Template talk:Archive

Template:Archive is permanently protected from editing because it is a heavily used or highly visible template. Substantial changes should first be proposed and discussed here on this page. If the proposal is uncontroversial or has been discussed and is supported by consensus, editors may use {{edit template-protected}} to notify an administrator or template editor to make the requested edit. Usually, any contributor may edit the template's documentation to add usage notes or categories.

Any contributor may edit the template's sandbox. Functionality of the template can be checked using test cases.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Archive template.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives: 1, 2, 3: 28 days

This template was nominated for merging. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:

Merge, 2023 December 7, see discussion.
No consensus, 2020 August 24, see discussion.

New parameters discussion

Copying a post from Steel1943 below:

@Rjjiii: I noticed some of these abnormalities as well, and had actually started manually editing some transclusions to conform with what seemingly needs to be done here. And ... you may the best editor to ask this, given I saw your work on Module:Archive and since I'm not very versed in editing modules/Lua: In Template:Archive, did 1=1 function like it does prior to you performing your edits? (After reviewing the edit history of Template:Archive/doc, it looks like it did not, but feel free to correct me if I'm wrong there.) If not, is it possible for that to instead of hiding just the text in the article box to hide the entire archive box, leaving just the navigational links below it? Steel1943 (talk) 16:19, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Responding here so that the discussion will be easier to locate for future editors. I'm not so great with Lua either tbh; if you look at the sandbox histories, you'll see that I've mostly been discussing, testing, and cleaning up talk pages.

The sandbox now has |omit=banner to omit the whole box. There is almost certainly a better way to code that if you flag down someone better with lua modules. It worked okay when I previewed {{archive/sandbox|omit=banner}} on a few of the odd pages. |next= and |previous= are already available, but for some pages like Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Middle-earth/archive10 it probably makes more sense to move the page. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 06:19, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hilst: I only added a parameter because I was unsure how "1=1" was currently being used. In your recent sandbox update (much appreciated!), the sandbox version now omits the banner for "1=1". If that works fine on the pages currently doing it, then "omit=banner" can just be removed entirely. That's closer to what Steel1943 had proposed anyway. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 18:20, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Rjjiii: I think omit can be kept, since we could do something like |omit=links, which would keep only the banner. – 🌻 Hilst (talk | contribs) 20:30, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, that makes sense. Do you have any example pages with |1=1 so I can preview them? Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 21:18, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Only one I know of is this template's testcases page. – 🌻 Hilst (talk | contribs) 23:32, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it's been in Template:Automatic archive navigator since the beginning,[1] but I don't see any usage on actual archives. "|omit=<whichever>" is probably more clear. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 03:28, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've implemented this in the sandbox. I've also removed |1=1, since I don't see any value in keeping a special case that is pretty much unused. – 🌻 Hilst (talk | contribs) 14:43, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Rjjiii: Could you review the changes and push them to the live template? It's just a simple rewrite of table code, |omit=links, and some misc improvements (ignore the yellow test cases, the output is the same between both versions, save for the order of some CSS rules). Thanks. – 🌻 Hilst (talk | contribs) 17:51, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and if I don't do it in a week or so, {{ping}} me again to remind me. The whole site's default font size is a bit bigger, so the links are slightly too wide on a page like Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard/Archive 101 (try zooming the page in and out with the toolbar pinned, if it looks fine at first), so fixing that is a priority. I'm also waiting a week to see if any more bugs are reported, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 19:10, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

By too wide, do you mean that they spill out into the sidebar? If so, a simple max-width: 100% should prevent that. I don't use Vector 2022, so I didn't know that that was an issue. – 🌻 Hilst (talk | contribs) 19:31, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, only on Vector 2022. The mobile site and app both scroll overflow. Try this link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view/Noticeboard/Archive_101?useskin=Vector-2020 Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 19:40, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. – 🌻 Hilst (talk | contribs) 19:47, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good, I'll still wait a bit. Introduce changes slowly in case more problems pop up, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 19:57, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Archive navigation edge cases

User:Daedalus969/talkarchive is used on pages like User talk:Daedalus969/Archive 20. Adding this template into that userspace template, prevents it from rendering. It gives the wikitext for a table? Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 20:06, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, pinging Steel1943 who was looking into these and Daedalus969 who may have some insight, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 20:08, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This was fixed with this edit, btw. – 🌻 Hilst (talk | contribs) 20:19, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh snap, you've already fixed it! I see your testing in that page's history now, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 23:53, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Paper9oll/Archive 8 This is another archive using a custom userspace template. I tested the sandbox template out here and it breaks in a different way. I don't know if it's worth making any kind of change to the template to accommodate pages like this though. Courtesy ping to Steel1943 who was looking into these, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 00:16, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not seeing any problems with the sandbox test. How exactly is it broken? – 🌻 Hilst (talk | contribs) 11:18, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Too wide and overflowing to the right of the content area (Windows 10, Firefox, Vector 2022), Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 14:19, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It *should* look better now. – 🌻 Hilst (talk | contribs) 15:20, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hilst: I think so, planning to push it live on Thursday Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 02:10, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine by me. – 🌻 Hilst (talk | contribs) 11:32, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Striking those two examples above. After recent updates, they work. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 02:43, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Archive number

{{Archive navigation}} is down to around 150 uses on weirdly named pages that will probably have to be manually fixed. The 30 pages after User talk:Fish and karate/Archive 1 are easy to fix but will require an admin. {{Archive number}} was made to work with {{Archive navigation}} and it is now down to around 70 transclusions. The only page remaining with both[2] has a warning banner not to change it as it is some kind of demo? The remaining uses are kind of odd but all in userspace, like User talk:Little Mountain 5/Archive 12. If the template is not nominated for deletion, the documentation needs to be updated Template:Archive number/doc Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 06:08, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Down to 100 transclusions now. For some of the odder uses of archive nav, I think it's easier for us to just remove the template entirely. – 🌻 Hilst (talk | contribs) 12:12, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Rjjiii: We're down to only Fish and karate's archives. I've left a message over at his talk page, but if you want to speed things up, feel free to ask someone at AN to do so. – 🌻 Hilst (talk | contribs) 13:15, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hilst First, thanks for going through and doing all of these types of edits to clean up.[3] And, Fish and karate seems fairly active, so I'll wait a week or so before reaching out to another admin. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 13:56, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@I've fixed them all, I think. Thanks for letting me know. Ping me if I've missed anything. Cheers, Fish+Karate 14:01, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I think that's all of them,[4] Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 14:17, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Break

{{Archive navigation}} is now deleted, and the helper template {{Archive number}} has been nominated for deletion.[5] Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 18:07, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

{{Archive number}} is now also deleted. I think that's it for the merge, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 17:56, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Possibilities for merging uncommon templates into this one?

There are several templates that make archive banners, that I am thinking could possibly be merged into this one. {{UserTalkArchive}} seems redundant but I may be overlooking something. Check out the sandbox for a proof of concept on on using {{archive|period=index}} to replace {{Archive index}} and {{Archive-index}}.

I am not sure how difficult it would be to implement something like |period=annual for pages using the format "Archive 2023, Archive 2024, etc.". I also wonder if there might be a way to detect situations where the year-based links of {{Annual archive}} would be appropriate ("Archive 1" does not exist but an page beginning with "Archive 20..." does?). Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 02:36, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

{{UserTalkArchive}} has a slightly different blurb ("past discussions with X" vs "past discussions about X") and the box listing all archives. Other than that, it has the same functionality as {{Archive}}.
I'm not sure if |period= is the correct parameter for implementing {{Archive index}}. Maybe it should get its own parameter?
Annual archives shouldn't be too hard to implement. We could just reproduce {{Yearly archive list}}'s logic (or, better yet, use the actual template with expandTemplate).

– 🌻 Hilst (talk | contribs) 13:23, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Replying also in bullets:

The blurb there makes slightly more sense, but it's not a huge difference. If the blurb here could be switched automatically on namespaces 2 & 3, it would make more sense, but again not a big deal. The box is an actual difference, but I don't know that it's a positive difference to have an arbitrarily different interface on a handful of talk pages.
I'm not attached to "period=index" and would be fine with an |index= parameter.
expandTemplate is definitely the way to go. That should give the same output as the main talkpage banner for annual archives.

Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 07:47, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hilst In the sandbox, I've added "index" as a possible value for a |type= parameter. I've also added a preposition that will change depending on namespace. This should make the blurb brought up by Andy more clear for user talk pages and noticeboards. I started to add "annual" as another |type= and to try out expandTemplate, but there is too much there that I don't grasp, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 20:23, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good changes! I'll look into doing the annual logic later. – 🌻 Hilst (talk | contribs) 12:38, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for looking into it. I started to do a proof of concept to see whether {{yearly archive list}} would make more sense inside the box where {{annual archive}} has it (which is probably the right place as it is), or below the box since the numbered links would need to be suppressed anyway for annual archives. I ran into the issue that about 50 or so pages do the annual archives with a complicated subpage format (User talk:User/Archives/20YY) which may not be worth it to add everything to support that for those 50 pages, :-/ Sorry if I've led you on a goose chase there. I will still likely push changes live for the namespace prepositions and index blurb, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 07:46, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think all the parameters work for an annual archive now, but am somewhat hesitant to add a bunch of parameters. The more I think about this, the more it seems like the correct thing to is to check the format ("Archive 20XX", "Archive/20XX", or "Archives/20XX"), check to make sure "Archive 1000" doesn't exist, and then intuit that the archive is annual. I'll probably leave this in the sandbox and push some other changes live this coming week. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 17:34, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Later archives not linked, take n+1

Template talk:Automatic archive navigator/Archive 1#Bug: Missing links to next archives, regarding for example Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chemicals/Archive 2015 not linking to 2016 and beyond, is still broken. DMacks (talk) 17:31, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DMacks Did the solution that you and Mr. Stradivarius tried back then ever work for annual archives? The issue noted about Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers/Archive 145 seems fixed. When I preview Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chemicals/Archive 2015 using this version of the module, I still don't see an "Archive 2016" link, instead the final link is an "Archive 2" red link. This even older version by Toohool from before the rewrite does correctly give the 2016 link. Also, is the desired output for annually archived page a row of navigation links like this template emits for sequential archives, or is it something more like the list that {{annual archive}} has in its banner? Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 18:39, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed with this edit. I haven't checked to see if this broke anything else. – 🌻 Hilst (talk | contribs) 19:58, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hilst & DMacks, I would not describe this as broken, but try to preview the sandbox template ({{archive/sandbox}}) on this page which has annual archives but no navigation links right now: Talk:IEEE 1394/Archive 2004

I'm wondering if this doesn't offer a better way to navigate than the link list that {{annual archive}} offers. Is there an easy way to suppress the red links to years not archived ("Archive 2000 ← Archive 2002" in this case), and would it be preferred to suppress them? Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 23:46, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]