Sesame Street Fever/Trash 45 all the time.
And there were later Sesame Street LP's that were gatefold, but the other pocket was glued shut, like Sesame Disco. So they might have made that change when they pressed this cover, since it had the original number. I'm guessing that this is an alternate version of the first edition, since it's dated 1978, and has the original catalog number. They only took out the pictures and removed the front cover text. I've always wondered how long they kept this one in print, anyway. The 2-record version was dated 1981, and renumbered, so they had time to go back and redo everything, although I still don't know why, if they were going to save money by removing the pictures, they bothered to press 2 records, and change the order of songs. That's a lot of extra work they didn't have to do.
Update: I was on Discogs again, and they have a Warner variant of Sesame Country! Same thing, same catalog number, but no Warner markings on the back cover. Just different text on the label. I don't know if it would help to make a list of the variants, though. Maybe Warner was helping to press LP's when they got behind. The major record companies used to do that when smaller labels needed help to keep up with demand. I've seen records by The Everly Brothers, which are on the Cadence label, but they were actually pressed by RCA, or Columbia, and sometimes both companies were pressing the same title at the same time. The only way you can tell is by the matrix number on the label, because the Cadence catalog number is the same on both! So until we know more, I'm guessing Warner was pressing Sesame albums after 1978, and before 1983, but we don't know exactly why!
I was on e-bay the other day &saw that the sesame street Monsters LP came with a Fold out booklet? I remember the Lp but Never a Booklet, wish i had a link the seller said it was rare. wasn't sure if you two knew anything about this? thanks :)
Hi! It sounds like you're talking about this auction, but the seller doesn't have a picture of the booklet, or describe what it's about. As far as I know, Sesame LP's didn't come with booklets, unless they had a fold out cover, and then they'd have a booklet stapled to the cover. He might be talking about an advertisement or sales brochure, but I've never seen one included with a new LP. This might be a promo copy, with a booklet that was put inside for promotion, but without seeing it, I can't really say for sure.
yeah i was thinking the samething Ernie when i saw it, I was hoping the seller might have the booklet in the picture but he didn't so your right. I've never seen one with the booklet either even when i had the LP as a Kid, be interesting though to see what it actually details.