Content deleted Content added
m Archiving 1 discussion(s) from Template talk:WPBannerMeta) (bot |
m Archiving 1 discussion(s) from Template talk:WPBannerMeta) (bot |
||
Line 328:
My concrete plan is to move links from old reviews from this template to {{tl|Old Wikiproject-associated peer review}}, starting with Wikiprojects that have only a handful of reviews created this way, such as [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Peru]] and [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Greece]]. If it seems to work smoothly then I'll work from there. Eventually I think this parameter could be deprecated. What are others thoughts about this? Ping to {{u|Redrose64}} as you commented above. I guess my main goal here is to standardise how things are done, make peer review related maintenance easier, and also improve the overall peer review related process.--[[User:Tom (LT)|Tom (LT)]] ([[User talk:Tom (LT)|talk]]) 02:11, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
== HOOK_NESTED_ASSESS ==
WikiProject Japan (well actually just Nihonjoe at the moment) are exploring putting some additional information in the collapsed banner, e.g. when a photo has been requested:
{{WPBS|{{WikiProject Japan/sandbox|category=no|class=stub|importance=low|photo=yes}}}}
I think it would be neater to have that icon after the quality/importance ratings. Would it cause any problems to just move the hook to be after the bracketed portion, because I don't think there is any banner using both of these simultaneously yet? — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 14:45, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
:See also [[User:Headbomb/Sandbox/Banner#If_there_are_issues]] (3rd mockup, If there are issues), from a 2017 mockup. As well as 'Projects expanded' from mockup 2.  <span style="font-variant:small-caps; whitespace:nowrap;">[[User:Headbomb|Headbomb]] {[[User talk:Headbomb|t]] · [[Special:Contributions/Headbomb|c]] · [[WP:PHYS|p]] · [[WP:WBOOKS|b]]}</span> 02:48, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
::I've seen those examples before Headbomb and I like them very much. It's high time for an overhaul of the quality assessment scales, and we should centralise them (one rating for all projects) and take them out of the individual project banners. (It's very rare that two WikiProjects assess an article differently, and if it ever happens, it is usually "fixed" very soon by a well-intentioned editor.) Would be a massive project though ... — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 11:38, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
:::Am working on wikiproject-associated peer reviews as above, but I definitely think this is a worthwhile idea. I think it would have massive time saving impacts. --[[User:Tom (LT)|Tom (LT)]] ([[User talk:Tom (LT)|talk]]) 23:46, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
{{done}} Hook moved after ratings — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 12:38, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
| |||