Module talk:WikiProject banner/Archive 7
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions about Module:WikiProject banner. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 |
Strange thing with project links
There's something odd going on with the project links in this template and its children: when a template links to WikiProject {{{PROJECT}}}, it's showing up in the Whatlinkshere for the article named "PROJECT".
For instance, Template:WikiProject Science Fiction links to Wikipedia:WikiProject Science Fiction, but it also appears in Special:Whatlinkshere/Science Fiction. Another example, Template:WikiProject Health and fitness links to Wikipedia:WikiProject Health and fitness, but it also appears in Special:Whatlinkshere/Health and fitness. (And there is no article Health and fitness, so it ended up being listed for Red Link Recovery, which is how I came to notice.)
I'm not up to wading through the code for this template to figure out what's going on – can somebody look into it? —Paul A (talk) 06:33, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
- Well, the science fiction banner has a link to Science Fiction in the banner text which is why it shows up in Special:Whatlinkshere/Science Fiction. For the Health and fitness banner, if no
|MAIN_TEXT=
or|MAIN_ARTICLE=
is specified then the banner code does an ifexists check on the value of the PROJECT parameter to see if that should be linked to or not which is why it's showing up in the Whatlinkshere. I've now set a MAIN_ARTICLE on that banner without any link so Whatlinkshere should clear out in a while. -- WOSlinker (talk) 06:45, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
I see. (Let me try that with another template that's been listed for Red Link Recovery – yes.) Thanks! —Paul A (talk) 08:46, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
...but it doesn't seem to be the reason why Template:WikiProject Amateur radio is appearing on Special:WhatLinksHere/Suomen_Radioamatooriliitto. Any suggestions? —Paul A (talk) 09:01, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Never mind. It's because it transcludes Wikipedia:WikiProject Amateur radio/To Do List. —Paul A (talk) 09:03, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
SHOW?
The hook {{WPBannerMeta/hooks/priorityscale}} has a SHOW option, but I don't see what it does. I've set it to No, but I didn't see a change. Due to confusion regarding "importance", we're trying to transition to "priority", but would also like to hide the priority if no priority is defined. Morphh (talk) 12:19, 09 July 2009 (UTC)
- It's an internal parameter, which shouldn't have been exposed. I'm not sure why you'd want to hide the scale if it's not been set (it automatically hides itself on non-articles, but surely if no priority has been assigned, that's an issue that needs to be resolved?); but you can achieve it with something like this:
|HOOK_ASSESS = {{#if: {{WPBannerMeta/importance|{{{priority|}}}|{{{class|}}}}} |{{WPBannerMeta/hooks/priorityscale ... }} |{{WPBannerMeta/hooks/cats |category={{{category|¬}}} |cat 1 = yes |CAT_1 = Unknown-priority Tulips articles }} }}
- That will display the priority rating if one is set, or just add the category otherwise. Hope this helps, Happy‑melon 12:36, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks. I'm going to get clarification on what the project wants to do with the hiding as you make a very good point. Perhaps they want to hide it after it is assigned. Editors are getting into too many disputes over the "importance" of an article, so we're trying to make it more apparent that this is only a project priority. Morphh (talk) 12:58, 09 July 2009 (UTC)
qualimpintersect
This quality / importance intersect template {{WPBannerMeta/hooks/qualimpintersect}} does not have the ability to configure it for "Priority". Perhaps someone could fix. Thanks, Morphh (talk) 1:56, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
- It does, although the docs don't quite show it. Just set
|IMPN=priority
-- WOSlinker (talk) 05:36, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
- Ok, this worked on the article itself, but for some reason none of the articles are updating the categories. For example, if you go to Talk:Economics, which shows Category:B-Class, Top-priority Economics articles at the bottom, but when you click it, it is not in that category. It's still in the Category:B-Class, Top-importance Economics articles. I've waited approx 24 hours, thinking maybe a bot would move it, but nothing has changed. They only seem to move if someone edits the talk page of the article. Morphh (talk) 11:58, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
- You'll just have to wait for the job queue to catch up. Yes, any edit to the page (including a null edit) will force recategorisation. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:30, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
- Ok, this worked on the article itself, but for some reason none of the articles are updating the categories. For example, if you go to Talk:Economics, which shows Category:B-Class, Top-priority Economics articles at the bottom, but when you click it, it is not in that category. It's still in the Category:B-Class, Top-importance Economics articles. I've waited approx 24 hours, thinking maybe a bot would move it, but nothing has changed. They only seem to move if someone edits the talk page of the article. Morphh (talk) 11:58, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Notes with no text
Review /note/sandbox -> /note
Using notes without text is a really useful way to add support for conditional categories without using unnecessarily complicated things like /hooks/cats. At the moment, it produces some vertical space. This will fix this. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 00:00, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
- Won't that play havoc with our new collapsing automagic? I can't see anything wrong with the code itself, but I anticipate problems there. (also)Happy‑melon 09:35, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
- Yes it will and that's next on my list to try and sort out! — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:18, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
Review This might work. Some testcases on Template:Fishproject/testcases. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:26, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
- and could someone check my code on Template:WPBannerMeta/hooks/collapsed/sandbox as well please. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:47, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
- I've check it and it all looks fantastic ! -- WOSlinker (talk) 18:14, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for that.
All implemented, hopefully without any problems. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 23:01, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for that.
- I've check it and it all looks fantastic ! -- WOSlinker (talk) 18:14, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
One of the supposed improvements to /collapsed was that the text indentation would be consistent (it now uses IMAGE_LEFT_SIZE). However, when I put a ruler on my monitor, it seems to be a pixel or two out. I assume this is because the inner table has some padding. Is there a hack for this that will work on all browsers? If not it doesn't matter because it's pretty hard to tell they're not aligned. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:14, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
Auto creation of "Foo" articles by quality error
When the template creates "Foo" articles by quality, it uses {{catmore1}}, but that template requires the page name to be surrounded by double square brackets to make a link, and when it creates the fill-in, the double square brackets are not there, so many times I've seen a dead link for the catmore line on those Foo articles by category categories. Is there a way to fix this? --Funandtrvl (talk) 07:02, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
- Not quite sure what you mean. It's Template:WPBannerMeta/templatepage/qualheader which passes the square brackets to catmore1. Can you give an example of it not working? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:58, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, when you click on a red-linked category, like: Category:Travel and Tourism articles by quality, then the following code displays, note the first line, it doesn't display the double "[" and "]" brackets after the pipe link:
{{catmore1|Wikipedia:WikiProject **PROJECT**}} [[Category:WikiProject **PROJECT**]] [[Category:Wikipedia 1.0 assessments]]
- Is there a way to make it display like below, so the 'catmore' template will actually work and not just be a dead link that is in bold text? (I've seen many instances where editors just filled in the "Project" word & didn't realize it needed double brackets or else it would be a dead link):
{{catmore1|[[Wikipedia:WikiProject **PROJECT**]]}}<!-- NOTE THE DOUBLE '[' BRACKETS -->
--Funandtrvl (talk) 08:20, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
- Another note, you need to click the red-linked T & T articles by quality cat from this page: Template:TourismProject/sandbox --Funandtrvl (talk) 08:23, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
- That was an issue in Template:WPBannerMeta/templatepage/preloadmeta. Now
Fixed — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:28, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
- That was an issue in Template:WPBannerMeta/templatepage/preloadmeta. Now
- Thanks for fixing it! --Funandtrvl (talk) 19:40, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
- Another note, you need to click the red-linked T & T articles by quality cat from this page: Template:TourismProject/sandbox --Funandtrvl (talk) 08:23, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
Customized comments
Hey, can someone help me with Template:WikiProject Lithuania? There used to be a customized comment section, which does not go onto subpage, but directly into template. It was mostly used for signatures of reviewer. I cannot figure out how to make it work with the meta banner. Help? Renata (talk)
- I've added a note on the banner for it (example on /testcases). However you also have the subpage feature enabled - do you need this as well? .... — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:24, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
- Great! Thank you. No, the subpage feature was not needed -- I deleted it. Renata (talk) 00:33, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Question about td
Is there any reason to use the {{td}} template in WPBannerMeta/core rather than just using the contents of the td template directly? -- WOSlinker (talk) 12:45, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
- No, especially not now the styles can be applied through CSS (mbox-empty-cell, which I need to apply on
{{td}}
, actually). (also)Happy‑melon 13:10, 24 July 2009 (UTC)- Would get rid of 2,000,000 transclusions if the 3 occurrences were replaced. -- WOSlinker (talk) 17:08, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
Could the two {{td}}s in Template:WPBannerMeta/bchecklist be changed as well? Thanks. -- WOSlinker (talk) 15:03, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
Done I was wondering why the transclusion count was still sky-high. Any more? Happy‑melon 22:34, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
- None I can see in the WPBannerMeta templates but there are some in other templates & I've already put in a few {{editprotected}} requests for those. -- WOSlinker (talk) 22:51, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
Please see the sandbox for the above template, the TFs are redirects to the WPs, and there were no nested parameters, so I've added that to the sandbox version. Please update the code for us. Thanks --Funandtrvl (talk) 21:57, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Task force naming and categorization
I'm trying to convert WikiProject LA into one of the task forces of Category:WikiProject California articles and have a minor issue with the category naming on the Category:WikiProject Los Angeles articles by quality. The articles all have the WikiProject prefix in front of them and wanted to drop that on the rename. Can somebody take a look at my last edit to Template:WikiProject California/sandbox and make sure that it will rename Category:B-Class WikiProject Los Angeles articles → Category:B-Class Los Angeles articles, etc. Also does anyone know any adjustments will be needed for User:WP 1.0 bot to get the statistics correctly. -Optigan13 (talk) 05:52, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, that looks fine. As long as you put them in Category:Wikipedia 1.0 assessments the bot should find them. You might like to use this version which prompts you for the categories which need creating. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:14, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks, I think I've pulled it off, but can you double check my work at both the template and at the task forces of Category:WikiProject California. I want to make sure before I fire off a bot request to replace the templates. The 1.0 assessment fired correctly for Los Angeles. As long as Foo by quality and Foo by importance have the WP 1.0 category that it will work, right? -Optigan13 (talk) 02:28, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
- Everything looks fine to me. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:42, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks, I think I've pulled it off, but can you double check my work at both the template and at the task forces of Category:WikiProject California. I want to make sure before I fire off a bot request to replace the templates. The 1.0 assessment fired correctly for Los Angeles. As long as Foo by quality and Foo by importance have the WP 1.0 category that it will work, right? -Optigan13 (talk) 02:28, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
Comments page TOC issue
This problem was brought up at Template_talk:WPAVIATION#Comment_subpage and can be viewed at Talk:UH-1_Iroquois. If the comment page included a header, the whole talk page toc is also embedded into the banner. Can this be fixed? - Trevor MacInnis contribs 02:21, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
- Not in the banner code as far as I'm aware. The way to fix it is to add __TOC__ below all the banners on the affected talk pages. -- WOSlinker (talk) 06:36, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
B-class checklist help
I've noticed that Template:WPAVIATION no longer displays the text showing how to add the b-class checklist (see:Talk:Bahrain International Airport). Is this an error? I'd like to get it back. - Trevor MacInnis contribs 18:44, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
- To fix it, in Template:WPBannerMeta/core, the following code should be changed to pass through the BANNER_NAME parameter:
{{#if:{{{B_CHECKLIST|}}}|{{WPBannerMeta/bchecklist |class={{{class|}}} |b1={{lc:{{{b1|}}}}} |b2={{lc:{{{b2|}}}}} |b3={{lc:{{{b3|}}}}} |b4={{lc:{{{b4|}}}}} |b5={{lc:{{{b5|}}}}} |b6={{lc:{{{b6|}}}}} |ASSESSMENT_LINK={{{ASSESSMENT_LINK|}}} }}
to
{{#if:{{{B_CHECKLIST|}}}|{{WPBannerMeta/bchecklist |BANNER_NAME={{{BANNER_NAME}}} |class={{{class|}}} |b1={{lc:{{{b1|}}}}} |b2={{lc:{{{b2|}}}}} |b3={{lc:{{{b3|}}}}} |b4={{lc:{{{b4|}}}}} |b5={{lc:{{{b5|}}}}} |b6={{lc:{{{b6|}}}}} |ASSESSMENT_LINK={{{ASSESSMENT_LINK|}}} }}
-- WOSlinker (talk) 20:12, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
- Will that work for WPAVIATION, which only has 5 b-class parameters? - Trevor MacInnis contribs 20:20, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
- Should do but I haven't been able to fully test. If you look at Template:WPBannerMeta/bchecklist, you'll see that it uses the BANNER_NAME parameter but Template:WPBannerMeta/core isn't passing that parameter through. WPAVIATION uses a custom class template at Template:WPAVIATION/class which handles that part, but since BANNER_NAME is not being passed through to Template:WPBannerMeta/bchecklist it is looking at Template:WPBannerMeta/class instead of Template:WPAVIATION/class. -- WOSlinker (talk) 20:38, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
{{editrequest}}
- Sounds good, but I don't know enough about the template and its various subpages to do this edit myself. Can someone more familiar with its workings do it? - Trevor MacInnis contribs 02:23, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
Done and seems to be working. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 11:35, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
Hmm, was this an error of mine? I thought I/we had tested this one thoroughly before changing it ... — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:46, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
- Somehow it got removed in this edit. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:14, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
Suggestions for A-Class and Peer Review hooks
A few minor suggestions to make these two hooks more visually consistant...
- At Template:WPBannerMeta/hooks/aclass, change:
|TEXT = This article '''[[{{{SUBPAGE_LINK}}}|is undergoing]]''' an [[{{{REVIEW_LINK}}}|A-Class review]]. ... |TEXT = This article '''[[{{{SUBPAGE_LINK}}}|{{#switch:{{lc:{{{a class|}}}}}|pass=has passed|fail=has failed|current=is undergoing}}]]''' an [[{{{REVIEW_LINK|}}}|A-Class review]].
to:
|TEXT = This article '''[[{{{SUBPAGE_LINK}}}|is currently undergoing]]''' an [[{{{REVIEW_LINK}}}|A-Class review]]. ... |TEXT = This article '''[[{{{SUBPAGE_LINK}}}|{{#switch:{{lc:{{{a class|}}}}}|pass=has passed|fail=has failed|current=is currently undergoing}}]]''' an [[{{{REVIEW_LINK|}}}|A-Class review]].
This one is just an idea, but why not use the different icons for current/pass/fail, e.g.
|IMAGE = {{#if:{{{IMAGE|}}}|{{{IMAGE}}}|{{#switch:{{lc:{{{a class|}}}}}|pass=Symbol a class|fail=Symbol unsupport A vote|current=A candidate}}.svg}}
- At Template:WPBannerMeta/hooks/peerreview, change:
|TEXT = This {{#if:{{SUBJECTSPACE}}|page|article}} is [[{{{LINK}}}/{{SUBJECTPAGENAME}}|currently]] being [[{{{LINK|}}}|peer reviewed]]. ... |TEXT = This {{#if:{{SUBJECTSPACE}}|page|article}} has had a [[{{{LINK}}}|peer review]] which is now [[{{{LINK}}}/{{SUBJECTPAGENAME}}|archived]]. ... |TEXT = This {{#ifeq:{{{class|}}}|NA|page|article}} is [[{{{LINK}}}/{{SUBJECTPAGENAME:{{#if:{{{title|}}}|{{{title}}}|{{FULLPAGENAME}}}}}}|currently]] being [[{{{LINK|}}}|peer reviewed]]. ... |TEXT = This {{#ifeq:{{{class|}}}|NA|page|article}} has had a [[{{{LINK}}}|peer review]] which is now [[{{{LINK}}}/{{SUBJECTPAGENAME:{{#if:{{{title|}}}|{{{title}}}|{{FULLPAGENAME}}}}}}|archived]].
to:
|TEXT = This {{#if:{{SUBJECTSPACE}}|page|article}} '''[[{{{LINK}}}/{{SUBJECTPAGENAME}}|is currently undergoing]]''' a [[{{{LINK|}}}|peer review]]. ... |TEXT = This {{#if:{{SUBJECTSPACE}}|page|article}} has had a [[{{{LINK}}}|peer review]] which is '''[[{{{LINK}}}/{{SUBJECTPAGENAME}}|now archived]]'''. ... |TEXT = This {{#ifeq:{{{class|}}}|NA|page|article}} '''[[{{{LINK}}}/{{SUBJECTPAGENAME:{{#if:{{{title|}}}|{{{title}}}|{{FULLPAGENAME}}}}}}|is currently undergoing]]''' a [[{{{LINK|}}}|peer review]]. ... |TEXT = This {{#ifeq:{{{class|}}}|NA|page|article}} has had a [[{{{LINK}}}|peer review]] which is '''[[{{{LINK}}}/{{SUBJECTPAGENAME:{{#if:{{{title|}}}|{{{title}}}|{{FULLPAGENAME}}}}}}|now archived]]'''.
Also (I've mentioned this elsewhere) add a |SIZE=
parameter as per the A-Class hook by changing all instances of:
|SIZE = 30px
to:
|SIZE = {{#if:{{{SIZE|}}}|{{{SIZE}}}|30px}}
Thoughts? PC78 (talk) 23:01, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
- The {{#ifeq:{{{class|}}}|NA|page|article}} part of the peerreview template should be changed to {{pagetype}} as class isn't even a parameter in the peerreview template. -- WOSlinker (talk) 06:37, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
Done I like all of these suggestions. Happy‑melon 11:00, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks! Not sure if it was intentional or not, but you missed the bold text in the peer review hook... ;) PC78 (talk) 21:17, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
- It was accidental, but I'm not sure which I prefer.
{{ChicagoWikiProject}}
has both in play; what do people think? Happy‑melon 21:28, 28 July 2009 (UTC)- I don't mind terribly whether you opt for bolded or unbolded text, I just think it should be consistant across the two hooks. But personally I would say the bold because it highlights the most relevant link. PC78 (talk) 22:02, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
- It was accidental, but I'm not sure which I prefer.
*bumped out of archive* If there is no objection here can we get this finished up and make these two hooks consistant on their use of bolded text? PC78 (talk) 16:25, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:09, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
Placing notes into the banner
I noticed there is code to add a link to a page of notes, but what if I want to just have the ability to put {{Template}} and have the text "There are notes on improving this article: Needs references" appear below the quality/importance. Is this possible? - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ τ ¢ 18:52, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
- Of course. Is this a to-do list or something? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:01, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
- No just on an individual article basis. My "needs references" was just an example of what I could type in. Basically having notes="blah blah blah" as a parameter would make "blah blah blah" appear in the template. Sorry if I'm confusing, I don't even know how to word something like this. I don't want a predetermined list of notes to call upon, but rather the ability to add a note individually to each article (if that makes sense) - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ τ ¢ 19:43, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
- I'm guess, looking at your contributions, that you are talking about the progressive rock template? I've put some possible code in the template sandbox. So for example {{Progressive Rock|class=C|note=needs references}} would produce:
- No just on an individual article basis. My "needs references" was just an example of what I could type in. Basically having notes="blah blah blah" as a parameter would make "blah blah blah" appear in the template. Sorry if I'm confusing, I don't even know how to word something like this. I don't want a predetermined list of notes to call upon, but rather the ability to add a note individually to each article (if that makes sense) - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ τ ¢ 19:43, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
Template:Progressive Rock/sandbox
- Is this what you had in mind? If not you might be able to work out how to tweak the code. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:52, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
- Thats exactly it :) Thank you once again for your awesome template knowledge Martin!.. If-then conditionals in wiki syntax are really strange. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ τ ¢ 20:22, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
- Great, another satisfied customer. You're welcome :) — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:30, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
- Thats exactly it :) Thank you once again for your awesome template knowledge Martin!.. If-then conditionals in wiki syntax are really strange. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ τ ¢ 20:22, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
- Is this what you had in mind? If not you might be able to work out how to tweak the code. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:52, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
Question regarding task forces
Is it possible to set up the banner in such a way that an article can be assessed for two different work groups while displaying only the name, etc., of one work group? John Carter (talk) 15:58, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
- Sure. Tell me which banner and work group you have in mind? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 23:00, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
Feature request for A-Class hook
The coding for A-Class review in a number of non-meta project banners (specifically {{WPBiography}}, {{Film}} and {{WPMILHIST}}) includes a number of checks to ensure that articles are tagged correctly. To facilitate the conversion of {{WPBiography}} (and perhaps in time those other two) I would like to request that the necessary support for this feature be added to the A-Class hook here.
I've prepared some code at {{WPBannerMeta/hooks/aclass/sandbox}} and tested it with {{WPBiography/sandbox}}. This adds two one optional parameters to the existing hook:
|CHECK_SUBPAGE=
which should be set to "yes" to perform an ifexist check for {{{SUBPAGE_LINK}}}, and|INVALID_CAT=
which both activates the check and sets the category for incorrectly tagged articles.
What this does:
- If
|a class=
is set to pass/fail/current but a review subpage does not exist, then {{{PASS_CAT}}}, {{{FAIL_CAT}}} and {{{CURRENT_CAT}}} will be ignored in favour of {{{INVALID_CAT}}}. - If
|a class=
is not set but a review subpage exists, then an article is added to {{{INVALID_CAT}}}.
Thoughts on the above? PC78 (talk) 23:52, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
- Support in principle. Last feature is unlikely to work because the hook is not even called if the parameter is not defined. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 06:19, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
- I think this stuff ought to just be enabled by default. No need to have to specifically request it. Certainly it should be done if
|INVALID_CAT=
is defined. (also)Happy‑melon 11:02, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
- I think this stuff ought to just be enabled by default. No need to have to specifically request it. Certainly it should be done if
- Good call, I've removed
|CHECK_SUBPAGE=
and the checks are now enabled if|INVALID_CAT=
is defined. The last feature seems to work fine in the testing I've done. You guys should of course check over the code I've written, though. :) PC78 (talk) 17:44, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
- Good call, I've removed
- Looks ok to me. -- WOSlinker (talk) 19:47, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
Review I tweaked the code a little to remove redundancy: can you confirm that it still does what it should? AFAICT it does... Happy‑melon 19:46, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
- Hmmm, for the most part yes. However, if I preview
{{WPBiography/sandbox|A-Class=pass}}
at Talk:Milla Jovovich it tries to add the page to Category:WikiProject Biography/A-class review/Milla Jovovich. PC78 (talk) 00:13, 30 August 2009 (UTC) - Ah-ha, you inadvertantly replaced PASS_CAT with SUBPAGE_LINK. Fixed, and does indeed work as intended. PC78 (talk) 11:24, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
- Lol oops! Anything else? Happy‑melon 12:48, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
- No, I think we're good here. :) PC78 (talk) 13:38, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
- Lol oops! Anything else? Happy‑melon 12:48, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
- Hmmm, for the most part yes. However, if I preview
...and for Peer Review
For the same reasons I've added the same feature to {{WPBannerMeta/hooks/peerreview/sandbox}}; again this will need someone to check over it, but it appears to work OK. Incidentally, this would be required for {{Comicsproj}} if anyone is still working on converting it. PC78 (talk) 18:37, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
Review I made similar changes to the logic in that one. Do they work? Happy‑melon 13:45, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
- No, the last check isn't adding to INVALID_CAT if the parameter is used and a review subpage exists. PC78 (talk) 14:13, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, I see what the point of that check is; I thought it was redundant at first, then went barking up the wrong tree (and left in some triple logical negation, which didn't help!). Fixed? Happy‑melon 15:36, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
- No. You fixed the last problem, but now it's not adding to INVALID_CAT if the parameter is used and the review subpage doesn't exist. (Just noticed I said "is" when I meant "isn't" in my last comment. Sorry if that caused any confusion!) PC78 (talk) 16:18, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, I see what the point of that check is; I thought it was redundant at first, then went barking up the wrong tree (and left in some triple logical negation, which didn't help!). Fixed? Happy‑melon 15:36, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
- No, the last check isn't adding to INVALID_CAT if the parameter is used and a review subpage exists. PC78 (talk) 14:13, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
Just to clarify how the checks are supposed to work in case I've muddied the waters:
- If
|peer review=yes
and review page exists, add to CAT - If
|old peer review=yes
and review page exists, add to OLD_CAT - If
|peer review=
or|old peer review=
are unused (or set to "no" etc.) and review page exists, add to INVALID_CAT - If
|peer review=yes
or|old peer review=yes
and review page does not exist, add to INVALID_CAT
-- PC78 (talk) 16:22, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
- Hehe, you made me break one check to fix another! Nm, we can do that easily enough: xor is my favourite logical statement, after all :D Yay! First smiley after coming back! How does that look? Happy‑melon 16:40, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
- Argh, now I'm not getting INVALID_CAT at all! ;) PC78 (talk) 16:59, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
- Where are you testing these? It's rather lazy of me to expect you to do all my debugging :D Happy‑melon 17:37, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
- {{WPBiography/sandbox}} is rigged up with the sandboxed meta code. I don't have any tests saved anywhere. Typically I test the banner on a page like Talk:qhekwqjehj by previewing without saving, and on Talk:Jada Pinkett Smith for an example of an article with a peer review. :) PC78 (talk) 18:18, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
- Fixed I believe (just a missing |). However it might be preferable to use CAT and OLD_CAT regardless of whether INVALID_CAT is used. For example, it is quite possible that the
|peer review=
parameter is to the template before creating the subpage for it. Due to the nature of categorising pages by template it would then be necessary to make another edit to the talk page before the category was updated. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:14, 2 September 2009 (UTC)- I've just done a quick test; it's currently working in the manner you suggest, I'm not sure if that was intentional or not. It's possibly a good idea though, I was just going by how these things are currently coded elsewhere. PC78 (talk) 10:36, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
- Okay, shall I do the same thing with the A-class hook then and keep it consistent? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:06, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
- Sure, why not. :) PC78 (talk) 11:11, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
- Could you have a final check of these two sandboxes again please and then I'll implement them. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:51, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
- Both of them are fine. :) PC78 (talk) 13:03, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
Both implemented — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:47, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
- Both of them are fine. :) PC78 (talk) 13:03, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
- Could you have a final check of these two sandboxes again please and then I'll implement them. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:51, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
- Sure, why not. :) PC78 (talk) 11:11, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
- Okay, shall I do the same thing with the A-class hook then and keep it consistent? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:06, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
- I've just done a quick test; it's currently working in the manner you suggest, I'm not sure if that was intentional or not. It's possibly a good idea though, I was just going by how these things are currently coded elsewhere. PC78 (talk) 10:36, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
- Fixed I believe (just a missing |). However it might be preferable to use CAT and OLD_CAT regardless of whether INVALID_CAT is used. For example, it is quite possible that the
- {{WPBiography/sandbox}} is rigged up with the sandboxed meta code. I don't have any tests saved anywhere. Typically I test the banner on a page like Talk:qhekwqjehj by previewing without saving, and on Talk:Jada Pinkett Smith for an example of an article with a peer review. :) PC78 (talk) 18:18, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
- Where are you testing these? It's rather lazy of me to expect you to do all my debugging :D Happy‑melon 17:37, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
- Argh, now I'm not getting INVALID_CAT at all! ;) PC78 (talk) 16:59, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
More thoughts on peer review
May as well post these here while we're on the subject. :)
- Not that I mind as long as it works, but why is the review subpage defined as
{{{LINK}}}/{{SUBJECTPAGENAME:{{#if:{{{title|}}}|{{{title}}}|{{FULLPAGENAME}}}}}}
as opposed to{{{LINK}}}/{{#if:{{{title|}}}|{{{title}}}|{{{PAGENAME}}}}}
- Would it be better to use File:Searchtool.svg as the default icon? I'm thinking it would be more visually consistant with File:Bclass-checklist.svg. PC78 (talk) 13:03, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
- I believe that these equalities always hold so it makes little difference. It's only because of a quirk that we need it at all.
{{SUBJECTPAGENAME}} = {{SUBJECTPAGENAME:{{PAGENAME}}}} = {{SUBJECTPAGENAME:{{FULLPAGENAME}}}}
- No strong opinion. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:47, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
- I believe that these equalities always hold so it makes little difference. It's only because of a quirk that we need it at all.
Default image sizes
Hi - Are the default image sizes 40px & 80px now? What are the default sizes for the TF link images? Please update the doc page under simple options and task forces, if the values have changed. Thanks --Funandtrvl (talk) 06:05, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
- I've done it (but why didn't you just fix it?). The taskforce picture still defaults to 30. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:34, 9 September 2009 (UTC)