Jump to content

Template talk:WikiProject banner shell

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Template talk:WPBS)

Template-protected edit request on 28 August 2024

[edit]

Implement Special:Diff/1233809115/1242799168, to fix night mode issue with Template:Banner holder. Andumé (talk) 20:39, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@I Am Andumé Can you point to a example of said issue. Sohom (talk) 01:30, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Sohom Datta: See [1] for an example. Andumé (talk) 01:43, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@I Am Andumé I see no change on that specific page after apply your fix. Per that, I'm going to mark this  Not done for now. Sohom (talk) 03:13, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Sohom Datta: See Template:Banner holder/sandbox for a clear example of the effects of my proposed change. Andumé (talk) 03:29, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I see what you mean, marking as  Done based on that. However, please be a bit more specific next time about the exact issue that you are solving in future requests. Sohom (talk) 03:51, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why we should choose between blp or living

[edit]

We should pick one parameter to support and bring all the others into line. I'm spending a good part of my life resolving conflicts where one says no and the other says yes. Just one example. If we allow editors to use either parameter, then this will keep happening — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:40, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll run a scan on Category:Biography articles of living people (1,157,898) to see what the natural preference is. My initial preference would be blp though, since it's half as long as living, and due to {{BLP}}/{{blp}}.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  21:12, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
On 2nd thought, insource searches for blp & living return 901,385 & 823,454, respectively, so I'm sticking with blp.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  21:36, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, technically those searches time out, but blp seems to always win, and as long as living isn't winning by a mile, I'll stick with blp.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  13:17, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I guess it would be more logical to use one parameter with options like |blp=yes, |blp=no, |blp=other, |blp=activepol but don't know if it's worth changing now — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:41, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I was also thinking that way, but I wasn't sure if there was a situation where you'd need more than one at the same time. Gonnym (talk) 08:50, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
According to Tom you can't use activepol unless blp=yes and you can't use blpo unless blp=no, so there is redundancy here — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:54, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but only based on the wording of Template:WikiProject Biography#Living people, active politicians and other BLP issues. I think it would be good to confirm with WT:Biography first whether or not there's (still?) a legit need for both params, just to be safe.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  09:14, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have posted a message on the project talk page, in case anyone is active there — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 22:02, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Depending on how fast & frequently Category:Pages using WikiProject Biography with conflicting living parameter (0) naturally fills up, it may or may not be worth it, but I think it's still a step in the right direction.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  09:17, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My preference is also for blp, because that has always been the parameter used with this template. Living was migrated from WPBio, and it would have been better to convert it at that time — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 22:03, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Combine messages

[edit]

Would it be a good idea to combine {{active politician}} and {{BLP}} into one message? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 22:25, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think they're worth distinguishing, since activepol implies a higher likelihood of misrepresentation, above the already-heightened blp baseline.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  11:45, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but do we need two separate messages on active policitians, or could we adapt the message on {{BLP}} accordingly? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:21, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think displaying 2 separate messages is necessary nor as useful as just displaying 1, mostly b/c of banner blindness. Have 1 msg for regular blp, and another for activepol, and adjust the wording of each if/as needed.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  16:13, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Current

[edit]

Currently we display the following for active politicians:

Proposed

[edit]

We could combine in the following way:

Comments? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:13, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good - a verbatim merge, with the "If you are a subject of this article" bit at the bottom of both is sensible.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  15:28, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
After implementation:
  1. should |blp=yes|activepol=yes be changed to |activepol=yes, or left alone?
  2. Template:WikiProject Biography/doc needs updating with this and the other changes made
~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  15:39, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  1. I would still prefer |blp=yes, |blp=other, |blp=activepol or |blp=no. Reducing to one parameter makes it more likely to be updated correctly
  2. {{WikiProject Biography}} no longer does anything with these parameters (it actually identifies them as unknown parameters). Might be better to add to Template:WikiProject banner shell/doc?
— Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:37, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Oh good, yes, looking forward to using |blp= for everything.
  2. Yes, remove from {{WP Bio}} doc & add to {{WPBS}} doc.
~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  19:00, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay let's do this ... Also Category:Pages using WikiProject Biography with conflicting living parameter is filling up and I can't keep up, so any help would be appreciated — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:56, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is an easy bot task. No reason to have human beings waste time on something a bot can do. Pages that are in Category:Living people and Category:Pages using WikiProject Biography with conflicting living parameter should have blp=yes, anything else, should have no. Gonnym (talk) 09:38, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds like a good idea, assuming the category is up to date. Do you want to make a bot request? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:25, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think there is a higher chance that the category on the main page will be more up to date than the banner on the talk page. I'll ping User:Kanashimi to see if their bot User:Cewbot can handle this as part of their task 12, if not I'll post a request. Gonnym (talk) 10:29, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay sounds good. My only hesitation is that WP:BLP can also apply to a person who is recently deceased, but this is rather vague in the policy. If a bot starts removing {{BLP}} from talk pages on the day of the death, it might cause consternation or at least raise eyebrows — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:39, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you mean synchronizing |blp= with for pages in Category:Pages using WikiProject Biography with conflicting living parameter, the bot may do this operate. Kanashimi (talk) 07:25, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Cleared all 142 from Category:Pages using WikiProject Biography with conflicting living parameter (0). It's good to also confirm that a Category:Deaths by year exists before removing |blp=yes.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  13:40, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have added support for |blp=activepol and |blp=other on the sandbox. Regarding the possible merge of the templates, I think the best route forward might be a TfM for {{Active politician}} with {{BLP}} — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:42, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

blp and/or living for disambiguation, redirect, etc.

[edit]

There are quite a few disambiguation pages, redirects, etc. that apparently fall under WikiProject Biography. Specifically, I'm looking at Category:Biography articles without living parameter (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Biography_articles_without_living_parameter&from=W).

  1. Do they really fall under that project?
  2. Should they have a living/blp parameter?
  3. What's the best way to go about resolving this?

Snowman304|talk 23:50, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I mentioned this discussion on WT:Biography.
What do you mean by "etc."? For categories & templates, |blp= isn't required & should be removed. For drafts, I think it's important to include.
For redirects, I think |blp= is important to maintain. One of the duties of |blp=yes is to populate Category:Noindexed pages per WP:NOINDEX, and should apply to someone's aliases, nicknames, stage names, etc. where reasonable, lest a backdoor index is created.
For DAB pages, I think this should apply to the main/top target of the dab; for example Joey Lawrence (disambiguation) & Sai Kumar, though there are some notable exceptions. I'd like to get WP:Biography's opinion about this too.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  11:40, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
By "etc.," I meant "there are a bunch of random cases besides that should probably be talked about, but I don't want to list them all." Maybe there's a page somewhere within the WikiProject that explains when and when not to include it. But the hundreds of articles in the category make it seem like it's not super clear.
Snowman304|talk 16:09, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think it would make sense to not require |blp= on redirects or disambiguation pages — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:48, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, as long as |blp=yes is recognized.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  14:15, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay so it will be optional on those pages. |blp=yes will operate as normal, but it will not populate Category:Biography articles without living parameter if missing — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:07, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:32, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Non-standard grades

[edit]

It seems like the Wikipedia:Content assessment#Non-standard grades are not implemented except for "NA". Bug or feature? --Mungo fraans ïttrë rumden (talk) 15:03, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That is correct. Only the standard grades are implemented — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:36, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CSS class

[edit]

I've noticed that we are using a CSS class assess which is not defined in Module:Banner shell/styles.css. It is defined in Module:WikiProject banner/styles.css but that is not used by this module, so probably not intended. I suggest renaming it and adding the same definition to Module:Banner shell/styles.css. Or we could use a more standard class like mbox-image — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:58, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There should be no need. If a given talk page uses {{WikiProject banner shell}}, it ought to also have one or more WikiProject banners, and so Module:WikiProject banner/styles.css will be loaded, and the rules defined within it will be available elsewhere on the page. For example:
Rules having the .assess selector are applied to this div element
shows as bolded and centred (when the whole page is viewed, but not when previewing this section when editing), because the style sheet defined inside Template:WikiProject Council is being applied. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 13:10, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
99% of them will have project banners in, but we do also support WPBS used standalone. I wonder if that would look different, as the assess class is not loaded? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:29, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I added a background colour, but didn't expect it would affect this module. So I have made it more specific to banners [2]. Will that work? It seems to have made an impact on the spacing too, which I don't understand — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:44, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Importance options for redirects

[edit]

It appears that importance options for redirects do not work any more. Only no importance and NA seem to be available. This is not good as many redirects with possibilities (R from subtopic for example) have real importance to projects. Low is the usual case, but higher importance ratings are possible, and where relevant should be displayed. Has someone decided to arbitrarily override the choice of projects? Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 03:00, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see you've found the discussion on Module talk:WikiProject banner so I will reply there — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:55, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Transition code

[edit]

Now that Category:Pages using WikiProject banner shell without a project-independent quality rating is almost always empty, I think we can safely remove the transition code that we have been using in this module for the past year or so. Any article without |class= defined will be regarded as unassessed. This will replace the WikiProject Council logo with the unassessed logo along with a corresponding change in wording — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:55, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Major work ongoing in sandbox. Proposed changes:
Are there any other changes which people want to see? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:33, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 22:00, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FM-class

[edit]

We need to make the banenr shell support FM-class. Currently on pages such as File talk:Sfearthquake3b.jpg there is no visual indication that the file is rated FM-class (although the categories do work) — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:36, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've made a start on this in the sandbox, but it's turning out to be quite complicated and not working properly yet — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:36, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This code is now ready for review/testing. Changes include:
  1. [3] Pass class parameter through the class mask in all cases, not just for articles
  2. [4] Use pagetype instead of the word "article", so we can say "This file has been rated ..."
  3. [5] |class=FM will fall back to File-class if FM category does not exist, and fall back to NA-class if File category does not exist
  4. [6] Hardcoded an exception for FM-class which will not trigger a conflict in ratings (e.g. if PIQA is FM-class but project is File-class)
  5. Support for |blp=other and |blp=activepol (discussed in a separate thread)
One unresolved matter: how should we track files marked as FM-class in a project banner, but not yet identified as FM-class in the banner shell? Perhaps a temporary tracking category for these — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:19, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FYI - Issue with the collapsed parameter for WikiProjects in this banner shell

[edit]

I tried to use "collapsed=yes" to collapse some WikiProject notices on a talk page but I couldn't get that to work, the WikiProject banners did not collapse. What did work was "collapsed=y" which is contrary to the instructions on this Template page. - Shearonink (talk) 16:29, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

|collapsed=yes works for me. Please give an example of where it's not working? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:33, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Example of it working — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:35, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So weird...I *swear*, I tried to use the =yes on Talk:Tom Simpson and I couldn't get it to work... All I can think of is maybe a stray space or letter snuck in and I missed it. Yes I see that =yes works. Thanks for the reply. Just another glitch in the matrix... - Shearonink (talk) 02:09, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template_talk:WikiProject_banner_shell&oldid=1252870876"