Jump to content

Template talk:Documentation

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by SLXINGMAOSHE (talk | contribs) at 12:42, 2 September 2023 (→Edit request {{subst:#time:j F Y}}: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
WikiProject iconTemplates
WikiProject iconThis template (like all templates) is within the scope of WikiProject Templates, a group dedicated to improving the maintenance of Wikipedia's templates. This particular template is especially important to the project because it is used in the maintenance of other templates. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TemplatesWikipedia:WikiProject TemplatesTemplate:WikiProject TemplatesTemplates

Template-protected edit request on 28 May 2023

This edit request changes the generation of links to edit, view history, and purge. Instead of using fullurl to generate the link, it uses plain wikilinks via special pages for edit, history, and purge. The code is available in Module:Documentation/sandbox (diff). Testcases will need to be adjusted because they expect fullurls instead of wikilinks. SWinxy (talk) 22:37, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am getting a script error on Template:Documentation/sandbox, please check? This will need testing properly being deploying so do update the testcases as needed. Thanks. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:21, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Module:Documentation/config/sandbox probably needs resyncing to live (though im unable to do this right now since im on phone and the editor keeps fighting me) Aidan9382 (talk) 07:53, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've done that and it seems to be working properly now — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:26, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Izno (talk) 01:24, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@SWinxy, you can adjust the test cases yourself so far as I know. :) Izno (talk) 01:26, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:Template documentation § Heading level: 2 or 3?

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Template documentation § Heading level: 2 or 3?. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 20:34, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Template-protected edit request 22 July 2023

I'd like to implement two protected edits to the main module and /config submodule:

This code automatically detects if a transcluding page in the template namespace begins with "Infobox" and alters the header message to read "Infobox documentation" instead of "Template documentation" if that is the case. VanIsaac, GHTV contWpWS 02:19, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Is there some consensus this should be done? It seems unnecessary to me, since all infoboxes are templates. * Pppery * it has begun... 02:35, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well if you take a look at WP:Consensus, Bold Revert Discuss is a pretty prominent part of that policy. So yes, the BOLDness of this edit was unequivocally consensus. I happen to think there is a qualitative difference in development process and editor implementation with infoboxes that makes them unique enough from most "normal" templates to make recognizing those differences justifiable. I think calling them a template was up to this point just a convenience based on how that functionality was originally implemented, but given that I figured a mechanism for distinguishing them, I would call it unnecessary pedantry going forward to recognize only technical distinctions when we can do better. VanIsaac, GHTV contWpWS 05:50, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The bold-revert-discuss cycle works differently with protected templates. Besides, I wasn't just procedurally objecting to this request as needing consensus, but also providing my own opinion on it. And I'm still not convinced that infoboxes are anything more than another type of template.
Anyway, I'll let another template editor handle this request - if they think it makes sense then feel free to go ahead. * Pppery * it has begun... 13:42, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I'm not sure how TPEBOLD - a warning about bypassing BRD by advance permissions letting an editor impose their preferred version - remotely applies to someone making an edit request. Someone who wanted to revert would have at bare minimum the same functional permissions as I do to edit this module. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vanisaac (talk • contribs) 06:13, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That doesn't mean your request should get blindly applied either. You should expect admins to ask questions so someone else doesn't have to come along and ask for a revert. Anomie⚔ 10:29, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
And I think you'll find that I answered those substantive questions in the same edit I first questioned the procedural problem. I didn't stay with this line of concern over a single edit request, but rather I think the original insinuation of pre-clearance somehow being necessary is chilling to positive development on these kinds of templates and a direct violation of the principles behind the BRD cycle. It is that chilling effect that I want to nip in the bud. Edit protection is supposed to protect high-visibility templates from edit wars, vandalism, and technical problems, not to stifle their continued development. That has nothing to do with my innocuous edit request, and everything to do with the next one, ten, and three dozen edit requests that might not happen if less experienced editors perceive that they will be shut out of the process a priori. This is the last I will respond to this procedural concern here, but if you think there is an appropriate venue and you'd like to get larger participation for this discussion, please more it there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vanisaac (talk • contribs) 19:55, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I support the change. SWinxy (talk) 02:34, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think technically that the documentation is not for the infobox but for the template that produces the infobox — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:06, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would respectfully disagree with that assertion. Documentation is primarily for editors who are implementing the template/module/infobox/etc. on project pages, while template and module editors are a decidedly secondary audience. Those article editors don't care about the technical implementation, they just care about presenting the content they want to add. Having guideposts that point to that content-aware mentality helps reassure those editors that they are in the right place. This is exactly the sort of thing that wayfinding designers do in the physical world to help people navigate unfamiliar environments, and that's exactly what may of our editors are facing here. VanIsaac, GHTV contWpWS 20:17, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Any chance of an example (a link) with a description of what text would be different as a result of the proposed change? Johnuniq (talk) 23:41, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Uh, sure. You can compare template:Infobox Unicode block to template:Infobox Unicode block/sandbox, as long as no one edits either of the sandboxes in the meantime. The heading right at the start of the documentation is the only thing that changes, from Template documentation to Infobox documentation. VanIsaac, GHTV contWpWS 05:06, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. However, looking at those pages shows Template:Infobox Unicode block prominently as the title so having "Template documentation" as the subheading makes sense. Johnuniq (talk) 05:47, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – Who is the intended beneficiary of this edit request? Not readers of the encyclopedia, surely, because it's unlikely they'll ever be on a template page for an Infobox, reading the documentation. Then, who? Template:Infobox users, i.e., editors who want to know what the parameters are for a particular Infobox? Well, hiding the fact that an Infobox is, in fact, a template can only have a deleterious effect on those users if they are new; it *is* a template, and the parameters are template parameters; why confuse anyone and label the template as anything else but what it is? And if they're not new, it won't matter what you call it, and it's just a waste of time. Mathglot (talk) 08:58, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done: I'm aligned with the several above who think this is an unnecessary change, and a generally undesirable one from my point of view. Standard titles are desirable. There is also a slippery slope that this opens up to several different customizations that all ultimately become "template documentation". Izno (talk) 23:03, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Purge change?

Izno, did your recent change to the module break the purge function? I ask because now when I go to [purge] a template, it takes me to the purge verification page for the /doc (not the template itself). Primefac (talk) 10:55, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Testing shows that it's not that edit, it was the 17 June 2023 change. I don't have time to investigate further at the moment. Johnuniq (talk) 11:17, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh good, glad it's not my fault. I think that part can be more or less trivially reverted. Izno (talk) 16:48, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Should be fixed. Izno (talk) 17:21, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
o shoot it was my fault. Sorry! SWinxy (talk) 17:49, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

type error in message cfg.container

Hello, over at :species:Module:Documentation, as on :species:Template:BHL page, we are encountering the error message: "Lua error in Module:Documentation at line 144: message: type error in message cfg.container (string expected, got nil)."; is anyone who knows what this means able to fix it? Thank you very much, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 07:36, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Maculosae tegmine lyncis: This seems to be caused by Koavf importing the latest version of Module:Documentation to species:Module:Documentation, but not also importing the latest version of Module:Documentation/config to species:Module:Documentation/config. This has resulted in several necessary config fields being missing, among them cfg.container, the one shown in the error message on species:Template:BHL page. The way to fix it is either to revert the main module or update the config module. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 10:56, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This is why I hate importing. :/ ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:05, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
 Done species:Special:Log/Koavf. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:07, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Koavf: Almost - you imported to species:Module:Documentation/config/doc, but the correct page to import to is species:Module:Documentation/config. At the moment, species:Template:BHL page is still showing an error. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 00:11, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
 Done?????? All of them were "No revisions imported (all were either already present, or skipped due to errors)." This is why I hate importing. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:42, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request 2 September 2023

Description of suggested change:

Diff:

−
ORIGINAL_TEXT
+
CHANGED_TEXT

185.110.78.48 (talk) 12:39, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=Template%3ARequest+edit+button%2Fpreload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Edit+template-protected&preloadtitle=Edit+request+%7B%7Bsubst%3A%23time%3Aj+F+Y%7D%7D&section=new&title=Template+talk%3ADocumentation&cre PRESIDENTE CEO:DAIDAOXING

Edit request 2 September 2023

Description of suggested change:

Diff:

−
ORIGINAL_TEXT
+
CHANGED_TEXT

SLXINGMAOSHE (talk) 12:42, 2 September 2023 (UTC)https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=Template%3ARequest+edit+button%2Fpreload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Edit+template-protected&preloadtitle=Edit+request+%7B%7Bsubst%3A%23time%3Aj+F+Y%7D%7D&section=new&title=Template+talk%3ADocumentation&cre[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template_talk:Documentation&oldid=1173440312"