Content deleted Content added
MiszaBot II (talk | contribs) m Archiving 2 thread(s) from Template talk:WPBannerMeta. |
MiszaBot II (talk | contribs) m Archiving 4 thread(s) from Template talk:WPBannerMeta. |
||
Line 644:
::::Thanks, I've also tweaked to add an option for selected panorama since they have a seperate page. I'm a bit surprised that the portal elements don't have some standard split out page. -[[User:Optigan13|Optigan13]] ([[User talk:Optigan13|talk]]) 06:05, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
== More on QUALITY_SCALE ==
Following the [[Template talk:WPBannerMeta/Archive 5#Redundant parameters|discussion]] earlier in the year which didn't lead anywhere, I would like to present a more concrete proposal about how I think this parameter could behave.
{| class="wikitable"
|-
! value !! behaviour !! notes
|-
| ''standard'' or blank or anything else
|| Uses the standard 11 quality classes.
|| If {{para|class}} is not passed then no quality scale is used.
|-
| ''extended''
|| Uses the full 17 quality classes, currently employed by FULL_QUALITY_SCALE.
|| If {{para|class}} is not passed then no quality scale is used.
|-
| ''subpage''
|| A custom mask held in the /class subpage is used.
|| If /class doesn't exist, no quality scale is used and a warning and tracking category are triggered on /templatepage.
|-
| ''inline''
|| An inline mask (e.g. using {{tl|class mask}}) is used, so no further class mask is needed.
|| Suitable for custom masks that differ slightly from the standard ones and by projects which do not use large numbers of taskforce hooks.
|-
| ''yes'' || If /class exists then use it. Otherwise if FQS=yes use the extended scale, otherwise use standard scale.
|| I.e. current behaviour. Will be deprecated eventually.
|}
The idea is to:
*Avoid redundant parameters. It it more logical to use QUALITY_SCALE=extended rather than QUALITY_SCALE=yes, FULL_QUALITY_SCALE=yes.
*Remove the possibility of disruption to high-risk templates by creating /class inappropriately.
*Simplify the custom class masks of many projects, with the use of an "inline mask". Using something like {{tl|class mask}} is more user-friendly and easier to understand at a glance than using a subpage. For example for a project that requires the use of Template- and Category-Class, it might be a lot easier for them to use
<pre>QUALITY_SCALE=inline
class={{class mask | {{{class|}}} | Template=yes | Category=yes }}</pre>
This would not be suitable for more specialised class masks or banner templates that use a lot of taskforce hooks.
*The existing behaviour of QUALITY_SCALE=yes would not alter.
Opinions welcome. — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[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 <tt>QUALITY_SCALE=subpage</tt> 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 → 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 <tt>:D</tt> 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)
:::*WOSlinker: no strong opinion on that. Another approach would be to retain the same behaviour for {{para|QUALITY_SCALE|yes}} and gradually migrate over to =standard and =extended. I don't really mind either way though.
:::*I would agree that having no quality scale might be the best option in this case.
:::*Agreed. {{tl|class mask}} will certainly need full protection when it starts being used significantly. At the moment though, it's more useful to be able to have WOSlinker working on it :)
:::*Hmm, yes maybe. By "default scale" do you mean the standard 11-class scale? — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[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 <tt>:D</tt>
::::*Well there's always a way to get around that...
::::*Yes, the 'short' WP1.0 scale.
::::[[User:Happy-melon|<span style="color:forestgreen">'''Happy'''</span>]]‑[[User talk:Happy-melon|<span style="color:darkorange">'''melon'''</span>]] 20:39, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
:::::Okay good, I think we're getting there. I've updated the table above to what I think we're saying. Perhaps everyone could check that again. Now, I just need someone to check my priority-scale code in the sandboxes and I can start playing with this! — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 09:36, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
So I'm assuming everyone's happy with the above then?! Question: do we want to enable taskforce-specific quality scales. For example {{para|TF_1_QUALITY|standard}} {{para|TF_2_QUALITY|extended}}, or should these parameters stay as YES/NO? — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 10:38, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
:Whenever I've come across a banner that required a different quality scale for the taskforces, I just used [[Template:WPBannerMeta/hooks/taskforces|hooks/taskforces]] to add the taskforces. You could still add the option if you want to but it's easy enough to do already. -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 10:58, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
::Thinking about it a bit more, it's probably worth doing to be consistent with the main QUALITY_SCALE parameter, but the value of yes has a slightly different meaning for taskforces which is "Inherit the value set in QUALITY_SCALE". -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 11:04, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
:::Good idea, but wait. On the main banner we have the QUALITY_SCALE parameter. But the hook doesn't have a "overall" QUALITY_SCALE which it can inherit ... — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 11:08, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
::::There are other issues to look at for this, such as if QUALITY_SCALE=inline then all the builtin taskforces would need to be inline as well as class is only passed through once, so while it seems logical to have the options for individual task forces, in practice it's a bit more complicated to get it all to work easily. Might be best just to keep the option as yes initally for the builtin taskfocres and for the hook, just add the QUALITY_SCALE option (similar to how it will be added to the main template). And then once QUALITY_SCALE has been implemented, could come back and see if any changes should then be made for task forces. -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 16:02, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
:::::This is starting to take shape. Few thoughts:
:::::*I agree. Each taskforce in the main template or in a hook must use the same value of ''class''.
:::::*Instead of passing QUALITY_SCALE to /core, {{para|class|¬}} can be used to switch off the quality scale.
:::::*Is it a good or bad idea to have alternative names of parameters, e.g. B_CHECKLIST / BCHK and FULL_QUALITY_SCALE / FQS? To me this seems to invite confusion.
:::::— Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 09:10, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
::::::So you're saying that we only use {{para|QUALITY_SCALE}} in the mask? Yes, sounds viable to me. I ''don't'' think the alternative parameter names were a good idea in hindsight, I think I made a mistake in forcing those through. I stand by my original position (which is that custom masks shouldn't get these data) but I think the compromise we came to was the worst of both worlds, in retrospect. [[User:Happy-melon|<span style="color:forestgreen">'''Happy'''</span>]]‑[[User talk:Happy-melon|<span style="color:darkorange">'''melon'''</span>]] 09:24, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
I agree (although I wasn't going to say it so bluntly ;). Any help in testing and debugging this would be appreciated. The templates I've changed are:
*[[Template:WPBannerMeta/sandbox]]
*[[Template:WPBannerMeta/core/sandbox]]
*[[Template:WPBannerMeta/class/sandbox]]
*[[Template:WPBannerMeta/templatepage/sandbox]]
— Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 14:18, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
:Just done a quick test. Seems to be ok apart from on the templatepage, the category missing warnings are only working for the yes/standard scale. Also, {{tl|Class mask}} needs expanding to support B_CHECKLIST I think. -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 23:03, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
::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. — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[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 <tt>QUALITY_SCALE = subpage</tt> 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, <tt>QUALITY_SCALE = subpage</tt> makes good sense. — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 10:01, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
:::::I've changed all those banners to use <tt>QUALITY_SCALE = subpage</tt>, apart from the protected ones. -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 11:14, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
{{hidden|1=Pages which need <tt>QUALITY_SCALE = subpage</tt> setting|2=
{{columns-list|3|
#{{tl|Album}}
#{{tl|WikiProject Architecture}}
#{{tl|WPAstronomy}}
#{{tl|WPAVIATION}}
#{{tl|WikiProject California}}
#{{tl|WikiProject Canada}}
#{{tl|WikiProject Caribbean}}
#{{tl|Chemicals}}
#{{tl|WikiProject College football}}
#{{tl|WikiProject Cycling}}
#{{tl|D&D}}
#{{tl|D&D/core}}
#{{tl|WikiProject Ecuador}}
#{{tl|WikiProject Florida}}
#{{tl|WikiProject Formula One}}
#{{tl|WikiProject Germany}}
#{{tl|WikiProject Greece}}
#{{tl|GreenBayPackersProject}}
#{{tl|WikiProject Illinois}}
#{{tl|WikiProject Israel}}
#{{tl|WikiProject Japan}}
#{{tl|WikiProject Law}}
#{{tl|WikiProject Minnesota}}
#{{tl|WikiProject Molecular and Cellular Biology}}
#{{tl|WikiProject National Register of Historic Places}}
#{{tl|WikiProject New Zealand}}
#{{tl|WikiProject Norway}}
#{{tl|NovelsWikiProject}}
#{{tl|WikiProject Plants}}
#{{tl|WikiProject Romania}}
#{{tl|WikiProject Texas}}
}}
}}
:Nice work. <s>What's the best rule to get AWB to change these?</s> — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 13:55, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
::I've changed all these. I've also added a tracking category just in case you've missed any in the list above, or any of our changes get undone. — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 09:08, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
===Section break===
*So shall we move over to using the full parameter names consistently, i.e.
**FULL_QUALITY_SCALE
**B_CHECKLIST?
*And can we decide whether ''class'' should be passed as a named or unnamed parameter to the class masks? (I have a slight preferece for using unnamed.) — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 09:08, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
*I can't work out where is the best place to normalise the B-checklist criteria. If we do it on /class, it won't work with inline class masks (of course, we could decide not to use inline masks with the checklist). If we do it on {{t|class mask}}, then it won't benefit other custom class masks ... — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 12:09, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
:Don't mind either way for the parameter names. -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 18:01, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
::{{twomanrule}} Okay I'm ready for a last check please. Every test I have carried out seems to work fine. I'm testing the B-class checklist on /class but also passing the raw b1-6 parameters for the use of custom masks. Hopefully this is the best method. — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 15:19, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Well we seemed to resolve the last few remaining niggles, and this has now been implemented. Let me or WOSlinker know of anything unexpected please. — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 09:00, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
== Wikipedia Signpost article ==
Hello, everyone! I'd like to do a report on the development of this template and the conversion of WikiProject banners for an upcoming edition of the [[Wikipedia:Signpost|''Wikipedia Signpost'']]. Would anyone here be willing to answer a few questions on those topics? [[User:Kirill Lokshin|Kirill]] <sup>[[User talk:Kirill Lokshin|[talk]]] [[User:Kirill Lokshin/Professionalism|[pf]]]</sup> 00:43, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
: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 style=color:#080>ガイ]][[Special:Contributions/Dinoguy1000|<span style=color:#F90>千？！]]」<sup>[[Help:IJP|?]] · [[User talk:Dinoguy1000#top|Talk⇒Dinoguy1000]]</sup></span> 19:11, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
== Missing pagetypes ==
{{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 <tt>article</tt>. [[User:PC78|PC78]] ([[User talk:PC78|talk]]) 21:04, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
:Neither of these should be non-articles though. — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[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)
:::I think I deliberately didn't add it to those. It seems pointless to add extra parser functions for no purpose. I take your point about the infobox, and would be happy to put it back to "article". — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 06:58, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
::::Well... whatever. :) But I'd still like peer review to be fixed. You can see how it shows "page" instead of "article" at {{tl|WPBiography/sandbox}}, for example. [[User:PC78|PC78]] ([[User talk:PC78|talk]]) 09:29, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
:::::{{done}}, and changed the infobox wording in the sandbox, so will be implemented on next sync. — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 09:54, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
OK, you're quite right when you say that certain elements should only be used on article talk pages. It's a trivial thing, but I was thinking that for test banners in other talk namespaces, it would be nice if article/page/whatever was displayed consistantly. Let me try this pagetype thing from another angle:
{{WPBiography/sandbox|class=A|A-Class=pass|category=no}}
In this case, even though I've overridden the default Template-Class assessment, pagetype still displays "template". Should pagetype not default to the assessment rather than the namespace? [[User:PC78|PC78]] ([[User talk:PC78|talk]]) 10:17, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
:Ah well. I thought quite hard about how to code this logic. See [[Template:Pagetype/doc]] for all the details. I can't quite remember now, but I think I decided that most demonstration cases (e.g. documentation, test cases) would be in subjectspace, and indeed the behaviour you want is exactly what does happen in any subject space. In normal usage, a file is still a file whatever you class it as, so it seemed to make more sense to say "this file has been rated as A-class" than "this article has been rated as A-class". What your asking for, I think, is for the ''category'' parameter be passed to {{tl|pagetype}} so that it knows if it's "real" or a "demo", and this is probably far too much added complexity for little gain. — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 10:56, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
::OK, no worries. :) On a related note then, what do you think of [[User:PC78/article only]]? The idea is to have some way of suppressing certain parameters for non-articles without interfering with demo banners. [[User:PC78|PC78]] ([[User talk:PC78|talk]]) 11:19, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
:::Interesting. You've added it to the ''attention'' parameter - does that mean you don't foresee any need for a template or file to be tagged for attention? — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 12:04, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
::::Dunno. That was for testing purposes more than anything else. [[User:PC78|PC78]] ([[User talk:PC78|talk]]) 12:23, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
::::With this latter idea I think I was just being dumb. The desired effect would be best achieved with something like <code><nowiki>{{#switch:{{WPBiography/class|class={{{class|}}}}}|Category|Disambig|Template|NA=|{{{needs-photo|}}}}}</nowiki></code>; there's no reason for a test banner to behave differently to a normal banner. [[User:PC78|PC78]] ([[User talk:PC78|talk]]) 00:15, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
== What's in the new "extended" quality scale? ==
Does it include Redirect, Needed, Future, and Current classes?
If so, I'd like to float the idea to have {{tl|WikiProject College football}} use this new extended scale rather than a subpage. If not, perhaps using an inline class mask is more appropriate. In the past, the only reason WP:college football was using a subpage was to enable these classes - there was no other custom processing going on. It seems that there are now better ways of doing something straightforward like enabling less-common assessment classes. Thanks. <font color="red">[[User:DeFaultRyan|'''De''']]</font><font color="green">[[User Talk:DeFaultRyan|'''Fault''']]</font><font color="blue">[[Special:Contributions/DeFaultRyan|'''Ryan''']]</font> 16:51, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
:No. {{para|QUALITY_SCALE|extended}} does just the same thing as {{para|FULL_QUALITY_SCALE|yes}} used to do. However we now have the funky {{tl|class mask}} which I have just put on your [[Template:WikiProject College football/class|custom mask]]. (This can be put inline if you prefer, you just won't have that documentation page there.) — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 17:22, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
:(ec) There's nothing new. {{para|QUALITY_SCALE|extended}} is now equivalent to the old {{para|QUALITY_SCALE|yes}}{{para|FULL_QUALITY_SCALE|yes}}. So those classes are still unsupported. I'm not fully up to speed with what Martin's been doing with {{tlx|class mask}}; maybe that template has support for what you're looking for? [[User:Happy-melon|<span style="color:forestgreen">'''Happy'''</span>]]‑[[User talk:Happy-melon|<span style="color:darkorange">'''melon'''</span>]] 17:23, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
::OK, thanks for the clarification. Thanks also for the class mask edit. Keep up the good work! <font color="red">[[User:DeFaultRyan|'''De''']]</font><font color="green">[[User Talk:DeFaultRyan|'''Fault''']]</font><font color="blue">[[Special:Contributions/DeFaultRyan|'''Ryan''']]</font> 20:10, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
| |||