Content deleted Content added
m Archiving 1 discussion(s) from Module talk:WikiProject banner) (bot |
m Archiving 2 discussion(s) from Module talk:WikiProject banner) (bot |
||
Line 602:
As more of the class assessments are now set automatically based on namespace and what templates are used on the page, I'm planning to add a demo_page parameter in order to test how the module will behave on different pages. [[Template:WikiProject banner shell]] already has such a parameter. — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 18:33, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
== Highlight conflicting ratings ==
I would like to propose a red border, or similar, when a rating is given which conflicts with the project-independent quality assessment. See {{oldid|oldid=1188186153|Talk:Freemasonry in Montenegro}} for an example of how it could look. — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 21:31, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
:Other suggestions:
:# Apply red border to the quality rating in the expanded version of the banner. The idea is that this should be a copy of the bubble in the collapsed version, so should convey the same information ideally.
:# Add a note in the banner to explain that the rating conflicts with the PIQA rating, perhaps with a link to an information page with details on PIQA and how to update the article's rating.
:None of this will apply to projects which have opted out of PIQA. — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 12:41, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
::I agree in principle. I have no thoughts on how it would look though. -[[User:Kj cheetham|Kj cheetham]] ([[User talk:Kj cheetham|talk]]) 18:37, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
:::I added the red border to the bubble. Regarding other suggestion 1, this will take more work as [[Module:Class]] needs to be modified. That might expedite the proposed merge of that module into this module. Other suggestion 2 probably makes sense to do at the same time. The usual wording could be replaced by {{green|This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible. See XXX for more information.}} — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 15:37, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
::::I have added the code for this to the sandbox, and there is a test on [[Module talk:WikiProject banner/testcases]] to show what it would look like. — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 13:05, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
== Listing of draft articles as unassessed ==
{{moved from|User talk:MSGJ}}
Sorry to bother you once again, Martin, but I have just noticed that today for the first time draft articles in WP Italy are now being listed as unassessed. See [https://wp1.openzim.org/#/project/Italy/articles?quality=NotA-Class here]. Do you happen to know if this is intentional and if so, why? You will see they are not listed under [[:Category:Unassessed Italy articles]] (but that's logical as they're drafts, not articles).--[[User:Ipigott|Ipigott]] ([[User talk:Ipigott|talk]]) 12:12, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
:Just dropping this here in case anyone has time to look into this issue — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 16:56, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
::I see the problem has now been fixed.--[[User:Ipigott|Ipigott]] ([[User talk:Ipigott|talk]]) 06:46, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
:::No idea what caused it, but don't think it was template-related — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 09:19, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
| |||