Module talk:WikiProject banner/Archive 7: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 17:02, 7 June 2022

Revision as of 07:38, 24 October 2022

Line 84:

Is there any reason to use the {{tl|td}} template in [[Template:WPBannerMeta/core|WPBannerMeta/core]] rather than just using the contents of the td template directly? -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 12:45, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

:No, especially not now the styles can be applied through CSS (<ttcode>mbox-empty-cell</ttcode>, which I need to apply on {{tlx|td}}, actually). [[User:Also-Happy-melon|<small style="color:red">(also)</small>]][[User:Happy-melon|<span style="color:forestgreen">'''Happy'''</span>]]‑[[User talk:Happy-melon|<span style="color:darkorange">'''melon'''</span>]] 13:10, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

::Would get rid of [[Wikipedia:Database reports/Templates with the most transclusions|2,000,000 transclusions]] if the 3 occurrences were replaced. -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 17:08, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

:::{{done}} [[User:Happy-melon|<span style="color:forestgreen">'''Happy'''</span>]]‑[[User talk:Happy-melon|<span style="color:darkorange">'''melon'''</span>]]

Line 229:

Thoughts? [[User:PC78|PC78]] ([[User talk:PC78|talk]]) 23:01, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

:The <ttcode><nowiki>{{#ifeq:{{{class|}}}|NA|page|article}}</nowiki></ttcode> part of the peerreview template should be changed to <code><nowiki>{{pagetype}}</nowiki></code> as class isn't even a parameter in the peerreview template. -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 06:37, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

{{done}} I like all of these suggestions. [[User:Happy-melon|<span style="color:forestgreen">'''Happy'''</span>]]‑[[User talk:Happy-melon|<span style="color:darkorange">'''melon'''</span>]] 11:00, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Line 295:

*If {{para|peer review|yes}} or {{para|old peer review|yes}} and review page does not exist, add to INVALID_CAT

-- [[User:PC78|PC78]] ([[User talk:PC78|talk]]) 16:22, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

:Hehe, you made me break one check to fix another! Nm, we can do that easily enough: xor is my favourite logical statement, after all <ttsamp>:D</ttsamp><small> Yay! First smiley after coming back!</small> How does that look? [[User:Happy-melon|<span style="color:forestgreen">'''Happy'''</span>]]‑[[User talk:Happy-melon|<span style="color:darkorange">'''melon'''</span>]] 16:40, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

::Argh, now I'm not getting INVALID_CAT at all! ;) [[User:PC78|PC78]] ([[User talk:PC78|talk]]) 16:59, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

:::Where are you testing these? It's rather lazy of me to expect you to do all my debugging <ttsamp>:D</ttsamp> [[User:Happy-melon|<span style="color:forestgreen">'''Happy'''</span>]]‑[[User talk:Happy-melon|<span style="color:darkorange">'''melon'''</span>]] 17:37, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

::::{{tl|WPBiography/sandbox}} is rigged up with the sandboxed meta code. I don't have any tests saved anywhere. Typically I test the banner on a page like [[Talk:qhekwqjehj]] by previewing without saving, and on [[Talk:Jada Pinkett Smith]] for an example of an article with a peer review. :) [[User:PC78|PC78]] ([[User talk:PC78|talk]]) 18:18, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

:::::Fixed I believe (just a missing |). However it might be preferable to use CAT and OLD_CAT regardless of whether INVALID_CAT is used. For example, it is quite possible that the {{para|peer review}} parameter is to the template before creating the subpage for it. Due to the nature of categorising pages by template it would then be necessary to make another edit to the talk page before the category was updated. &mdash;&nbsp;Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]]&nbsp;·&nbsp;[[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 10:14, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Line 393:

:I think the change in layout on /core/sandbox was necessary, but it does make for a very messy diff. Looks ok though. I don't think it's a good idea to expose {{para|IMPN}} on WPBM, though: it destroys our Zero <s>One</s> Two Inifinity rule on scale names, isn't necessary AFAICT given that there are only two scales in use, and is going to make life even more difficult on /templatepage... Is there a reason to expose it?

:I'm not surprised the /templatepage stuff isn't working; the substitution stuff ''desperately'' needs string functions. I once tried adding optional subst to {{tlx|str sub}}, it was a complete disaster <ttsamp>:D</ttsamp> [[User:Happy-melon|<span style="color:forestgreen">'''Happy'''</span>]]‑[[User talk:Happy-melon|<span style="color:darkorange">'''melon'''</span>]] 09:34, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

::I think it is necessary to expose it. (You'll notice it was added as an after-thought.) The main reason for supporting this is to aid the conversion of WPBiography, and they use priority for their taskforces but do not have an "overall" priority scale. The only way to do this (I think) is to pass IMPN but not to pass ''importance'' or ''priority''. &mdash;&nbsp;Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]]&nbsp;·&nbsp;[[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 09:44, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

:::You could get around that issue by only using the hooks to add taskforces for WPBiography. -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 10:06, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Line 407:

&mdash;&nbsp;Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]]&nbsp;·&nbsp;[[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 08:11, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

:{{done|All done}}. I even remembered to remove /sandbox from the code this time :) &mdash;&nbsp;Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]]&nbsp;·&nbsp;[[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 22:10, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

::Well you're certainly doing [[rev:55991|better than me]] <ttsamp>:D</ttsamp> Looks nice... [[User:Happy-melon|<span style="color:forestgreen">'''Happy'''</span>]]‑[[User talk:Happy-melon|<span style="color:darkorange">'''melon'''</span>]] 22:17, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

:::Aww, is that the equivalent of being rolled back? &mdash;&nbsp;Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]]&nbsp;·&nbsp;[[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 07:23, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

::::Yeah, essentially; Brion said to work it up in a branch so any creases could be ironed out. Essentially I broke the login form on translatewiki for 12 hours; people had to log in using the API because the regular login form just looped the cookie check ad infinitum... <ttsamp>:S</ttsamp> [[User:Happy-melon|<span style="color:forestgreen">'''Happy'''</span>]]‑[[User talk:Happy-melon|<span style="color:darkorange">'''melon'''</span>]] 08:59, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

== SMALL_TEXT? ==

Line 415:

Any thoughts on adding a {{para|SMALL_TEXT}} parameter to the main banner? It might help encourage projects using {{para|MAIN_TEXT}} to add more concise wording for small banners, and for those that already do it would eliminate the need to use parser functions in {{para|MAIN_TEXT}}. Just an idea. [[User:PC78|PC78]] ([[User talk:PC78|talk]]) 14:33, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

:Last discussed [[Template_talk:WPBannerMeta/Archive_4#.7B.7B.7Bsmall.7D.7D.7D_and_template_length|here]]. If this option was used widely, then it would be a good idea. But it's hardly used at all I think. &mdash;&nbsp;Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]]&nbsp;·&nbsp;[[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 18:03, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

::A whopping 0.02% of banners, in fact. I hate the small parameter, and the small tmbox style in general (as opposed to the small ambox, which I think is adorably cute <ttsamp>:D</ttsamp>). I remember having a cleanout of that category once, and found a lot of 'small' banners ''also'' inside shells; so many that I tweaked the tmbox CSS to ensure that the nesting automagic overrides the small parameter. I just ran a Toolserver DB query: 141 of those 513 pages also transclude {{tlx|WikiProjectBannerShell}}. So some of those 'small' banners could actually not be small at all... [[User:Happy-melon|<span style="color:forestgreen">'''Happy'''</span>]]‑[[User talk:Happy-melon|<span style="color:darkorange">'''melon'''</span>]] 21:15, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Listy. Sorry for the text explosion, can't think of a better place to put it... [[User:Happy-melon|<span style="color:forestgreen">'''Happy'''</span>]]‑[[User talk:Happy-melon|<span style="color:darkorange">'''melon'''</span>]] 21:46, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Line 567:

Ah well. I'll get my coat... :) [[User:PC78|PC78]] ([[User talk:PC78|talk]]) 00:08, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

:Quite a few on that list have a {{tl|FAOL}} or {{tl|Talk Spoken Wikipedia}} with the <ttcode>small=yes</ttcode> parameter outside of the {{tl|WikiProjectBannerShell}} though. -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 09:42, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

== Auto=yes is a bit intrusive ==

Line 680:

Opinions welcome. &mdash;&nbsp;Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]]&nbsp;·&nbsp;[[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 09:18, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

:Sounds good, but if this is implemented then all the banners currently [[:Category:WPBannerMeta templates using custom classes|using custom classes]] should then be changed to use <ttcode>QUALITY_SCALE=subpage</ttcode> and then whenever the ''yes'' or ''default'' options are then used, the banner code would no longer use /class if exists. -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 09:51, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

::Looks good. Some thoughts:

::#"subpage" and /class mask doesn't exist &rarr; what behaviour? I'm tempted to say "no quality scale at all". This was something we discussed last time but didn't conclude on.

::#I love {{tlx|class mask}}! Another one to add to WPBM's growing harem of templates <ttsamp>:D</ttsamp> Not sure I'd be happy turning off WPBM's own masking in favour of a semi-protected template, though. We might have to bump up the protection (and attention) on that 'offshoot' if we integrate it this deeply.

::#Do we want to try and work on some automagic for {{para|class}}?? That is, if {{para|QUALITY_SCALE}} is not defined but class is passed through, automagically switch to the default scale? Again, something we thought about in April but never really decided on.

::Glad to see this moving again. [[User:Happy-melon|<span style="color:forestgreen">'''Happy'''</span>]]‑[[User talk:Happy-melon|<span style="color:darkorange">'''melon'''</span>]] 11:39, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Line 692:

:::*Hmm, yes maybe. By "default scale" do you mean the standard 11-class scale? &mdash;&nbsp;Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]]&nbsp;·&nbsp;[[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 16:47, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

::::*I agree with Martin: we should retain the current behaviour of {{para|QUALITY_SCALE|yes}} - that is, full automagic, nothing assumed. If we implement automagic on {{para|class}} then that value becomes deprecated in favour of no {{para|QUALITY_SCALE}} at all.

::::*That was easy <ttsamp>:D</ttsamp>

::::*Well there's always a way to get around that...

::::*Yes, the 'short' WP1.0 scale.

Line 717:

::Thanks for the check. I've got a few tests of my own to complete yet. What should we do about the category warnings? They are impossible/difficult to check for the ''inline'' and ''subpage'' options ... We could maybe add a {{para|topic}} parameter to {{tl|class mask}} and put category warnings on the /class page. By the way, I'm coming round to your idea of treating ''yes'' the same as ''standard'', once templates with subpages have been converted over. &mdash;&nbsp;Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]]&nbsp;·&nbsp;[[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 08:17, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

:::For the inline scale, the banner could provide the same warnings as the standard scale since if inline is only going to be used with class mask then it's going to have at least the standard scale. A topic parameter on class maks for /class pages would be a good addition as well. -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 09:24, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

::::Another thought, we could actually set <ttcode>QUALITY_SCALE = subpage</ttcode> now, (already tried it on [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:WikiProject_24&diff=313540014&oldid=300349969 one banner]. And then you could simplify your WPBannerMeta/class/sandbox a little. -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 09:26, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

::::At the moment it contains at least the standard scale, but I foresee a possibility of allowing some to be turned off (e.g. A-class) in the future. Yes, <ttcode>QUALITY_SCALE = subpage</ttcode> makes good sense. &mdash;&nbsp;Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]]&nbsp;·&nbsp;[[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 10:01, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

:::::I've changed all those banners to use <ttcode>QUALITY_SCALE = subpage</ttcode>, apart from the protected ones. -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 11:14, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

{{hidden|1=Pages which need <ttcode>QUALITY_SCALE = subpage</ttcode> setting|2=

{{columns-list|colwidth=22em|

#{{tl|Album}}

Line 781:

{{tl|pagetype}} needs to be added in a few places:

*At {{tl|WPBannerMeta/hooks/peerreview}} for the template version of "old peer review", which currently uses <code><nowiki>{{#if:{{SUBJECTSPACE}}|page|article}}</nowiki></code>.

*At {{tl|WPBannerMeta/core}} for "auto", which currently uses <ttsamp>article</ttsamp>. [[User:PC78|PC78]] ([[User talk:PC78|talk]]) 21:04, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

:Neither of these should be non-articles though. &mdash;&nbsp;Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]]&nbsp;·&nbsp;[[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 21:07, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

::Sure, but you have pagetype everywhere else (actually, it's missing at {{tl|WPBannerMeta/hooks/aclass}} too), so this is for consistancy more than anything else. You wouldn't tag a non-article as needing an infobox, yet pagetype is used there. It should be fixed for peer review, if nothing else. [[User:PC78|PC78]] ([[User talk:PC78|talk]]) 21:26, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Line 827:

Also, I would like to suggest that we adopt a standard size for such icons, because there is currently a certain amount of inconsistancy:

*Task forces, notes, auto assessment and peer review all default to <ttsamp>30px</ttsamp>.

*Needs-attention and needs-infobox are both fixed at <ttsamp>20px</ttsamp>.

*A-Class review defaults to <ttsamp>18x18px</ttsamp>.

Personally I would prefer to adopt a standard of <ttsamp>25px</ttsamp> or <ttsamp>25x25px</ttsamp>, that way icons won't look too big when placed next to a single line of text, and not too small against two or more lines of text. (Actually my preference would be <ttsamp>x25px</ttsamp>, but that doesn't appear to stretch smaller images - I don't know if that's a bug or not.)

Thoughts? [[User:PC78|PC78]] ([[User talk:PC78|talk]]) 19:40, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Line 850:

Can we go ahead and implement these four icon changes? Any thoughts about what I said above regarding default icon sizes? [[User:PC78|PC78]] ([[User talk:PC78|talk]]) 02:15, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

:Tempting though it is to refuse until you do it yourself, {{done}} <ttsamp>:D</ttsamp> [[User:Happy-melon|<span style="color:forestgreen">'''Happy'''</span>]]‑[[User talk:Happy-melon|<span style="color:darkorange">'''melon'''</span>]] 11:16, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

== Portal box ==

Line 872:

<small>I have placed a notification on [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council]] about this proposal. &mdash;&nbsp;Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]]&nbsp;·&nbsp;[[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 11:45, 9 September 2009 (UTC)</small>

Renaming thousands of categories may never happen, but we can at least change '''XXX-Class''' to '''XXX-class''' in all the text in the banner, and continue to link to the same categories, can't we? This will make it consistent with importance/priority which use a lowercase initial letter. &mdash;&nbsp;Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]]&nbsp;·&nbsp;[[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 15:08, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

:Is this "think big" week? <ttsamp>:D</ttsamp> I can't see any real downsides with doing this. [[User:Happy-melon|<span style="color:forestgreen">'''Happy'''</span>]]‑[[User talk:Happy-melon|<span style="color:darkorange">'''melon'''</span>]] 15:59, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

::I'm not so keen. Simply changing it here would make things more ''in''consistant, with the categories (as noted above), with other non-WPBM banners, with the [[WP:1.0]] logs, and wherever else '''XXX-Class''' is commonly used. I'm certainly not against a capitalisation change, but would prefer it to be done across the board. [[User:PC78|PC78]] ([[User talk:PC78|talk]]) 16:14, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

:::Yes, but we have to start somewhere, and it makes sense to start on the most widely-used template. I don't mind tracking down other templates and changing them. &mdash;&nbsp;Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]]&nbsp;·&nbsp;[[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 17:00, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Line 907:

<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 913:

<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><center>[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}/Comments|action=edit}} edit]{{·}} [{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}/Comments|action=history}} history]{{·}} [{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}/Comments|action=watch}} watch]{{·}} [{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=purge}} purge]</center></sup><br />{{ {{FULLPAGENAME}}/Comments}}</td>

</tr></table>

Line 1,143:

Thanks, –[[user:xeno|<b style="font-family:verdana; color:black;">xeno</b>]][[user talk:xeno|<sup style="color:black;">talk</sup>]] 20:25, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

:{{doing|Thinking}} not ignoring ;) &mdash;&nbsp;Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]]&nbsp;·&nbsp;[[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 12:45, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

::Me too; I think this is good, but it has caveats to work through. I think we'll want to implement something like {{para|auto|stub}}, {{para|auto|inherit}}, and {{para|auto|yes}} as B/C for "stub". I shall await Martin's words of wisdom... <ttsamp>:D</ttsamp> [[User:Happy-melon|<span style="color:forestgreen">'''Happy'''</span>]]‑[[User talk:Happy-melon|<span style="color:darkorange">'''melon'''</span>]] 13:04, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

:::Yes, I had thought about that as well. We could go one further and allow "auto=XX" for any class, and then if class= does not match auto=, the auto verbiage is suppressed and some kind of maintenance category could be added (Automatically assessed articles that have been re-rated... or something) for a bot or human to clear the auto flag. –[[user:xeno|<b style="font-family:verdana; color:black;">xeno</b>]][[user talk:xeno|<sup style="color:black;">talk</sup>]] 13:07, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

No words of wisdom, but a few points:

Line 1,189:

:::See [[Special:PrefixIndex/Wikipedia:Books]] for example (and [[Help:Books]]). [Also this wouldn't encourage the assessing of templates anymore that allowing the importance rating for template encourages the "importancing" of templates]. [[User:Headbomb|Headbomb]]&nbsp;{^{[[User talk:Headbomb|ταλκ]]}<sub style="margin-left:-4.0ex;">[[Special:Contributions/Headbomb|κοντριβς]]</sub>&nbsp;&ndash;&nbsp;[[WP:PHYS|WP Physics]]} 15:14, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

::::Also, while templates might not "need" assessing, the new [[Wikipedia:Article alerts]] function works on the basis of the pages in question either having the banner placed on them or being included in the categories generated by the banners, which, in effect, makes it more useful for the template to have some sort of parameter to use on them, even if only the extant NA. And again, whether for good or ill, I was thinking that many of the banners already have an "Image" class, and that the two other classes which have a "Featured" variant also have separate assessment grades for them, so adding this grade seemed at least to me to be sonsistent with the prior work done on the template. [[User:John Carter|John Carter]] ([[User talk:John Carter|talk]]) 17:26, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

The purposes of the assessment system are 1) to assist WP1.0 in selecting articles for static releases, and 2) to assist WikiProject members in prioritising their work. The purpose of WPBM's assessment code is to technically support the assessment system, and to minimise the administrative overhead associated with a project managing its slice of the assessment system. The purpose of the template is not to allow people to categorise things to an arbitrary precise degree, except where that furthers those two goals above. <p>Adding a {{para|type}} parameter multiplies the number of possible permutations of the assessment scheme by however many type values you allow; probably by around five or six times. Maintaining this very large number of possibilities significantly increases the administrative cost of the assessment system. What benefit does it provide? More importantly, how does it allow the limited resources of the WikiProject to be applied to a sufficiently better degree to outweigh the time cost of implementing the system? Saying that "a project isn't interested in assessing lists..." is disingenuous because you are not proposing a system that gives individual projects choice. This would be a change more akin to the C-Class introduction, something that would be possible, but difficult, for projects to opt out of. And recall the problems that those projects found with C-Class; except for a tiny handful of projects that run regular assessment drives, I'd say 95% of tag-and-assess is done by users who are not 'members' of the project they are tagging for. The C-Class optouts found that they were still accumulating large numbers of C-Class articles, because passing editors were 'helpfully' tagging them thus. With a change this extensive, it would be impossible for projects to opt-out entirely: either they implement the system and shoulder the increased administrative costs, or they shoulder the administrative costs ''anyway'' in keeping things the way they were. So the costs are unavoidable. Where are the benefits?</p> [[User:Happy-melon|<span style="color:forestgreen">'''Happy'''</span>]]‑[[User talk:Happy-melon|<span style="color:darkorange">'''melon'''</span>]] 16:42, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

:Concerning "objective 2)", if you want to prioritize work when you have >3 million pages to monitor (and I don't know how many category, books, topics, images...), you need a solid classification scheme. The encyclopedia consists of more than just the articles. There are categories, lists (also "articles" in a way), books, topics, and so on. If you introduce the type parameter, you can now assess lists, topics, books, and so on, thus allowing to identify which of them needs works. These are the benefits. And there is a demand for it.<br><br>Saying "if a project isn't interested in..." is not disingenuous in the least. Many project don't use the list-class. Some don't even use the "FA" and "FL" classes (Chemistry project comes to mind). Others don't tag their redirects. What I'm proposing gives no less a choice than Project already have. If you don't want to assess lists, don't assess them. If you don't want to keep track of topics, don't tag them with the banner. If you don't care about tagging templates, don't tag them.<br><br>For the C-Class opt out, if the passerby tagging of C-Class really is a problem, then hardcode a "C-Class = Yes" in the metabanner. If this isn't passed, then have the banner treat "|class=C" as "|class=Start". Problem solved, at no costs to WikiProjects. [[User:Headbomb|Headbomb]]&nbsp;{^{[[User talk:Headbomb|ταλκ]]}<sub style="margin-left:-4.0ex;">[[Special:Contributions/Headbomb|κοντριβς]]</sub>&nbsp;&ndash;&nbsp;[[WP:PHYS|WP Physics]]} 17:39, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Line 1,203:

::::::I've found [[Template_talk:Grading_scheme#Overhaul|where it came up before]]. There were some reservations about FP-class because of the ambiguity between Pictures/Portals. FF-class (Featured file) was also suggested by Dinoguy over there. &mdash;&nbsp;Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]]&nbsp;·&nbsp;[[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 12:17, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

:::::::Heh, I remember that... *imagines a new user seeing "FF-class page" and thinking "wait, this page is Final Fantasy class?"* XD (oh, and I still want to do something with Featured Templates, but I'm hopelessly unmotivated) <span style=white-space:nowrap>「[[User:Dinoguy1000|<span style=color:#00f>ダイノ</span><span style=color:#080>ガイ</span>]][[Special:Contributions/Dinoguy1000|<span style=color:#F90>千？！</span>]]」^{[[Help:IJP|?]] · [[User talk:Dinoguy1000#top|Talk⇒Dinoguy1000]]}</span> 19:29, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

::::::::If we're going to go down that line, I'd support FM. I doubt we're ever going to set up [[Wikipedia:Featured MediaWiki system messages]].... <ttsamp>:D</ttsamp>

::::::::Featured Templates? Nice idea, but utter hell to set criteria for. Which is most elegible for featured-ness, {{tlx|ambox}}, {{tlx|str sub}} or {{tlx|!}}? <ttsamp>:P</ttsamp> [[User:Happy-melon|<span style="color:forestgreen">'''Happy'''</span>]]‑[[User talk:Happy-melon|<span style="color:darkorange">'''melon'''</span>]] 22:22, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

:::::::::Actually, I like to think about a possible FT process, and I do have a usable set of criteria, I think, though they probably need further polishing. When I have more time, maybe I'll start a subpage draft in my userspace (teaser: any template, regardless of complexity, could be nominated as long as it's got clean, bug-free source or is well-maintained and is reasonably well-used... or something - like I said, needs polishing). =) <span style=white-space:nowrap>「[[User:Dinoguy1000|<span style=color:#00f>ダイノ</span><span style=color:#080>ガイ</span>]][[Special:Contributions/Dinoguy1000|<span style=color:#F90>千？！</span>]]」^{[[Help:IJP|?]] · [[User talk:Dinoguy1000#top|Talk⇒Dinoguy1000]]}</span> 22:26, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

::::::::::Can't say I'm terribly enthusiastic about "Featured Media" because it's an invented term. I was actually thinking that HM was on the right track with his previous suggestion. [[User:PC78|PC78]] ([[User talk:PC78|talk]]) 22:32, 14 October 2009 (UTC)