Template talk:AfC submission/Archive 3
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Template:AfC submission. 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 2 | Archive 3 |
Template-protected edit request on 24 April 2025
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 | This edit request to Template:AfC submission/declined has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I recently created {{AfC notice shell}}, which serves an analogous purpose to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, but for instances of {{AfC submission}} on drafts. However, the submission template uses {{ombox}}, which makes itself somewhat narrow than... wherever it is displayed. Although that is fine for general display, it results in a significant mismatch of width when placed inside the holder.
Prior draft decline notices |
| Submission declined. The reviewer(s) who declined this submission will be listed in the page history. |  |
| This is {{ombox}}, which these notices currently use. |
Description of suggested change: Add the parameter wide to {{AfC submission/declined}}.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Diff:
| − | + | {{{{#ifeq:{{{wide|}}}|yes|Fmbox|Ombox}}
| templatestyles = AfC submission/styles.css
...
|
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Then, if {{AfC submission/declined|wide=yes}} or {{AfC submission|D|wide=yes}} are inserted within the notice holder, the result should look something like this:
Prior draft decline notices |
Submission declined on 5 November by Guy Fawkes (talk).
This is a modified copy of the source for demonstrative purposes.
Declined by Guy Fawkes 420 years ago. Last edited by Lowercase sigmabot III 20 hours ago. | Please note that if the issues are not fixed, the draft will be declined again. |
I first suggested both the template and the parameter at Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab) § What to do about prior draft decline notices, where you may wish to comment. – MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 12:21, 24 April 2025 (UTC)
Question: Why is this not being prototyped at Template:AfC submission/declined/sandbox, and why is it not being tested at Template:AfC submission/declined/testcases? See WP:TESTCASES. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 16:47, 25 April 2025 (UTC)-
- I oppose this change as it will cause reviewers to make another action (click show) in order to properly review a draft. Each action just takes more time. S0091 (talk) 17:47, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
- So is the notice shell just collapsing prior reviews? Because if so I’m gonna have to be mildly against this as it is just creating extra steps for.. aesthetics? Sophisticatedevening🍷(talk) 18:11, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
- Not showing the submitted a giant wall of "your draft sucks!!" every time they look at it seems desirable, but I would want to see the decline. Is it possible to do something like the "many issues" box that provides a short summary of previous decline notices? Perhaps something like:
- Declined on 5 November by Guy Fawkes for notability & copyright violations
- Declined on 4 November by Rusalkii for verifiability
- Rusalkii (talk) 18:18, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
- Not showing the submitted a giant wall of "your draft sucks!!" every time they look at it seems desirable, but I would want to see the decline. Is it possible to do something like the "many issues" box that provides a short summary of previous decline notices? Perhaps something like:
- So is the notice shell just collapsing prior reviews? Because if so I’m gonna have to be mildly against this as it is just creating extra steps for.. aesthetics? Sophisticatedevening🍷(talk) 18:11, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
- After using the sandbox and putting up testcases for show and tell, I've decided to revise my specific suggestions for things I overlooked:
- I oppose this change as it will cause reviewers to make another action (click show) in order to properly review a draft. Each action just takes more time. S0091 (talk) 17:47, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
| − | + | {{{{#ifeq:{{{wide|}}}|yes|Fmbox|Ombox}}
| templatestyles = AfC submission/styles.css
| class = afc-submission-declined
| type = {{#ifeq:{{{wide|}}}|yes|system|notice}}
| style = background:#fee
| image = none
...
|
- I now recognize that I should've made use of those pages in the beginning and I apologize for not having done so. – MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 18:16, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
- @MrPersonHumanGuy: With templates, it's never a good idea to paste code blobs into a talk page, they can't be tested directly, and it can be tricky to make the formatting show correctly when both editing and reading. I think that it might have been better if you had started off by copying the present version of Template:AfC submission/declined to Template:AfC submission/declined/sandbox and saving that. Then make your changes to that sandbox. Then set up some testcases, but not by pasting the template code into the testcases page, as you seem to have done here - have a look at the page history, particularly the edits by Ahecht and Primefac, to see how such pages are normally used. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 13:22, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
Done... I think. This time, I've decided to leave my proposed changes to the template on its sandbox counterpart to allow for further testing. I didn't think your advice to check the edit history of the /testcases page was as helpful as you might've hoped, as what ends up on a page may not necessarily always match exactly what a user types in (especially not when templates are substituted), so I decided to look for an instructional page instead. I came across WP:TESTCASES § Basic format and decided to reformat my tests to be in line with what is demonstrated there. – MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 14:32, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
- @MrPersonHumanGuy: With templates, it's never a good idea to paste code blobs into a talk page, they can't be tested directly, and it can be tricky to make the formatting show correctly when both editing and reading. I think that it might have been better if you had started off by copying the present version of Template:AfC submission/declined to Template:AfC submission/declined/sandbox and saving that. Then make your changes to that sandbox. Then set up some testcases, but not by pasting the template code into the testcases page, as you seem to have done here - have a look at the page history, particularly the edits by Ahecht and Primefac, to see how such pages are normally used. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 13:22, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
- I now recognize that I should've made use of those pages in the beginning and I apologize for not having done so. – MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 18:16, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit template-protected}}template. Currently a reasonable amount of opposition to this. Feel free to continue discussing though. Primefac (talk) 14:47, 26 April 2025 (UTC)- I suggest starting a discussion at WT:AFC as this will impact AfC reviewer's processes and I think you need to clear about how this is a benefit. To me, it needs to be a benefit to both the creators and the reviewers (a win win). S0091 (talk) 19:04, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.