Content deleted Content added
→WikiProject Higher education: thoughts |
|||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
Line 110:
:::::::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}}
Line 132 ⟶ 134:
: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)
| |||