Jump to content

Module talk:WikiProject banner/Archive 5

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by MiszaBot II (talk | contribs) at 08:13, 5 May 2009 (Archiving 2 thread(s) from Template talk:WPBannerMeta.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Archive 1Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7Archive 10

"Investigate balance of C_NOTEs vs TFs"

As promised... From the tracking category, we see that 27 banners use one or more of the collapsed notes. From WhatLinksHere, we see that 21 banners use the /taskforces hook, indicating that they have an inadequate number of taskforces built into the banner. These results surprised me a little, I admit, but they seem correct. I remember that several of the projects using the hook have a huge number of taskforces, such that it would be a hopeless task trying to add enough taskforces for them. Consequently, and a little surprisingly, I don't think there's anything to be done here. Comments? Happymelon 19:36, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Another question that could be asked is: Should WPBannerMeta still support the collapsed notes directly or should those banners use the HOOK_COLLAPSED parameter and the hooks/notes template instead? -- WOSlinker (talk) 19:56, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
I think it's important to have some support for 'basic' functionality in the core code; we could split a whole host of things out into hooks, but we'd soon find ourselves with nothing left in the main banner. Whether collapsed notes count as "basic" functionality is not entirely unequivocal, however. Happymelon 20:03, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
27 is not so many, and it would actually simplify the syntax somewhat to just use hook_collapsed. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 22:49, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Importance

Now that the banner is using the {{Class}} template, just thinking about having something similar for Importance. The Importance template is already being used, so would need to think of another name to use though. -- WOSlinker (talk) 12:45, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

In general, yes, I'd love to do that. I think it's worth making at least an attempt to get hold of that template name; that template itself is essentially a fork of {{notability}} and so should be merged/redirected there. Do we have icons for the importance scale? Happymelon 13:25, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
What about using an abbreviation such as {{Impor}}? We don't have icons for importance, and (not surprising given my comments above) I don't see why we would need any. PC78 (talk) 18:47, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
FWIW, {{priority}} is unused. I also went ahead and created {{importancecol}} in anticipation of future use. PC78 (talk) 15:09, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
No way are we mixing up importance and priority any more than we already have :D It's a real shame we can't get hold of {{importance}}; we may have to go for something silly like {{importance-rating}}, and create a similar redirect for {{class-rating}} for consistency. Anyone fancy setting this up? Happymelon 15:14, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
 Done I've gone ahead and created {{Impor}} and {{Imporicon}}. There are icons for NA-Importance and Unknown-Importance. The only thing left is to bring {{Impor}} into the template.  Dylanlip  (talk) 16:55, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
Hello? I never got a response from anyone about this. This seems extremely important. :|  Dylanlip  (talk) 12:22, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
Is it? IMO the total borkage on Safari would seem to be more important, although a much trickier problem to resolve. Having said that, I am grateful to you for putting the code together. Happymelon 13:16, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Will also need some support for the priority categories as well, either by adding support in {{impor}} or by having a separate template. -- WOSlinker (talk) 17:33, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Would that not be done via the |category= parameter as with the existing templates? PC78 (talk) 17:45, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
He means that the "-importance" part of the category link is hardcoded into {{impor}}, which will break when "-priority" should be used. Happymelon 17:53, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
Why hardcode it then? That seems counterproductive here. PC78 (talk) 15:43, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Minor bug

The ASSESSMENT_CAT value is being ignored in favor of PROJECT (I think), in the case of the category name used when AUTO_ASSESS is on. That is, for Template:WikiProject Belgium for example, all of categories used by this template for assessment and cleanup sorting are in the form "Category:Top-importance Belgium-related articles", "Category:Belgium-related articles needing attention", etc., with the sole exception of "Category:Automatically assessed Belgium articles". — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 21:41, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes you are right, it will set to Automatically assessed {{{PROJECT}}} articles by default. I'm hesitant to just change it though because it may affect quite a lot of banners which already have the category in the current location ... — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 22:46, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
It would require help at WP:CFD, a mass speedy rename. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 01:17, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
Don't forget |AUTO_ASSESS_CAT=; there is already the facility to customise this category. I agree that it should include the value of |ASSESSMENT_CAT= in the fallback chain, but we can probably make the change silently if we're careful. Happymelon 09:30, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
Resolved

Happymelon 16:14, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Please see requests at Template talk:WikiProject Middle Ages#adding to wrong assessment categories. Thank you. --Funandtrvl (talk) 15:02, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Still has assessment problems, see: Template talk:WikiProject Middle Ages#Still has assessment problems. Thanks --Funandtrvl (talk) 17:52, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
Please see: Template talk:WikiProject Middle Ages#Addendum. --Funandtrvl (talk) 19:35, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Could you add parameters to Template WikiProject Architecture

Just a request to add the full parameters to the WP Architecture template. Thanks. --Funandtrvl (talk) 19:48, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Created cats and updated doc. Just noticed that a File-Class cat is now there, which name are we supposed to use, Image or File, because the WPBM is still prompting for Image? Just curious --Funandtrvl (talk) 23:51, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
We might have crossed tracks while I was checking your banner: can you be a bit more specific (it looks OK to me). For the Image/File question, I don't think we have a standard yet! Physchim62 (talk) 23:54, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Yes, there are now two categories for images under WP Architecture, one that I created using the prompts (Image-Class) and one that MSGJ created later on (File-Class). Since these cats duplicate each other, just wondering which one should be changed to redirect to the other. --Funandtrvl (talk) 00:00, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
I thin this needs a more specific header! Physchim62 (talk) 00:14, 21 April 2009 (UTC) (discussion continued below)
Funandtrvl simply replied in the wrong place. I'll copy this to Template talk:WikiProject Architecture. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 05:14, 21 April 2009 (UTC)