Content deleted Content added
→WikiProject Higher education: misuse of syntaxhighlight - only the opening tag may be indented, on other lines the colons are taken literally; also, Lua is not Wikitext |
|||
| (16 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown) | |||
Line 15:
}}
{{archives|index=/Archive index|bot=lowercase sigmabot III|age=28|auto=short}}
— Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 07:52, 2 April 2025 (UTC)▼
== Misplaced banners by bot ==
Line 108 ⟶ 100:
</syntaxhighlight>
:::Apologies if there are errors, I never saw a line of lua until a few weeks ago, but I'd love to help in any way I can. Does this help explain what I mean? [[User:Tduk|Tduk]] ([[User talk:Tduk|talk]]) 13:51, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
::::I understand most of what you have written, but I still have no idea why you would want to do this, or what the end goal might be. What are you actually trying to achieve, that you can't do now? — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 16:46, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
:::::Really, I'm thinking about the future. No one anticipated what @[[User:Pharos|Pharos]] wanted to be able to do, but what he wants makes sense. I'm trying to think of a system by which others in the future can more easily [[Syntactic sugar|sweeten]] the arguments (in lua rather than a cumbersome template) to WikiProject Banner. Does that make sense? [[User:Tduk|Tduk]] ([[User talk:Tduk|talk]]) 17:25, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
:This looks really great to me, would be happy to adopt the [[Template:WikiProject Higher education/config]] system for that project, and then maybe see if other wikiprojects might be interested in it as well. Ideally this could go some way toward a simpler and more flexible system of wikiprojects/taskforces, especially if we're looking to consolidate more stuff as taskforces in the longer term. [[User:Pharos|Pharos]] ([[User talk:Pharos|talk]]) 17:12, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
::I'll look at coding something in the sandbox — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 09:18, 25 June 2025 (UTC)
:::I coded a mock-up of my idea which I described above, so maybe you can see what it might accomplish if you see an example. See [[Template:WikiProject Higher education test2]] (one additional arg, HELPER), [[Module:WikiProject banner ltest]] (small addition of code around line 150), [[Module:Higher education sweetener]] (essentially our original lua module but in reverse). Do you see how this might be useful down the road in ways we can't currently envision? [[User:Tduk|Tduk]] ([[User talk:Tduk|talk]]) 15:28, 25 June 2025 (UTC)
::::(anyone who wanted to add their own functionality would just need to provide the HELPER arg and their lua helper module - we could eliminate the arg and simply call it if an appropriately named one exists but that feels like asking for trouble). [[User:Tduk|Tduk]] ([[User talk:Tduk|talk]]) 15:34, 25 June 2025 (UTC)
:::::conceivably the lua module could even read in the config file as spec'd above [[User:Tduk|Tduk]] ([[User talk:Tduk|talk]]) 15:37, 25 June 2025 (UTC)
::::::Yes, that's what I had in mind. I have added some code to [[Module:WikiProject banner/sandbox]] and the effect can now be seen on [[Template:WikiProject Higher education/sandbox]]. Interested in your thoughts — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 11:13, 2 July 2025 (UTC)
:::::::Perfect, looks like you've solved the generalization problem entirely. [[User:Pharos|Pharos]] ([[User talk:Pharos|talk]]) 18:24, 7 July 2025 (UTC)
:::::::This does the job for this, but I would have liked to see a solution that was more expandable down the road by others that wouldn't require so much intervention into the actual banner lua code. (i.e. something less generic that wouldn't have a whole chunk of code just for taskforces in the global lua banner code) Does that make any sense? [[User:Tduk|Tduk]] ([[User talk:Tduk|talk]]) 02:05, 8 July 2025 (UTC)
::::::::No sorry, I can't understand your point. Can you give an example? I've put some of my thoughts below — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 15:30, 11 July 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::Maybe I'm missing something; what happens when someone comes along with a new parameter they would like to be added to the configuration file? [[User:Tduk|Tduk]] ([[User talk:Tduk|talk]]) 17:28, 11 July 2025 (UTC)
My thoughts on the possible benefits to moving to the configuration page approach:
* Simplification of syntax so <code><nowiki>{{{parameter1|{{{parameter2|{{{parameter3|}}}}}}}}}</nowiki></code> is replaced with something like {{para|trigger|parameter1, parameter2, parameter3}}
* Avoid having to pass through parameters completely, so things like {{para|attention|<nowiki>{{{attention|}}}</nowiki>}} will be removed
* Ability to do smarter things like comma-separated task forces (see above).
* Potentially add better support for projects like US Roads which uses {{para|state|AL}} instead of {{para|AL|yes}} and for Women in Red which uses an indefinite number of unnumbered parameters.
* More robust parameter checking and auto documentation which would include aliases. The current setup reads the wikicode of the template and attempts to work out what each parameter does. This has a performance impact.
* Significant simplification of module code which would make it easier for editors to maintain.
▲— Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small>
== Assessment issue with "inactive" WikiProjects ==
If I understand this correctly, when you set a project as "inactive" (by replacing {{code|main}} in the template), most of the the arguments from child templates are discarded (around [[Module:WikiProject banner#L-901|line 900]]). This means that if you mark a WikiProject as inactive, then it and all of its task-forces will lose their assessments, as the assessment categories are ignored and not applied.
I know that having a load of seemingly useless categories around isn't great, but the problem is that it's a bit of a death sentence for further collaboration if they disappear; mark a template as inactive and the project page ends up looking like [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Pipe organ|this]] (lots of empty/broken templates due to unpopulated/deleted categories). If someone wants to revive a WikiProject then they'd likely have to go through the process of recreating the assessment system, assuming they made it that far.
Ideally, I think it'd be good to have two levels: '''Inactive''' where assessments are kept, and '''Defunct''' where the categories aren't added. Pretty sure that'd be a huge change though. In the meantime, or as a fix entirely, could a check be added so that existing categories are populated so they don't get deleted?
This is quite relevant due to a [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council#differing criteria for inactive status|recent discussion]] at the WikiProject Council where they discuss labeling a load of WikiProjects as inactive using {{template|WikiProject status}}; this itself won't effect the assessments, but if anyone sees it then changes the status on the talk page banner, bad times. One of the comments on that thread from [[User:Psychastes|Psychastes]] says, {{tq|Inactive projects still retain all the assessments and article alerts, it's not like an inactive project goes away!}} If that's not actually the case, it needs to be made clear with a big ol' warning in the docs.
...again, assuming I've got this right. Cheers, [[User:Aluxosm|Aluxosm]] ([[User talk:Aluxosm|talk]]) 06:56, 9 July 2025 (UTC)
:You have understood the situation pretty well. There is a {{para|PROJECT_STATUS}} parameter, which accepts values like "inactive" and "defunct", but currently the only effect is a slight change in wording and a microformat. Yes it would be possible to change in the way you suggested, if there was consensus for this. The current situation rests on rough consensus from 2022; please see [[Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous)/Archive 73#Improper handling of assessment for inactive WikiProjects]] for more — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 08:26, 9 July 2025 (UTC)
::Good stuff, cheers for the link! Fun to see the origins of [[WP:PIQA]], and thanks again for all of your work on it. Thinking about it, a more resilient fix (and one that is beneficial in all cases) would be to make the creation of the assessment categories easier; I might take a look at rewriting [[Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/Generate_categories|this bot]], as well as fixing the templates so that they display a warning about running the bot instead of just erroring out. [[User:Aluxosm|Aluxosm]] ([[User talk:Aluxosm|talk]]) 03:43, 13 July 2025 (UTC)
| |||