Content deleted Content added
MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) m Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12) |
m fix lint issues |
||
Line 775:
:Sure, no problem. — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 09:03, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
:Certainly, fire away. [[User:Happy-melon|<span style="color:forestgreen">'''Happy'''</span>]]‑[[User talk:Happy-melon|<span style="color:darkorange">'''melon'''</span>]] 09:05, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
:If I'm not too late to this, I might be able to provide some insight in the conversion process for [[Template:WikiProject Anime and manga|one case]] that really didn't work out. <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>]]」<sup>[[Help:IJP|?]] · [[User talk:Dinoguy1000#top|Talk⇒Dinoguy1000]]</sup></span> 19:11, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
== Missing pagetypes ==
Line 858:
:{{tlx|portal|2=break=yes}} [[User:Happy-melon|<span style="color:forestgreen">'''Happy'''</span>]]‑[[User talk:Happy-melon|<span style="color:darkorange">'''melon'''</span>]] 18:40, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
:Although, of course, you really mean "is there a way to get the portal box ''produced by WPBM'' to wrap...?" [[User:Happy-melon|<span style="color:forestgreen">'''Happy'''</span>]]‑[[User talk:Happy-melon|<span style="color:darkorange">'''melon'''</span>]] 18:42, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
::Personally, I prefer [[Template:WikiProject Anime and manga|our style]]... ;) <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>]]」<sup>[[Help:IJP|?]] · [[User talk:Dinoguy1000#top|Talk⇒Dinoguy1000]]</sup></span> 19:17, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
::Hmmm. It would be trivial to add a parameter here that would activate {{para|break}} in {{tl|portal}}, but all that actually does is wrap the "portal" onto a new line. In this particular case it would be desirable to have the line break between "and" and "Alternative", but that would require a change at {{tl|portal}}. [[User:PC78|PC78]] ([[User talk:PC78|talk]]) 19:56, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
:::Think I solved the problem. It's looking a bit shorter now. — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 20:03, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
Line 884:
::::::::This is certainly an alternative idea, but having them both lowercase would seem more correct to me personally. — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 09:23, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
:::::::I understand your point, and we can certainly talk about migrating the categories (and you should talk to [[User:Dinoguy1000|Dinoguy]] about that because he was interested). However, you have probably noticed that making sweeping changes is often pretty difficult here, and they are much more likely to succeed if they can be accomplished as a series of small steps. That is why I am suggesting this as an initial small step, as it would be trivial to implement. After using a lowercase c for several months, it would be much easier to make similar changes elsewhere or to make the case to move categories. — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 09:23, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
::::::::[[User talk:Dinoguy1000#Class -> class|Did somebody call me?]] =D I'd agree with this change, but personally, I'd rather see it made incrementally, as MSGJ and Happy-melon are recommending. The problem with making a sweeping change of simultaneously converting all instances of "Class" to "class", is that this is only one facet of the inconsistencies in the current system. Such a change would require a decent amount of planning and preparation, to make sure the change gets done reasonably quickly, without a lot of breakage or inconvenience for end-users and bots and the like. All this planning would, frankly, be a pain to do separately for every single such inconsistency (not to mention the large degree of duplication of effort), so if a sweeping change is to be made, I'd rather see [[User:Dinoguy1000/Assessment category RfC|everything discussed first]], with the whole community, and an agreement reached on exactly what to change and how to change it. This way, we have a central plan of action for all such changes, we can use the same resources for the entire thing, and we can get all of it done at once. On the other hand, if we're changing one system at a time (or even just changing *one* system, period, as has been tentatively suggested here), incremental steps mean we only have to deal with far more localized problems, and the different steps can be more easily parceled out to different users and done at different times, with little more planning than just making sure everyone is kept up-to-speed with what any one person is planning to do. <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>]]」<sup>[[Help:IJP|?]] · [[User talk:Dinoguy1000#top|Talk⇒Dinoguy1000]]</sup></span> 19:09, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
:::::::::So, you support doing things "incrementally", but you also want to "get all of it done at once". Can you clarify what you mean because these seem to be opposite ;) — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 12:58, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
::::::::::Yes, I suppose my above comment ''was'' a bit confusing... Let me see if I can clarify (with extreme summarization; all my reasoning is already above): if we're only looking at changing "Class" to "class" for now, I'd prefer to see it done incrementally. If we want everything done at once, though, I would rather have [[User:Dinoguy1000/Assessment category RfC|'''everything''']] done at once. Does that resolve the apparent contradiction? =) <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>]]」<sup>[[Help:IJP|?]] · [[User talk:Dinoguy1000#top|Talk⇒Dinoguy1000]]</sup></span> 18:38, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
:::::::::::Okay, so I will take your response as '''support''' for this small proposal, and I look forward to taking part in your RfC whenever you get round to it. — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 19:46, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
Line 1,193:
: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]] {<sup>[[User talk:Headbomb|ταλκ]]</sup><sub style="margin-left:-4.0ex;">[[Special:Contributions/Headbomb|κοντριβς]]</sub> – [[WP:PHYS|WP Physics]]} 17:39, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
::I'm not necessarily ''against'' a greater distinction of pages based on type, but after reading above comments, I am led to believe that it would be best to add support via an auxiliary template which then gets hooked into individual banners for projects which want the additional functionality. WPBM then still maintains its primary use - WP:1.0 quality/importance tracking - and projects that really want to go to the extra effort and trouble to assess their lists while still noting that they're lists (most common possible usage) have a simplish (simple-ish?) way to do it. And I still have no interest in actually pursuing any such system in the above linked RFC draft; as I've said more than once there, that is intended merely to help line up and polish all the little trinkets we're already juggling, not to add new ones on top of them. <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>]]」<sup>[[Help:IJP|?]] · [[User talk:Dinoguy1000#top|Talk⇒Dinoguy1000]]</sup></span> 18:32, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
::Your whole argument hinges on your first sentence: "if you want to prioritize work [in this environment], you need [this] classification scheme". I don't take that as axiomatic. What's your justification for that assertion? Why does a project being able to separate its featured images from its featured sounds (and from its other media) help it to more efficiently improve the encyclopedia? [[User:Happy-melon|<span style="color:forestgreen">'''Happy'''</span>]]‑[[User talk:Happy-melon|<span style="color:darkorange">'''melon'''</span>]] 20:28, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Line 1,202:
::::::Since we already have FA and FL classes, it would seem simpler to add a new class for featured pictures rather than adding a new parameter (unless we are running with Headbomb's proposals). I think there is little need to track portals using WikiProject banners (typically there is no more than a one or two portals within a project's scope - it's hardly going to be hard to keep track of which of them are featured). I can see the use of keeping track of featured pictures though (I think I even suggested it somewhere) but would prefer FP to FI, or perhaps FM for Featured Media if sounds are to be included as well. — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 12:12, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
::::::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. — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[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>]]」<sup>[[Help:IJP|?]] · [[User talk:Dinoguy1000#top|Talk⇒Dinoguy1000]]</sup></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]].... <tt>:D</tt>
::::::::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|!}}? <tt>:P</tt> [[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>]]」<sup>[[Help:IJP|?]] · [[User talk:Dinoguy1000#top|Talk⇒Dinoguy1000]]</sup></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)
| |||