Content deleted Content added
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
Line 120:
* Significant simplification of module code which would make it easier for editors to maintain.
— Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 15:29, 11 July 2025 (UTC)
:I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "configuration page approach" - do you mean what you've implemented now? My concern is futureproofing it. My general approach though was basically coming from [[Object-oriented programming]], specifically pointers to functions. I don't see a reason why both couldn't be implemented. [[User:Tduk|Tduk]] ([[User talk:Tduk|talk]]) 14:37, 1 September 2025 (UTC)
== Assessment issue with "inactive" WikiProjects ==
Line 134 ⟶ 136:
: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)
| |||