Content deleted Content added
m Archiving 1 discussion(s) from Module talk:WikiProject banner) (bot |
m Archiving 1 discussion(s) from Module talk:WikiProject banner) (bot |
||
Line 257:
:::::::The way that the pages in these 2 would-be categories are fixed is different. In 1, WPBS's {{para|class}} is kept. In the other, WPBS's {{para|class}}, if found, is removed. Someone working on these categories in the future might not know to check the redirect-status of the page before proceeding, and perform the wrong operation.
:::::::But, if there is to be only 1 category to contain both of these cases, then I think "unnecessary" is better, as it can describe both "redundant" & "ignored" ~ [[:Category:WikiProject banners with unnecessary class parameter]]. 2nd choice would be "ignored". With category text describing this distinction, regardless of the chosen descriptor. <b>~</b> <span style="font-family:Monotype Corsiva; font-size:16px;">[[User:Tom.Reding|Tom.Reding]] ([[User talk:Tom.Reding|talk]] ⋅[[WP:DGAF|dgaf]])</span> 16:27, 1 July 2024 (UTC) <b>~</b> <span style="font-family:Monotype Corsiva; font-size:16px;">[[User:Tom.Reding|Tom.Reding]] ([[User talk:Tom.Reding|talk]] ⋅[[WP:DGAF|dgaf]])</span> 16:42, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
== Warnings ==
I would like to add some prominent warnings when people try to use the {{para|class}} parameter in a project banner instead of in the banner shell template
# If {{tl|WikiProject banner shell}} is already on the page (but without a {{para|class}} parameter), then the message will say something like {{error|Please add the quality rating to the WikiProject banner shell instead of this project banner}}
# If {{tl|WikiProject banner shell}} is not on the page yet, then the message will say something like {{error|Please add the WikiProject banner shell template to this page and then add the quality rating to that template}}
I'm sure the wording could be improved. What do you think? — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 12:08, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
:{{tq|Please add {{tl|WikiProject banner shell}} to this page and add the quality rating to it.}} maybe something like this? Regardless, link the banner shell template. I'm in favor of the warning. [[User:Gonnym|Gonnym]] ([[User talk:Gonnym|talk]]) 21:38, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
::Yep, probably a link a [[WP:PIQA]] somewhere in there too — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 21:39, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
:::This should be expended to any parameter we migrate to the shell, like {{para|listas}} do deal with redundant, duplicate or conflicting data. [[User:Gonnym|Gonnym]] ([[User talk:Gonnym|talk]]) 16:20, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
::::This is now coded on the sandbox. Example of the first message can be seen at [[Module talk:WikiProject banner/testcases#Globally unassessed]]. the second message below — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 10:24, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
{{WikiProject Cycling/sandbox|page=Talk:Crakehall Mill|class=B|category=no}}
Okay this is ready to go, but I will wait for {{clc|Pages using WikiProject banner shell without a project-independent quality rating}} and {{clc|Articles with WikiProject banners but without a banner shell}} to be emptied first to avoid ugly warnings on so many pages — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 09:35, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
:Note: this is now deployed — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 12:17, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
::Is it too late for me to object to this? As I said at the template talk page, something like [[Special:Permalink/1240851078|this]] is just dumb; if we are going to force people to use the banner shell, then we should integrate it into every WikiProject banner automatically. I don't mind giving a warning if there's already a WPBS on the page, since it's a "hey, this is here, please put your banner in the right place", but for a page with no shell it shouldn't have a warning. {{ppor|no}} [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 21:26, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
::What Primefac said. On talk pages other than the main Talk: space, people should not be forced to use a WPBS, ''particularly'' when there is only one WP banner, because the autodetection of class is pretty much universal. --[[User:Redrose64|<span style="color:#a80000; background:#ffeeee; text-decoration:inherit">Red</span>rose64]] 🌹 ([[User talk:Redrose64|talk]]) 07:29, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
:::The error can probably be removed from the user space. Other than in user space (which the updated code isn't placing in [[:Category:WikiProject banners without banner shells]] (pages there need to be purged to reflect the update), so will not be relevant here), almost {{em|all}} pages have already been placed inside the banner shell, so any change at this point is purely disruptive, in addition of course, to the fact that no ones owns project pages so no one is forced into anything. Having the shell, even for one template, provides a consistent look across the entire project and allows any future update (which might be relevant to pages with a single template), to have an immediate effect. [[User:Gonnym|Gonnym]] ([[User talk:Gonnym|talk]]) 07:43, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
::::{{tq| no ones owns project pages so no one is forced into anything}} - by that logic, we should not be forced to use WPBS for a single banner by having big warning sign about it. And just to reiterate (and expand) on what I said above - I don't mind the warning if WPBS is already there (because that makes sense) and I don't care if a bot goes around ''adding'' WPBS (even for pages that have a single banner), my only concern is the massive warning given if WPBS isn't on the page already. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 10:40, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
:::::(No it's not too late to object!) We certainly can (and should) remove the message from non-article pages. For a start the message is incorrect, because these pages are detected automatically so don't even have a {{para|class}} parameter that needs transferring. What about mainspace though? We have no efficient method (that I know of) to detect the number of banners on a page, so we have to treat one banner the same as 8 banners. In mainspace we absolutely do want WPBS on every talk page. We are now 18 months into the new system, and it seems that a little editor education is needed, which is what the warning is trying to do. — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 19:26, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
::::::We also have a bot that, once the backlog is cleared, will fix/update any new pages that aren't following PIQA. Just a thought. It probably makes editors complacent (look how many dated maintenance tags get tagged by AnomieBOT every day instead of folks just putting the date, which is piss-easy) but that's why we have bots like this in the first place. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 20:10, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
:::::::Yeah, the bot is good when it works. For some reason it is not clearing [[:Category:Articles with WikiProject banners but without a banner shell]] very quickly — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 17:30, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
:::::::I have removed the warning (numbered 2 above) in the sandbox. Hopefully the bot will catch up with these soon — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 17:41, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
::::::::Deployed to live — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 14:45, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
:::::::::Thanks. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 14:52, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
| |||