Content deleted Content added
MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) m Fixed Lint errors in signatures. (Task 2) |
Plastikspork (talk | contribs) m Remove page from Special:WantedTemplates |
||
| (9 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown) | |||
Line 8:
I thought this padding issue had been resolved? [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 00:09, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
:Me too, but then again I use a proper browser <
::Looks better. Cheers! [[User:PC78|PC78]] ([[User talk:PC78|talk]]) 12:29, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
Line 16:
:Looks pretty good! But the colour of the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Merseyside/Collaboration]] link suggests to me that you are not using this collaboration of the month thing, so maybe these should be fixed or removed? Ditto for [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Merseyside/Merging]]. As you are using so many of the extended quality classes, I might suggest that it would be simpler to use them all and do away with the custom class that you have created. Regards, [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 23:33, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
::I dunno, I'd prefer to keep things as they are in the current template - they can always be dealt with later. This is still a relatively new WikiProject after all. :) Since everything seems to be in order I'm going to go ahead with the switch. Cheers! [[User:Small-town hero|Small-town hero]] ([[User talk:Small-town hero|talk]]) 01:49, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
== Another Padding Comment ==
{{#invoke:WikiProject banner|main
|PROJECT = Tulips
|category=no
Line 26 ⟶ 27:
|IMAGE_RIGHT = Tulipa suaveolens floriade to Canberra.jpg
|IMAGE_RIGHT_LARGE = 50px
|MAIN_TEXT = <div style="text-align: center;">'''WPBannerMeta'''</
}}
{{Tmbox
|image = [[Image:Tulipa suaveolens floriade to Canberra.jpg|50px]]
|imageright = [[Image:Tulipa suaveolens floriade to Canberra.jpg|50px]]
|text = <div style="text-align: center;">'''Tmbox'''</
}}
{{#invoke:WikiProject banner|main
|PROJECT = Tulips
|category=no
Line 43 ⟶ 44:
|IMAGE_RIGHT = Tulipa suaveolens floriade to Canberra.jpg
|IMAGE_RIGHT_SMALL = 30px
|MAIN_TEXT = <div style="text-align: center;">'''WPBannerMeta'''</
}}
{{Tmbox
Line 49 ⟶ 50:
|image = [[Image:Tulipa suaveolens floriade to Canberra.jpg|30px]]
|imageright = [[Image:Tulipa suaveolens floriade to Canberra.jpg|30px]]
|text = <div style="text-align: center;">'''Tmbox'''</
}}
There's a little bit of a difference with the border on the left when comparing the WPBannerMeta and Tmbox template. Should a bigger left border be added to WPBannerMeta? -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 13:20, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
:I don't think the border should be bigger necessarily. But perhaps it ought to be the same as the border on the right, which it currently isn't (on my browser anyway). [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 16:16, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
::The main difference is that the quality/importance rows have backgrounds that fill the entire cell; IMO it looks a bit wierd having a huge border between them and the banner border. I agree that the right image should have the same padding as the left image, I'll have a look at that.
:::I synchronised the padding left and right. What do people think about it overall?
::::Looks better now that left & right match. Not too bothered about matching with tmbox. -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 19:22, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
Line 76 ⟶ 77:
:::There's a {{para|HOOK_NOTE}} parameter which can be used to add further notes. See example below: -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 13:44, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
<pre>
{{#invoke:WikiProject banner|main
|PROJECT = Tulips
|small = {{{small|}}}
Line 107 ⟶ 108:
Could the WPBannerMeta/importancescale be altered so that "This article has been" is changed to "<nowiki>This {{#if:{{SUBJECTSPACE}}|page|article}} has been</nowiki>", so that it matches WPBannerMeta/qualityscale. Thanks. -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 12:47, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
:{{done}}
== A couple of things... ==
Line 115 ⟶ 116:
Cheers! [[User:PC78|PC78]] ([[User talk:PC78|talk]]) 17:50, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
:Point 1 has now been fixed I believe. I don't quite understand point 2: what do you mean by "forced comment message"? [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 18:32, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
::The "please leave comments [[avpoiaev|here]]..." message that appears if no comments exist and {{para|COMMENT_FORCE}} is set. Now disabled for Redirects and Disambigs. Any others?
:::Thanks for that. [[User:PC78|PC78]] ([[User talk:PC78|talk]]) 19:11, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
== Collapsed section ==
Line 133 ⟶ 134:
Thanks. -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 23:37, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
:Oops, that was [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:WPBannerMeta/core&diff=257981712&oldid=257931630 this edit]. Well spotted WOSlinker (what ''is'' a WOS linker?) [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 09:17, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
::Well spotted. {{fixed}}
:Well, WOS stands for ''World of Spectrum''. When I first started, I was just adding links to a number of computer games articles. But since then I done a few other [[User:WOSlinker|things]]. -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 11:44, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
::You certainly have :) [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 12:06, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
Line 149 ⟶ 150:
</pre>
However, not all projects use the same parameters (for example, some use B-Class-1, B-Class-2, etc.) so this may be incorrect. I was just thinking that [[Talk:East Prussia]] might really confuse someone who is trying to rate it as B-class. [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 11:57, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
:Ouch! I can see the issue, but I think trying to play with the default message is asking for a world of pain with optional parameters flying everywhere. Isn't the simplest method to make sure each banner supports this set of parameters, whatever their 'primary' parameters may be?
::Yes, maybe, but that will involve updating all banners which use the checklist which could also be very painful! [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 13:34, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
:::There aren't actually [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3AWhatLinksHere&target=Template%3AWPBannerMeta%2Fbchecklist&namespace=10 that many] of them.
::::Okay, this should be possible then. Shall we just change any non-standard ones to
<pre>
Line 157 ⟶ 158:
</pre>
::::etc. I've noticed some using B1, B2, etc. I suppose parameters are case=sensitive? [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 17:48, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
:::::Yes, that looks good. Parameter ''names'' are case-sensitive, although the parameter ''values'' are not.
::::::Huh? That doesn't sound right. Parameter values ''are'' case-sensitive, otherwise we wouldn't need to use constructs such as <nowiki>{{lc:{{{class}}} }}</nowiki>. [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 10:30, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
:::::::Sorry, I meant that parameter values are case-insensitive ''because'' we use the lc: construct everywhere <
{{done}}. All banners using the checklist have been fixed, and the documentation has been updated to prevent this problem in the future. [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 16:06, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
Line 165 ⟶ 166:
Would it be possible for class=Image to also recognize class=File after our namespace change? Just a thought. [[User:Stepshep|<span style="color:green; font-family:Comic Sans MS;">§hep</span>]] • [[User talk:Stepshep|<span style="color:green; font-family:Comic Sans MS;">¡Talk to me!</span>]] 22:19, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
:Yes <
::Thanks. [[User:Stepshep|<span style="color:green; font-family:Comic Sans MS;">§hep</span>]] • [[User talk:Stepshep|<span style="color:green; font-family:Comic Sans MS;">¡Talk to me!</span>]] 23:18, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
== <nowiki>listas={{{listas|}}}</nowiki> ==
It says in the template doc that <nowiki>listas={{{listas|}}}</nowiki> is required for the template to work. I was wondering if this changes means that {{tl|OH-Project}} needs updated to include this? Is this a recent thing? I don't remember it always being required or even existent. [[User:Stepshep|<span style="color:green; font-family:Comic Sans MS;">§hep</span>]] • [[User talk:Stepshep|<span style="color:green; font-family:Comic Sans MS;">¡Talk to me!</span>]] 19:59, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
:This functionality should really be included in all banners, notwithstanding the fact that it is currently broken <
::If you could include it that'd be great and I'd be more than happy to doc it. I just can't touch the template in its current state... Thanks. [[User:Stepshep|<span style="color:green; font-family:Comic Sans MS;">§hep</span>]] • [[User talk:Stepshep|<span style="color:green; font-family:Comic Sans MS;">¡Talk to me!</span>]] 21:06, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
:::{{done}}
::::Thanks. [[User:Stepshep|<span style="color:green; font-family:Comic Sans MS;">§hep</span>]] • [[User talk:Stepshep|<span style="color:green; font-family:Comic Sans MS;">¡Talk to me!</span>]] 21:41, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
:::::I have found a number of instances where the WP Greece banner does explode if it does not have a value for the listas parameter but a banner above it, especially WP Biography, does have a value for the listas parameter. It is not a pretty sight.
Line 178 ⟶ 179:
:::::Although I am working to clean it out [[:Category:Pages with DEFAULTSORT conflicts]] may have examples of the above. Within the last 12 hours a bot has completed the listas parameter in only the WP Biography template. See what a mess can be made.
::::::[[User:JimCubb|JimCubb]] ([[User talk:JimCubb|talk]]) 16:27, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
:::::::The {{para|nested}} parameter is completely superfluous on WPBannerMeta banners; you can include or not include it at your pleasure, but if you experiment you'll see that it has no effect whatsoever: moving a WPBannerMeta banner inside a banner shell collapses it [[d:automagically|automagically]]. As for listas, note that this functionality is currently somewhat broken (see [[#listas functionality]] below; we're waiting on a MediaWiki configuration change that will make it much easier to fix listas conflicts both here and with other banners. Your comments in that thread would be very much appreciated.
== listas functionality ==
Line 184 ⟶ 185:
On the to-do list, there is '''check listas functionality'''.
It looks to me as it's not quite doing which it should be. Although there is some code in WPBannerMeta/core which does <
}}</nowiki>'''</
I think if <
}}</nowiki></
Would that be better?
Line 194 ⟶ 195:
-- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 19:20, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
:The todo should probably be "''fix'' listas functionality", it is currently as you say completely broken. I'm actually waiting for {{phab|18552}}, which will make the whole issue a hell of a lot easier (we'd just need to remove the sortkeys altogether). The solution you propose would fix the problem, but it would require passing parameters around that will become superfluous in the (hopefully) near future. I can 'fix' it if there's a pressing need for it, but I'm not aware of many projects that actively use this feature at the moment...
::No pressing need, although if you moved the <
:::On the contrary, you'd have to pass 'listas', defaulting to <
::::I'm meaning after {{phab|18552}} is fixed. -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 19:05, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
:::::Ah, I see. Then yes, as you say, after the bug is fixed it will be very easy; move the listas code as you say, and remove all the sorkeys from all the subtemplates.
== COLLAPSED_TEXT issue ==
Line 213 ⟶ 214:
-- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 22:11, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
:Hmn... This probably masks a deeper problem (like why collapsible notes and the collapsible text are in the same collapse box to start with...). I'm wondering (entirely unrelated to this) whether to spin off the C_NOTES as a hook and add some more normal notes and taskforces instead, since they seem to be far more popular... something to investigate. Thanks for the fix though.
::On a slightly separate note, I've created a new hook at [[:Template:WPBannerMeta/hooks/todolist]] which can be used to replace a lot of the uses of collapsible text. I've got a list of about 20 or so banners which are using collapsible text which I could convert over to this hook. It also allows for more than one collapsible text section by just adding the hook twice. -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 22:55, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
Line 219 ⟶ 220:
:::I've now converted all those templates I could find that were using COLLAPSED_TEXT over to this new hook. Perhaps you could add a tracking cat to see if anything is left using COLLAPSED_TEXT and also add some protection to the hook template. Thanks -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 23:13, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
::::Done, enjoy [[:Category:WPBannerMeta banners using collapsed text]]. They're sorted by namespace.
Just remove <
:But then it won't collapse inside banner shells. Kind of throwing the baby out with the bathwater <
== WPMIX ==
Line 242 ⟶ 243:
High, mid and low importance ratings have gained an extra | in the rating box, eg [[Talk:Australian dollar]]. [[Template:WikiProject Business & Economics]] is particularly badly affected, with some text missing eg [[Talk:Bank of New York Mellon Corporation]]. [[User:TRS-80|TRS-80]] ([[User talk:TRS-80|talk]]) 18:16, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
:{{Fixed}} nothing to do with WPBM: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&dir=prev&offset=20090111182606&limit=6&target=Happy-melon].
== Quality Hooks ==
Line 248 ⟶ 249:
Currently, there are two hooks for adding extra quality scales into a banner: {{tl|WPBannerMeta/hooks/qualitycats}} and {{tl|WPBannerMeta/hooks/additquals}}. Just wondering if there is really a need for both versions. We just really need one. Which one is best? -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 09:37, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
:/aditquals is less cleanly-coded (missing case-insensitivity, etc), but /qualitycats can only handle one set of categories at a time. Which one is more widely used?
:: All there appears to be is one use of each: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3AWhatLinksHere&target=Template%3AWPBannerMeta%2Fhooks%2Fqualitycats&namespace=10 qualitycats], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3AWhatLinksHere&target=Template%3AWPBannerMeta%2Fhooks%2Fadditquals&namespace=10 additquals]. -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 10:50, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
:::It was a pretty marathon effort (I had about ten catgory warning boxes under the template at one point!) but I converted WPBeatles to use /qualitycats, so /additquals is unused. Msjg, do you mind if we delete in the interests of cleanliness, rather than redirecting?
::::You've gone and used {{tl|WPBannerMeta/qualityscale}} in WPBeatles. So do we actually need either hook? -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 12:38, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
:::::Argh! On a pure technical level, no we don't, in the same way we don't ''need'' /hooks/notes or /hooks/taskforces. They're just wrappers for the internal templates. But they're wrappers that we need, because otherwise if we change the way things feed into the internal subtemplates, we have to update every banner that calls the subtemplates directly. If there's a complete and consistent 'shell' around the 'core' functions, we only need to ensure that the two interface ''with each other'' properly, and don't have to go hunting all over wikipedia to find the wierd and wonderful ways people have used the core templates directly. So while they might just be wrappers at the moment, it's still important to have them, and use them. So I've updated WPBeatles, and fixed the /hooks/qualitycats documentation that prompted me to use the internal template in the first place <
No, I don't mind. It's good to be clean. A problem with the Beatles template, as I noted [[Template_talk:WPBeatles#Quality_and_importance_scales|here]] last year is that FQS is selectively used. I don't think you have sorted this problem yet. [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 13:06, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
:Thanks. Indeed not, that's a problem, and one that's become ''more'' difficult to fix with the new class masks... Hmn....
::Of course, if you call the taskforce hook, you can specify FQS separately. [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 13:20, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
Line 268 ⟶ 269:
{{tlx|WP Crime|category=no}}
:That was quick! [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 13:38, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
::I'm bored <
== WPBannerMeta/hooks/priorityscale ==
Line 283 ⟶ 284:
:Also, PROJECT_LINK can be removed as it doesn't do anything. And is there any reason why SHOW shouldn't always be YES and not a parameter as well? -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 21:57, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
::The 'invisible' version is used on eg {{tlx|WPBeatles}}. Rest is {{done}}
Just wondering if the following would be better, which would then show the scale on the template page (as the importance scale usually is).
Line 321 ⟶ 322:
-- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 22:19, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
:{{done}}, kinda. I tweaked the code a bit to remove duplication, but it's essentially yours. Good idea: we should try and do that for the other hooks as well.
== Documentation and To-Do Lists ==
Someone might want to change the Documentation from showing to-do lists as to be done with <
:Hi, I've changed the docs for that section a bit & added a note about the hook for todo lists. -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 07:45, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
Line 335 ⟶ 336:
</pre>
thanks -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 12:27, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
:I know, why don't we add tracking categories to monitor ''every'' parameter... <
What's the rationale behind all this converting of collapsed things into hooks? [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 13:13, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
:If they're not widely used, the code bytes would be better off given over to extra taskforces, which I ''know'' are in heavy demand (and are more complicated to hook, since they need two separate hooks). I should say, WOSlinker, don't change anything ''yet'' until we see how many templates actually use the cnotes.
::I won't change anything yet. If we go ahead with the change though, the docs could be simplified to the following:
Line 359 ⟶ 360:
which would move this into a centralised position within the actual comments box? In either case, note the unnecessary extra space preceeding the {{tlx|·}} templates. [[User:PC78|PC78]] ([[User talk:PC78|talk]]) 19:33, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
:IMO, it was better before (apart from the spaces before {{tlx|·}}). —[[User:Ms2ger|Ms2ger]] ([[User talk:Ms2ger|talk]]) 20:18, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
::Reverted. What does everyone else think?
:::Could we see the two options side by side? [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 09:18, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
This should give you a rough idea...
Line 366 ⟶ 367:
<table class="collapsible" style="background:transparent" width="100%">
<tr><th style="background:#F8EABA; text-align:left; padding:0px;">'''Comments:''' <sup class=plainlinks>[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}/Comments|action=edit}} edit] {{·}} [{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}/Comments|action=history}} history] {{·}} [{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}/Comments|action=watch}} watch] {{·}} [{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=purge}} purge]</sup></th></tr>
<tr><td style="text-align:left; padding:0px; background-color:white; border:1px solid #c0c090; padding:5px; margin-top:5px;">{{ {{FULLPAGENAME}}/Comments}}</td>
</tr></table>
Line 372 ⟶ 373:
<table class="collapsible" style="background:transparent" width="100%">
<tr><th style="background:#F8EABA; text-align:left; padding:0px;">'''Comments:'''</th></tr>
<tr><td style="text-align:left; padding:0px; background-color:white; border:1px solid #c0c090; padding:5px; margin-top:5px;"><sup class=plainlinks><div style="text-align: center;">[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}/Comments|action=edit}} edit]{{·}} [{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}/Comments|action=history}} history]{{·}} [{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}/Comments|action=watch}} watch]{{·}} [{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=purge}} purge]</
</tr></table>
Line 393 ⟶ 394:
::(ec) Actually, it seems that {{tl|D&D}} has been altered to allow Bottom-importance anyway, so unless other projects want this it's a moot point. -[[User:Drilnoth|Drilnoth]] ([[User talk:Drilnoth|talk]]) 14:12, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
:::Thanks Martin! -[[User:Drilnoth|Drilnoth]] ([[User talk:Drilnoth|talk]]) 14:12, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
::::I don't have a problem with using custom importance masks ''per se'', just that coding it into the banner itself is computationally very expensive and fiddly, since a correct importance definition requires the class value to have ''already'' been normalised; either we create ''two'' layers of normalisation before hitting the actual code (messy), or we re-normalise the class value every time we need it for importance calculation (expensive because we have to use #ifexist:). In the situations where a banner is custom-coded to use an importance mask, that's not a problem, because you ''know'' that the custom mask will be there, you don't have to check for it. I've tweaked our own /importancescale subtemplate so you can call that instead of a D&D custom one; I'll have a think and see if it's possible to be more elegant than what you've done, but it's a perfectly satisfactory solution. Good thinking, too.
:::::I'm entirely willing to believe that it's difficult! But I don't quite understand. Importance depends on class but class does not depend on importance. So check the class first, then check the importance. Why would you need to do it twice? [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 15:09, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
:::::Hang on, I've got it. It would need an "intermediate" layer before the core. Yes, fiddly. [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 15:10, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Line 404 ⟶ 405:
[[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 14:15, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
:{{fixed}} good spot.
Unrelated error: AUTO_ASSESS_CAT is passed to core, but is not used. [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 15:07, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
::Needed a general overhaul <
:::Excellent. You're on form today. Umm, request two headers up? [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 16:01, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
:::Oh, and is there any advantage in being able to specify NO auto-assess category? For example COMMENTS_CAT=none allows that. [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 16:08, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
::::That's on the todo list somewhere... during the next blue-moon season... <
== Chemical Element ==
I'm working on getting {{tlx|Chemical Element}} to use WPBannerMeta at [[User:Peachey88/Sandbox/016]] but i don't think it's possible because it sticks the articles in multiple categories based on its rating, for example a FA class article would be in the following categories ''<
This should help:
Line 432 ⟶ 433:
</pre> -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 07:49, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
:Use {{tlx|WPBannerMeta/hooks/qualitycats}} instead of this direct call. The principle is the same, however.
== Some notes and a question ==
Line 451 ⟶ 452:
'''Current'''
{{#invoke:WikiProject banner|main
|PROJECT = Tulips
|small = {{{small|}}}
Line 459 ⟶ 460:
|IMAGE_LEFT = Tulipa suaveolens floriade to Canberra.jpg
|IMAGE_LEFT_LARGE = 50px
|HOOK_BOTTOM =
}}
'''Sandbox'''
{{
|PROJECT = Tulips
|small = {{{small|}}}
Line 473 ⟶ 471:
|IMAGE_LEFT = Tulipa suaveolens floriade to Canberra.jpg
|IMAGE_LEFT_LARGE = 50px
|HOOK_BOTTOM =
}}
Line 482 ⟶ 477:
:This looks promising. The bottom version does look okay. [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 15:10, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
::Finally! The sandbox version works great! This has been bugging me almost since this template hit the market it seems. [[User:Stepshep|<
Seems our spiritual leader is not around today. WOS, if you are confident that this will work then you could put an editprotected up. Apart from it looking fine on both browsers I have access to, I don't know enough about it to comment further. [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 20:32, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
Line 494 ⟶ 489:
Thanks -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 22:04, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
:Does the problem still occur now I've made [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3AWPBannerMeta%2Fcore%2Fsandbox&diff=264673287&oldid=264543469 this] tweak?
::Nope, that's broken it. [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 18:04, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
:::How interesting. How about [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3AWPBannerMeta%2Fcore%2Fsandbox&diff=264715302&oldid=264673287 the other part]??
::::Yes, that's looking okay. Why don't you install IE to test it :P [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 21:45, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
:::::True... well {{fixed}} in {{tlx|td}}, so hopefully the live template is sorted.
::::::All looking good from this end. [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 11:29, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
:::::::Looks good here too. [[User:Stepshep|<
== Comments' <code>colspan</code> ==
Line 508 ⟶ 503:
:In {{tlx|{{PAGENAME}}/core}}, there's also a <code>colspan="2"</code> that I think needs changing as well. <small>(The hide button moves on [[Talk:Banksia brunnea]] in IE)</small> -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 15:51, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
::{{fixed}} both. Took me a while to work out why the one in /core needed to be 3, but it's cos /note uses three columns.
Suggestion: I've been thinking about creating a subpage for bug reports. Non-controversial things which otherwise clog up this discussion page. Thoughts? [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 17:08, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
:There isn't really much that goes on on this page that ''aren't'' bug reports <
::I'd be more in favour of slowing the bot down actually! There is a discussion near the top of the page which hasn't reached a conclusion yet (I added an edit the other day to stop it being archived). There are some little things I find (e.g. small non-urgent errors) which don't need the attention of this page. But let's leave for now then. [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 21:54, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
== More on priority vs importance and hooks ==
Line 534 ⟶ 529:
Thoughts? - [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 09:33, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
:Or, since everything else is the same, the presence of those two parameters just prompts a 'swap' in what's passed to the first /importancescale. I can see that working. Please tell me no one uses a scale ''other'' than "importance" or "priority"??
::I've seen a few <small>(only a about 3 or 4)</small> templates with a {{para|type}} parameter which is to be set as Template, Category, Portal, Image, etc. when the banner was used on a non-article talk page, but I don't think that's worth supporting as they should really be using the FQS instead. -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 11:00, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
Line 562 ⟶ 557:
</pre>
then, to use it, all that would be required is <
-- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 20:15, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
:Looks good. Would be good to support Priority with a capital P because I've come across that before. [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 21:11, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
::Priority with a capital P can be supported in the Project Banner with <
:::You misunderstand. I saw a project (can't remember which now) which used, e.g. Low-Priority xxx articles, rather than Low-priority xxx articles. [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 22:16, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
::::I saw one project something similar for [[:Category:Evanescence articles by importance|Importance]] recently, so I've just put in a request for a [[Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Speedy|speedy rename]] after I'd converted the banner. -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 22:37, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
:::::The only project that uses "Priority" is WikiProject Mathematics. We're not adding something for one project out of 1,400. There are 26 projects by my count that use "priority". You have an interesting idea here, WOSlinker.
== Hooks and class masks ==
Question: should the class parameter be sent to hooks premasked, or should the hook pass it through the mask? It seems to me that the former is less user-friendly but is more efficient and also allows for custom masks to be used. [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 21:56, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
:Hooks should be responsible for ensuring that all parameters are handled as they would be in the template itself. So hooks should assume that all parameters are being sent in un-normalised, in shorthand notation, and using inverted camelcase <
::Hmmm, if you look at my [[Template:WPBannerMeta/hooks/qualimpintersect|category intersection]] hook, it would be necessary to call that mask three times! That's terrible efficiency ... [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 23:46, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
:::You might have to do qualimpintersect & qualimpintersect/core if you want to process it only once. -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 00:04, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
::::That's certainly one solution; it's worked for the main banner <
:::::You could also get them to show on the template page as well then which would be good. - [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 07:42, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
Oh, you two are good. Why didn't I think of that? I'll put my hook into a core straightaway. WOS, is there a way to do the templatepage stuff without affecting performance? I worry about having all the extra code on the hook. [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 13:52, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
:[[WP:PERFORMANCE|Don't panic]] <
::Ah, Happy-melon's favourite essay :P [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 14:40, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
:::Actually my favourite essay is [[WP:SENSE]], although it doesn't actually say what most people think it does. I actually care more about performance than [[WP:PERFORMANCE]] really condones.
Right I am now sick of [[Template:D&D]]. I lost count of how many times I had to use the custom class and importance masks so I did something which is probably a Bad Idea: put the whole thing into a core. <s>It seems to be working except that the core doesn't think it's the templatepage and I can't work out why not.</s> Any help to make this code more efficient is definitely welcome! [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 14:53, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
:And another thing which is completely annoying me. Sometimes it accepts D&D, other times you have to type D&D and there doesn't seem to be any logic to it. [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 14:55, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
Line 590 ⟶ 585:
How about putting the templates that are in /sandbox pages into a separate category, [[:Category:WikiProject banners under development]] say, instead of putting them into either of the two main categories. Could also do the same for any versions in the User space as well. What do you think? -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 22:34, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
:Good idea, but I'm not sure how you detect whether a page is in a /sandbox. Maybe the titleparts parser function? [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 22:39, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
::<
:::I've created that cat & it is now populated. -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 23:20, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
::::Wow, great! [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 23:38, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
Line 596 ⟶ 591:
On a related note, I would like to request the following. When BANNER_NAME = Template:XXX, the template will behave the same if it is in the sandbox, i.e. if the page name is Template:XXX/sandbox. This will help when moving a template from the sandbox into the main template. [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 22:41, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
:{{done}}. Note that my implementation breaks instances where {{para|BANNER_NAME}} is ''set'' as eg [[Template:WPAstronomy/sandbox]], these need to be fixed.
::We have a small problem here on my own WikiProject's template. We have {{tl|WPAFC/project}} which is a separate banner to {{tl|WPAFC}}. (Finally sorted out for good that problem of separating the two types of article!) But now your tweak to implement the above is affecting this template ... [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 22:16, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
:::Surely you can just set {{para|BANNER_NAME|Template:WPAFC}} and it will function normally, albeit by a somewhat counterintuitive method?
::::No, because it's looking for the custom mask in the wrong place! [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 22:32, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
:::::OH. <
::::::You should move it to {{tl|WPAFC administration}} (or something similar) and the redirect link would still be there. -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 23:38, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
:::::::I suppose I could ... but would it not be possible to interpret either the actual page name ''or'' the base page as the templatepage? [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 21:15, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
:{{fixed}}, although I see you've already moved the template.
== B-class checklist ==
Line 614 ⟶ 609:
:I ''love'' that, but please can we have it without the green background built into the image. We're moving towards having the colours coming entirely from CSS, which means they can be fully skinned. But if someone changes the B-Class colour (or if the default colour is changed) the image will look ''horrible''. But if we can have it with a fully-transparent background, then we're on to a winner.
:It's not possible to change the image when the collapsible section is opened.
::Might have to purge your cache, but the background is gone. This might be my lucky day after all. I've been without InkScape for..geez, verging on two monthsish? Anyways, it's working now. [[User:Stepshep|<
:::Great! Well done. Can we implement please? [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 21:17, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
::::{{done}} Looks great!
Just saw the updated version on [[Talk:German Empire]] and the greens don't quite match.
Line 627 ⟶ 622:
It's not actually an issue with the banner code, but actually to be a problem with [[Template:B-Class]] template. -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 23:27, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
:Further evidence of why we need these colours centralised. {{fixed}} in {{tlx|B-Class}}.
::<s>I'm interested in why it's rated B-class and not all the criteria are checked</s> ... Secondly, my idea was that this could take up just one line when it was collapsed. Did you try this? [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 23:41, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
:::<small>Oops, that would be my fault as I converted this banner! [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 23:43, 21 January 2009 (UTC)</small>
::::On my screen it ''does'' take up just one line, although the row is slightly taller than the others thanks to the image. What screen resolution are you using? Or have I misunderstood you entirely?
:::::On mt screen, the cell is twice the height as the C-class box above it. Resolution currently 1280x800. [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 23:56, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
::::::Appears to be double the class template size for me to; I also noticed on this particular banner the first [Show] is cut off. ([[:File:BannerMeta B-Class.png|Screenshot]]) Vista/IE7 1440x900 [[User:Stepshep|<
It's not this particular banner. It seems to be on all those that use the B-class checklist. I can see it happening on, e.g. {{tl|WikiProject Iran}} and {{tl|WikiProject Nevada}} as well. [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 08:53, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
<syntaxhighlight lang=wikitext>
{{WPBannerMeta/test|class=C|b1=yes|b2=no|b3=|cleanup=yes|~IMG_SIZE=30px|category=no}}
{{WPBannerMeta/test|class=C|b1=yes|b2=no|b3=|cleanup=yes|~IMG_SIZE=25px|category=no}}
{{WPBannerMeta/test|class=C|b1=yes|b2=no|b3=|cleanup=yes|~IMG_SIZE=20px|category=no}}
{{WPBannerMeta/test|class=C|b1=yes|b2=no|b3=|cleanup=yes|~IMG_SIZE=15px|category=no}}
</syntaxhighlight>
Here are a few different sizes of image. Which one is preferred? <s>I would also quite like to find a way of centering the "B" within the box, but we can play with that once we have a good size.</s> Preferences?
:Third one down? [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 14:03, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
::Could we have one where the [Show] for the checklist isn't cutoff? [[User:Stepshep|<
:::We could, yes, but it's so much cooler to only show the "sh", don't you think? <
::::Hehe, 3rd one down. [[User:Stepshep|<
:::::I think I've now fixed the cutting-off issue. Does it look ok in all your browsers?
::::::Looks great. 01:27, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
Line 654 ⟶ 650:
A couple of consequences: first, there's now no excuse for us not to add 'all options showing' examples to all hooks. I've done a few already, let me know if I miss any. Secondly, it means that we now need to pass {{para|BANNER_NAME}} pretty much everywhere, so we need to update docs etc, and existing banners, to make sure that examples are shown when they've been coded.
Thanks for all your help as always.
:The change you did to hook/peerreview didn't make it show in the templates but I've got a [[Template:WPBannerMeta/hooks/peerreview/sandbox|sandbox version]] that works. -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 22:36, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Line 663 ⟶ 659:
</pre> -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 23:52, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
:{{done}}, kinda. It works, anyway.
== Peer Review ==
I've been through the list of banners using the [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3AWhatLinksHere&target=Template%3AWPBannerMeta%2Fhooks%2Fpeerreview&namespace=10 peerreview hook], to add the <
However, it looks like a large number of them don't actually use the peer review system as they just have a red link to a peer review page:
Line 701 ⟶ 697:
-- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 20:09, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
:{{done}} the {{para|BANNER_NAME}} for the protected banners. I'd fully support removing any unused functionality from banners; after all, that's what this whole project is about.
::Thanks. I'll leave them a few days and then if nobody has fixed any of them, then I'll remove. -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 21:07, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
:::Instead of removing the peer review section from the banners listed above, I've just changed the link to [[Wikipedia:Peer review]]. -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 19:17, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
::::If the peer review departments are redlinked, then the project ''clearly'' doesn't use peer review, so there's no point having it in the banner. When an article goes for a wiki-wide peer review it gets a separate banner on the talk page anyway.
== B-Class assessment system ==
Would it be possible to add a hook for a B-Class check-list, like on the [[WP:MILHIST]] banners? That looks useful, and could come in handy. I can't code hooks, so I can't do it myself. '''[[User:Dendodge|<em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:blue">Den</em><em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:red">dodge</em>]]''' <small>[[User talk:Dendodge|Talk]]</small><sup>[[Special:Contributions/Dendodge|Contribs]]</sup> 12:12, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
:How about {{para|B_CHECKLIST|yes}} <
{{
|category=no|small=yes
|class=B
Line 721 ⟶ 717:
|IMAGE_LEFT=Tulipa suaveolens floriade to Canberra.jpg
}}
:
::/me feels stupid. '''[[User:Dendodge|<em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:blue">Den</em><em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:red">dodge</em>]]''' <small>[[User talk:Dendodge|Talk]]</small><sup>[[Special:Contributions/Dendodge|Contribs]]</sup> 16:19, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
I've just ammended the above example to highlight a potential concern. Is there not a better way to display the B-Class checklist instructions when the banner is set to small? [[User:PC78|PC78]] ([[User talk:PC78|talk]]) 16:45, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
:I've made ''an'' improvement, although it still makes the banner wider when it's uncollapsed.
== Portal link ==
Line 730 ⟶ 726:
:I'm sure that's possible, but if you're complaining about how text gets squashed up, try adding <code><nowiki>{{#ifeq:{{{small|}}}|yes|{{-}}|}}</nowiki></code> to the top of the main banner text. That fixes it (I know because I did it to {{tl|WPBeatles}}). '''[[User:Dendodge|<em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:blue">Den</em><em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:red">dodge</em>]]''' <small>[[User talk:Dendodge|Talk]]</small><sup>[[Special:Contributions/Dendodge|Contribs]]</sup> 19:23, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
::Not to worry, an #ifeq: parser function did the trick. [[User:PC78|PC78]] ([[User talk:PC78|talk]]) 19:17, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
:::Nooooo! {{done}} in /core, no need for scary hacks like that <
::::Many thanks! [[User:PC78|PC78]] ([[User talk:PC78|talk]]) 23:45, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Line 765 ⟶ 761:
etc. While this may be the ''de facto'' naming convention for such categories, it's also wildly inaccurate; these are not ''articles'', after all. Is there any way for the meta to resolve this? [[User:PC78|PC78]] ([[User talk:PC78|talk]]) 15:10, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
:The way to resolve it would be to rename all 10,000-odd categories that use that naming convention. I agree that it is counterintuitive, but it is the most common syntax in use today. Which is more important, being semantically ''correct'' or being semantically ''consistent''?? What ''harm'' does it do to have the categories follow an admittedly anachronistic naming convention? More importantly, what convention would you propose to replace it?
::There is still a significant minority of projects that use a mix of categories such as:
Line 789 ⟶ 785:
[[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 09:51, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
:1, I'm pretty sure, depends on the job que. You can get such things to update quicker by null editing the pages that need updated. While useful for the task, bots should ''never'' be used for such a task[[User:ShepBot|.]] <
:2, I created the [[Template:WPBannerMeta/hooks/collaboration|collaboration hook]], mainly by ripping the (excellent) code from the peer review hook :) [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 15:16, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
Line 797 ⟶ 793:
[[User:Msgj/Sandbox4]]
Could this be to do with the [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:WPBannerMeta/core&diff=262398035&oldid=261867280 2->3] edit? [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 07:05, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
:The {{para|HOOK_COLLAPSED}} hook injects to the bottom of the collapsible table, outside any defined cell or even a defined row (otherwise putting some things in it would result in nested tables or other wierdness). I'm not sure why Tidy moves content that's defined inside a table but outside any cell to a position ''outside'' the table, but that's not its fault. I've made the 2→3 col switch on /taskforce, hopefully that will improve handling.
::The Banksia template is still not working ... [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 09:24, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
== Unassessed Class ==
Line 833 ⟶ 829:
Hi, could you give us an update to when the listas parameter will work? See: [[Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#How to add listas sorting to a WPBM banner?]]. Thanks. --[[User:Funandtrvl|Funandtrvl]] ([[User talk:Funandtrvl|talk]]) 21:17, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
:When the developers see fit to fix {{phab|18552}}, which is really not a particularly difficult thing to implement; someone with shell access just needs to change one line of config and run one maintenance script (although I realise it might be a fairly epic run; it would essentially reset every category sorkey on every Wikimedia wiki). I would encourage people to go vote for that bug if you have a bugzilla account, and to otherwise poke the devs in any way you can.
::Okay, I voted for it at Bugzilla. Anything else we can do? Thanks. --[[User:Funandtrvl|Funandtrvl]] ([[User talk:Funandtrvl|talk]]) 23:08, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
== Portals ==
Line 855 ⟶ 851:
:Why don't we hold off on something like this until some things are decided, based on Kirill's comments here: [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council/Coordinators' working group]] -'''[[User:MBK004|MBK]]'''<sub>[[User talk:MBK004|004]]</sub> 05:04, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
:Indeed. While this is an interesting proposal, the change, as noted above, would be drastic and affect the entire encyclopedia and the work involved would be phenomenal. So we'd need to be sure that this had strong consensus and all ramifications had been considered. I would expect at least an [[WP:RfC|RfC]] to be conducted before a change like this was implemented. [[User:Msgj|Martin]]<sup>[[User talk:Msgj|Msgj]]</sup> 07:39, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
::''"If additional consensus beyond 5-6 people is needed for this change..."'' Given that the last time a change to the assessment scale was proposed, the consensus of over ''two hundred and fifty'' editors was barely considered sufficient, to suggest that such a phenomenal change should go ahead based on such a tiny consensus is ludicrous. There is a ''massive'' amount of work involved with implementing this change, even more than for C-Class. That work can be done silently, but it cannot be done lightly. Let's see mockups, let's see concrete proposals and, most of all, let's see wide community participation rather than closed off-wiki discussion. Policy is not made on IRC.
:::Okay; just thought I'd bring it up now. Once the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Coordinators' working group|Coodrinator's working group]] is up and running and both this and A-Class is being discussed by more projects, I'll probably write up a more full proposal for {{tl|CENT}}. Thanks! -[[User:Drilnoth|Drilnoth]] ([[User talk:Drilnoth|talk]]) 14:53, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
Line 864 ⟶ 860:
::You have to set the TF_1_ASSESSMENT_CAT parameter as well. I have done it for you. You now need to create these categories. Regards, [[User:Msgj|Martin]]<sup>[[User talk:Msgj|msgj]]</sup> 22:13, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
:::Thanks! Someone should probably add mention of that to the instructions here. [[User:Kaldari|Kaldari]] ([[User talk:Kaldari|talk]]) 22:20, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
Something along the lines of ''"TF_1_ASSESSMENT_CAT (Required) – the assessment category to be used for the taskforce-specific quality and importance assessments."''??
== Can't set up categories properly ==
Line 873 ⟶ 869:
== More taskforces? ==
An chance someone could modify this to support more taskforces? Perhaps up to 20? ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<
:Please see [[Template:WPBannerMeta/hooks/taskforces]]. You can add as many as you like, in multiples of 10. Let me know if you need help setting these up. [[User:Msgj|Martin]]<sup>[[User talk:Msgj|msgj]]</sup> 07:07, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
::Thanks. I'm looking to rework {{tl|WPJ}} to make it more flexible for expansion and such. This might allow that to work. ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<
| |||