I'm looking to revamp our squadron website, but before doing so I wanted to find out: what are some of the best examples of websites we have? Many that I have seen remind me of HAM radio sites: plenty of links, and lots of nostalgia for the 90's.
I'd like to make something better.
I will agree with you on the 90s nostalgia. My squadron website is still a work in progress. I will point out Youngstown Composite Sqdn has a nice site. http://oh051.ohwg.cap.gov/ (http://oh051.ohwg.cap.gov/)
I'm biased, but I like to point to my squadron's site as what I think to be a decent example: http://www.OswegoCAP.org (http://www.oswegocap.org). It did receive an honorable mention in the Balsem Awards last year.
Step 1...make sure you have the Wing (or higher) Commander approval for having a website. Just because you have one doesn't mean it's been properly approved.
Quote from: JeffDG on February 18, 2015, 05:45:26 PM
Step 1...make sure you have the Wing (or higher) Commander approval for having a website. Just because you have one doesn't mean it's been properly approved.
To add on to this, approval is requested and granted through the Internet Operations restricted application.
Both of the above suffer from the typical "outdated" disease which plagues CAP websites.
The first thing I would do is consider very carefully whether you even need a web site. The more content you have, the more you need to keep up-to-date. If you pick the wrong technology stack, no one other than the original author will have any idea how to maintain it.
Can you get by with Google Groups for internal comms? Or just a Facebook page?
My recommendation is either (1) a simple landing page with contact and meeting information, maybe a link to the squadron's Google Calendar, or (2) Wordpress. The latter is the standard for basic content management, and offers a dizzying array of themes and plugins to customize your experience.
I can't emphasize enough... think about not having a web site at all. You're making a commitment to design something nice and keep it updated, and that can be a tall order.
Quote from: dwb on February 18, 2015, 11:44:52 PM
I can't emphasize enough... think about not having a web site at all.
+1 - a nice contact site is a good idea, and your calendar needs to be somewhere, but beyond that, just pass them up to NHQ.
Facebook is a realistic option. No fuss, no mess and everybody is into FB. 8)
We use WordPress for our squadron website, www.dentoncap.org (http://www.dentoncap.org). We've found it relatively easy to use for non-technical folks to keep it updated or make changes. There are many add on modules that will update a Facebook page when the website is updated or to set up a sign up for CAP activities, etc.
I think that my wing's website is a pretty decent one. [urlwww.okwgcap.org (http://[/url)
don't know if i put the link in right might have to type it in yourself.
Maybe it's my bad work connection, but OKWG webpage took 20 seconds to load...Low quality images as well.
Quote from: Private Investigator on February 19, 2015, 10:22:08 AM
Facebook is a realistic option. No fuss, no mess and everybody is into FB. 8)
And, just to reiterate, these require Wing or higher commander approval as well.
Quote from: CAPR 110-111.
a. CAP units conducting CAP internet operations (including cap.gov domains) must obtain and
maintain a record of approval from the CAP/CC or applicable region, wing commander or their
designee. The NHQ/CO or designee approves CAPNHQ.gov domain delegations.
And before you ask, yes, Facebook is a "CAP internet operation" as defined in CAPR 110-1, 6:
Quote6. CAP Internet and Local Computer Operations are data, communication and information
operations that utilize the internet for hosting CAP websites, file services, e-mail, instant messaging
and other communications and sharing vehicles. Local computer operations include CAP-owned
personal computers, smartphones, tablet PCs and external storage devices that contain CAP data and
information.
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on February 19, 2015, 06:15:40 PM
Maybe it's my bad work connection, but OKWG webpage took 20 seconds to load...
Very slow for me as well (with a very fast connection).
I'm pretty fond of our new Wing site (and hopefully it loads faster than OK's :-\): mnwg.cap.gov (http://mnwg.cap.gov)
Quote from: A.Member on February 19, 2015, 07:15:16 PM
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on February 19, 2015, 06:15:40 PM
Maybe it's my bad work connection, but OKWG webpage took 20 seconds to load...
Very slow for me as well (with a very fast connection).
I'm pretty fond of our new Wing site (and hopefully it loads faster than OK's :-\ ): mnwg.cap.gov (http://mnwg.cap.gov)
Actually, yea. Almost instant load time, and it actually looks engaging...can't put my finger (eye?) on it, but it looks "clean", even with that broken up header.
Quote from: JeffDG on February 19, 2015, 07:05:20 PM
Quote from: Private Investigator on February 19, 2015, 10:22:08 AM
Facebook is a realistic option. No fuss, no mess and everybody is into FB. 8)
And, just to reiterate, these require Wing or higher commander approval as well.
Not to mention not available to our youngest cadets.
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on February 19, 2015, 06:15:40 PM
Maybe it's my bad work connection, but OKWG webpage took 20 seconds to load...Low quality images as well.
No, real slow to load, not to mention other...ahem..."issues"...
Quote from: A.Member on February 19, 2015, 07:15:16 PM
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on February 19, 2015, 06:15:40 PM
Maybe it's my bad work connection, but OKWG webpage took 20 seconds to load...
Very slow for me as well (with a very fast connection).
I'm pretty fond of our new Wing site (and hopefully it loads faster than OK's :-\): mnwg.cap.gov (http://mnwg.cap.gov)
I like it except for one thing...
"SEMPER VILIGANS?"
Ooh. Good catch.
After all these years, those Latin classes I was sure would be useless are still paying off!
Quote from: Starfleet Auxiliary on February 19, 2015, 11:11:26 PM
Quote from: A.Member on February 19, 2015, 07:15:16 PM
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on February 19, 2015, 06:15:40 PM
Maybe it's my bad work connection, but OKWG webpage took 20 seconds to load...
Very slow for me as well (with a very fast connection).
I'm pretty fond of our new Wing site (and hopefully it loads faster than OK's :-\): mnwg.cap.gov (http://mnwg.cap.gov)
I like it except for one thing...
"SEMPER VILIGANS?"
Haha! Great catch. The site was reviewed by most Wing staff members and that was never caught.
Corrected now. Thanks!
Still see viligans.
The three places where I saw "viligans" I now see the correct vigilans. Viligans, short for "village hooligans?"
Mike
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on February 20, 2015, 05:36:33 AM
Still see viligans.
Can you try refreshing/clearing your cache? All should be corrected.
As sardak stated, there were 3 instances found; two on the Home page and one on the Fact Sheet.
Quote from: sardak on February 20, 2015, 05:43:21 AM
Viligans, short for "village hooligans?"
Mike
Indeed. :)
My phone browser still messed up. I'll clear cache in a bit.
Quote from: JeffDG on February 19, 2015, 07:05:20 PM
Quote from: Private Investigator on February 19, 2015, 10:22:08 AM
Facebook is a realistic option. No fuss, no mess and everybody is into FB. 8)
And, just to reiterate, these require Wing or higher commander approval as well.
Quote from: CAPR 110-111.
a. CAP units conducting CAP internet operations (including cap.gov domains) must obtain and
maintain a record of approval from the CAP/CC or applicable region, wing commander or their
designee. The NHQ/CO or designee approves CAPNHQ.gov domain delegations.
And before you ask, yes, Facebook is a "CAP internet operation" as defined in CAPR 110-1, 6:
Quote6. CAP Internet and Local Computer Operations are data, communication and information
operations that utilize the internet for hosting CAP websites, file services, e-mail, instant messaging
and other communications and sharing vehicles. Local computer operations include CAP-owned
personal computers, smartphones, tablet PCs and external storage devices that contain CAP data and
information.
Interesting. CAPR 110-1 does not specifically address social media by name in its definition of CAP Internet operation. In contrast, CAPR 190-1 does cover social media in detail. In fact, CAPR 190-1 specifically states the following regarding unit websites (not social media):
Quote from: CAPR 190-1, Para. 11aPAOs at wing and region levels, in conjunction with the information technology officer and/or commander designee, will create and maintain their unit website in accordance with CAPR 110-1.
When CAPR 190-1 addresses social media, it states the following:
Quote from: CAPR 190-1, Para. 11b
All levels of CAP, from flights and squadrons to National Headquarters, are encouraged to create and use social media to help reach out to their membership, potential members, friends of CAP and the general public by telling CAP stories on unit social networking sites. Units are not required to use social media, but are encouraged to do so as resources allow. The responsibility for use of social media by CAP units rests with the unit commander and will be overseen by the unit PAO or a member designated by the commander under the direction of the unit PAO.
Note the lack of reference to CAPR 110-1. Oversight? Maybe. That said, it's important to note the importance that CAP has been placing in social media (see
http://capnhq.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/2180/kw/social%20media), so it's hard to believe that this is just an oversight.
To be clear. PAOs are responsible primarily for content not the technicals.
Don't disagree. I'm just not sure Facebook and other social media fall under the same category as a unit website. But even if that's the intent, it seems to me the regulations could've been more clear.
Quote from: Storm Chaser on February 21, 2015, 05:25:27 AM
Don't disagree. I'm just not sure Facebook and other social media fall under the same category as a unit website. But even if that's the intent, it seems to me the regulations could've been more clear.
Facebook is pretty clearly a sharing platform.
The Internet Operations app has specific options for Facevook, Twitter, Imstagram, etc.
Quote from: JeffDG on February 21, 2015, 01:09:36 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on February 21, 2015, 05:25:27 AM
Don't disagree. I'm just not sure Facebook and other social media fall under the same category as a unit website. But even if that's the intent, it seems to me the regulations could've been more clear.
Facebook is pretty clearly a sharing platform.
The Internet Operations app has specific options for Facevook, Twitter, Imstagram, etc.
Maybe so, but they could've spell out social media in the regulation more clearly. I bet many, many units have Facebook pages that haven't been approved by wing. Heck, I bet many wings are not enforcing this policy in regards to social media which, in my opinion, is not clearly spelled out in the regulation. If it was clear, we wouldn't be having this conversation.
Quote from: Storm Chaser on February 21, 2015, 04:26:18 PMIf it was clear, we wouldn't be having this conversation.
You wish.
Quote from: JeffDG on February 21, 2015, 01:09:36 PM
Facebook is pretty clearly a sharing an advertising platform.
FTFY
KS wing updated their website recently... http://www.kswg.cap.gov/ (http://www.kswg.cap.gov/) Any thoughts?
Quote from: CadetSnuffy on February 21, 2015, 10:05:20 PM
KS wing updated their website recently... http://www.kswg.cap.gov/ (http://www.kswg.cap.gov/) Any thoughts?
For starters the template doesn't scale properly, and there's a fair number of graphics that
don't have transparency working correctly.
I probably should have mentioned that it is still a work in progress. Thanks for the input!
On the subject of "Is Facebook an internet operation?"
http://www.capmembers.com/cap_national_hq/public_affairs/cap_unit_web_sites/ (http://www.capmembers.com/cap_national_hq/public_affairs/cap_unit_web_sites/)
I'm assuming that the twitter and facebook feeds couldn't get on this list without having submitted an IO request.
That being said, I think my squadron's IO request was sent in by paper many, many years ago. It isn't showing up in the list, so I'll be resubmitting it shortly with a note we intend to upgrade it from its 1990's chic look.
EDIT: word goof
Quote from: Starfleet Auxiliary on February 23, 2015, 12:41:19 AM
On the subject of "Is CAP an internet operation?"
http://www.capmembers.com/cap_national_hq/public_affairs/cap_unit_web_sites/ (http://www.capmembers.com/cap_national_hq/public_affairs/cap_unit_web_sites/)
I'm assuming that the twitter and facebook feeds couldn't get on this list without having submitted an IO request.
There are Twitter and Facebook links on that list.
What a MESS.
In the first third of that page, out of about 20 links, at least 10 are dead, broken web pages, woefully outdated, and one has a Rickroll.
No, CAP doesn't need standardization at all...
Quote from: Eclipse on February 23, 2015, 02:50:48 AM
In the first third of that page, out of about 20 links, at least 10 are dead, broken web pages, woefully outdated, and one has a Rickroll.
That last one was legit, their Squadron motto is: "Never gonna give you up, Never gonna let you down, Never gonna run around and desert you." All in latin, of course ;D
Quote from: S/M Thompson on February 23, 2015, 03:07:15 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on February 23, 2015, 02:50:48 AM
In the first third of that page, out of about 20 links, at least 10 are dead, broken web pages, woefully outdated, and one has a Rickroll.
That last one was legit, their Squadron motto is: "Never gonna give you up, Never gonna let you down, Never gonna run around and desert you." All in latin, of course ;D
I've never been rickrolled in ASCII before now...
my wing is supposed to be getting that whole Google site thing up & running for the squadrons to use...
I'm seeing a fair number of sites using them.
funny, speaking of outdated content, I surfed to a page on one of the cool sites referenced in this thread, and rec'd the dreaded "Page Not Found" : thought that was kinda amusing.
Content.....it can be a pain to update!
;)
Quote from: Eclipse on February 23, 2015, 02:50:48 AM
Quote from: Starfleet Auxiliary on February 23, 2015, 12:41:19 AM
On the subject of "Is CAP an internet operation?"
http://www.capmembers.com/cap_national_hq/public_affairs/cap_unit_web_sites/ (http://www.capmembers.com/cap_national_hq/public_affairs/cap_unit_web_sites/)
I'm assuming that the twitter and facebook feeds couldn't get on this list without having submitted an IO request.
There are Twitter and Facebook links on that list.
What a MESS.
In the first third of that page, out of about 20 links, at least 10 are dead, broken web pages, woefully outdated, and one has a Rickroll.
No, CAP doesn't need standardization at all...
One of them led to a yahoo page that said "Sorry, Geocities closed in 2009".
Subtract a few years from that when that list was probably last updated. :)
As an aside, if you do have a nice website now or think you do, I'd kindly ask you to point archive.org at it so that it gets indexed for historical purposes. Other IT people will thank you, and someday a CAP historian may thank you.
I noticed someone mentioned the OKWG website. We actually discovered an issue that we were unaware because of the comments about the page weight. It should be fixed now.
As for the graphics, we're harnessed by the theme we use in WordPress. They have static sizes and we have no way to upscale some of the photos. Regardless, we do the best we can.
www.okwgcap.org (http://www.okwgcap.org)
www.brokenarrowcap.org (http://www.brokenarrowcap.org)
www.capstarbase.org (http://www.capstarbase.org)
www.edmondcap.org (http://www.edmondcap.org)
www.capokc.org (http://www.capokc.org)
www.tinkercap.org (http://www.tinkercap.org)
www.counciloakcap.org (http://www.counciloakcap.org)
www.grovecap.org (http://www.grovecap.org)
www.muskogeecap.org (http://www.muskogeecap.org)
www.durantcap.org (http://www.durantcap.org)
www.capshawnee.org (http://www.capshawnee.org)
www.normancap.org (http://www.normancap.org)
www.woodwardcap.org (http://www.woodwardcap.org)
www.enidcap.org (http://www.enidcap.org)
www.lawtoncap.org (http://www.lawtoncap.org)
www.altuscap.org (http://www.altuscap.org)
www.stillwatercap.org (http://www.stillwatercap.org)
www.tulsacap.org (http://www.tulsacap.org) - Gateway for the Tulsa metro
I decided to spend about an hour on Google just visiting random Squadron sites. A lot of them are just awful looking, and need a big overhaul. The one thing that concerns me though is the number of them that haven't been updated in years. It can't really be good for Recruiting if people search for your unit and don't see anything new. I can see people going "Oh, I guess they aren't active anymore" and moving on from the idea.
Quote from: The14th on March 09, 2015, 12:19:32 AM
The one thing that concerns me though is the number of them that haven't been updated in years.
A continuing problem in CAP is that many squadron web sites are actually owned by some individual member rather than by the unit and if that person leaves, the unit has lost control over its internet identify. There really should be a requirement that all CAP web sites be controlled by some level of the corporation.
Quote from: RiverAux on March 09, 2015, 12:38:34 AM
Quote from: The14th on March 09, 2015, 12:19:32 AM
The one thing that concerns me though is the number of them that haven't been updated in years.
A continuing problem in CAP is that many squadron web sites are actually owned by some individual member rather than by the unit and if that person leaves, the unit has lost control over its internet identify. There really should be a requirement that all CAP web sites be controlled by some level of the corporation.
I would agree with that. Have the person who owns the site provide the log in details and sign something saying that they allow the Commander to edit/delete as needed if the member leaves CAP.
That's why some kind of access information is required to be in eServices as part of the approval for existence of the specific web presence. Continuity can be maintained, and things move on.
A while back as part of determining whether to continue on with the .gov TLD, or not- with a wing level internet activity, I set out to find every Wing and Region site, and some unit sites- using CAPWATCH data as a starting point, only to see that many were listed wrong. I was expecting that, so nothing out of the ordinary there.
What I wasn't expecting though, was just how many sites .. would have been made to look better had they been GeoCities templates 15 years ago. Of 52 Wings, just about a quarter had any kind of CMS (Content Management System) at all. Of the rest, most gave the impression they were just static pages, and some kind of upkeep was being done somewhere.
I added some notes, ranked sites according to impression, etc. It's well over a year old, in theory it should still be all correct information, but we know how that goes.
After much deliberation, looking at the choices of the googlesites.gov walled garden, the likely to be hacked wordpress, the innumerable CMS solutions out there, and whatnot, I think I'm going to run with a 2-tiered solution:
1. Front facing page. Powered by Twitter Bootstrap, this series of static pages can instantly scale to any size screen or device. Being static pages, there is nothing to hack. Embedded feeds will be added for Facebook and Twitter, allowing the PAO to update the facebook page and give the resultant feed on a page dedicated to current events.
2. Secure members page. Powered by the wing's google apps, authentication will be required to access it. Links to all CAPAPPS and FOUO/OPSEC/INFOSEC data that needs to be accessible online will be secured behind their auth firewalls.
Priority is 1. Self-driven due date is April 30th. This will give me time to hunt down media, bug test the website, and make sure I have all the appropriate approvals needed for all of our internet operations.