Jump to content

Template talk:WikiProject banner shell/Archive 5

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1←Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7→Archive 10

Support for {{BLP others}}

{{editprotected}} Please change the folowing: 

{{#ifeq:{{lc:{{{blp}}}}}|yes|{{blp}}
}}{{#ifeq:{{lc:{{{activepol}}}}}|yes|{{activepolitician}}
}}

to: 

{{#ifeq:{{lc:{{{blp}}}}}|yes|{{BLP}}|{{#ifeq:{{lc:{{{blpo}}}}}|yes|{{BLP others}}}}
}}{{#ifeq:{{lc:{{{activepol}}}}}|yes|{{Active politician}}
}}

(Or use the code I've prepared at {{WikiProjectBannerShell/sandbox}}.)

This adds |blpo= which if set to "yes" will display {{BLP others}}, in the same way that we currently use |blp=yes to display {{BLP}} and |activepol=yes to display {{Active politician}}. I've coded it so that |blpo=yes will only apply where |blp=yes is not used, since there is no reason to display both on a talk page.

In addition, this change will transclude {{BLP}} and {{Active politician}} directly rather than via redirects. PC78 (talk) 13:18, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Would a backwards switch be more efficient? E.g.
{{#switch:yes
 |{{lc:{{{blp}}}}}  = {{BLP}}
 |{{lc:{{{blpo}}}}} = {{BLP others}}
}}{{#ifeq:{{lc:{{{activepol}}}}}|yes|{{Active politician}}
}}
I think this would behave in the same way, although you might want to double-check. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:25, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
That works too. :) PC78 (talk) 13:31, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
As only one can be activated at one time, another option would be to use |blp=other or similar. Deactivating for now, to allow other people to comment on this. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:27, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
Tricky one. I think I marginally prefer the two separate parameters, but there's really not much in it. Partly because I think inverted #switches are hugely underrated :D Happy‑melon 21:38, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
It would be necessary to have a seperate parameter for this at {{WPBiography}} due to how the |living= parameter works there. For that reason I would prefer the seperate parameter here, to keep things consistant across the two templates. PC78 (talk) 00:15, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
Made a few tweaks in the sandbox copy. Are you happy with it? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:12, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
I'm not entirely sure what you did, but it works OK so I'm happy. :) PC78 (talk) 11:58, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
 Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:18, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. I've updated the documentation. PC78 (talk) 14:43, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Is this a side-effect from some recent change of "BannerShell"?

In page Talk:Meher_Baba, though there has been no recent change within the templates code, there appeared an error. It wasn't so some hours ago. Within the BannerShell, the WP India template appears open with lots and lots of empty lines. I checked whether WP India has been changed recently, but there is no edit I can see there either. Can someone please take a look? Hoverfish Talk 15:25, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

I've already raised the issue with Martin. For now I've switched the position of the banners inside the shell on that page, as for some reason this eliminates the problem. But obviously this will require a proper fix. PC78 (talk) 15:35, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
Ok, thanks PC78. Hoverfish Talk 15:37, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

This is happening in quite a few places I have seen. This needs to be fixed soon or I will revert. We can't have broken talkpages all over Wikipedia. Woody (talk) 16:14, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

If you're going to revert, can you please use the code in the sandbox? I don't want to lose the newly-added support for |blpo= since that isn't part of the problem here. PC78 (talk) 16:26, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
If you can give me an oldid of a good version, be that sandbox or the actual template, I will go with that. Regards, Woody (talk) 16:33, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
The version in the sandbox works. -- WOSlinker (talk) 16:56, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

The reason is that {{{1|}}} is no longer on a line on it's own. Just add a carrage return before {{{1|}}} and that will fix it. It's due to non-WPBannerMeta banners using wiki-style table syntax and wiki-style table syntax doesn't work unless it starts on a blank line. -- WOSlinker (talk) 16:50, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Has been sorted now, thanks. Woody (talk) 18:58, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
Yes, apologies for this. And thanks to WOS for the fix. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:27, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Bug report

I noticed that, using Internet Explorer 7, the banner shell on Talk:Arthur Schopenhauer is uncollapsed by default. In fact all of the collapsed boxes are uncollapsed. IE7 reports the following error: 

Line: 3
Char: 1
Error: 'jQuery' is undefined
Code: 0

I wonder what could be causing this. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:03, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

By the way, this computer has Java version 6 update 5. Perhaps it's just a problem with the installation on this computer ... — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:06, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Something in your user scripts, most likely. Other possibilities are that someone screwed up a gadget or some of the site-wide js. Anomie⚔ 14:35, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
jQuery is the thousand-file overhaul of MediaWiki's JS/CSS/AJAX/Tea-making/You-name-it interface, which Michael Dale has been playing around with for most of the year. They've tried turning it on twice before; and it's choked spectacularly every time; this is probably just another such attempt. If it stays broken for more than a few days, file a bug report. Happy‑melon 16:07, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Template:WikiProject Scientology

This banner currently includes a large arbcom message which does not collapse inside banner shells. Is this a problem or should it be accepted as a necessary evil? PC78 (talk) 01:27, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I'd consider that a feature rather than a bug. Considering how contentious and significant Scientology articles have been and continue to be, the Arbcom decision should be highly visible. — Huntster (t @ c) 04:05, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
Adding class=wpb-outside to the message box causes the message not to be displayed inside banners. I've just done this, because otherwise it stops editors from making decisions locally about how much information is appropriate for a particular talk page. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 04:43, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
Now the warning is NEVER shown. Per Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Scientology#Editors_instructed "A note concerning these restrictions shall be placed on the talkpage of each of the affected articles", it should be visible, should it not ? —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 13:22, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
It's visible outside the shell, for example on Talk:Scientology beliefs and practices. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:42, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, but not on Talk:Karen Black. See also Wikipedia:Help_desk#template_coding_help_please. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 16:27, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
In the current implementation, I think we should get a bot to move the WP scientology banner out of all of the bannershells. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 16:31, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
...and then somebody, not aware of this problem thread, will move it right back, believing that they are cleaning up a messy talk page. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:42, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Would a bot that removed it from the shell and added html code pointing to this discussion be out of line? Once the underlying problem is fixed, a bot could put it back. There are over 400 transclusions of the Scientology template, the vast majority in Talk: space. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 17:56, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Wouldn't it make more sense to just put something resembling {{blp}} on those pages instead of moving out the whole wikiproject banner? Anomie⚔ 17:58, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
Or would something like this work? Anomie⚔ 18:20, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
I like it, provided it meets ARBCOM compliance requirements. Do they require visibility of the entire note? I doubt it but if that's what we adopt, I recommend putting a note to this effect on the relevant ARBCOM page, just to give them a chance to raise objections on the off-chance this isn't sufficient. It is much better than the hidden out-of-compliance text we have now. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 18:29, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
I'll be bold and update the template and ask ArbCom. Anomie⚔ 20:33, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
I couldn't figure out which was the appropriate ArbCom page for something like this, so I just asked at Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests. Anomie⚔ 20:36, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Tech help

Is there any code I can add in my monobook.js which will make me see by default all collapsed banners of the BannerShell (or simply all collapsed material) in talk pages as uncollapsed? Thanks. Hoverfish Talk 10:35, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

I renew my request. My work would be greatly facilitated if I had immediate view of the BannerShell uncollapsed upon hitting a talk page. It would be even better if the code made ALL collapsed material uncollapsed both in Talk and in Main. Please let me know the trick. It shouldn't be too hard, except I have no idea how to do it by myself. Thank you. Hoverfish Talk 09:04, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

You're right, it should be easy. I've had a play around but can't figure out how to do it. Happy-melon would be able to answer this straightaway. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:54, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

This script should do it. -- WOSlinker (talk) 21:13, 28 November 2009 (UTC) 

/****************************
* Expand Table all the time *
****************************/

function expandTable()
{
  var autoCollapse = 2;
  var collapseCaption = "hide";
  var expandCaption = "show";

  for ( var tableIndex = 1; tableIndex  < 100; tableIndex ++ ) {

    var Button = document.getElementById( "collapseButton" + tableIndex );
    var Table = document.getElementById( "collapsibleTable" + tableIndex );
 
    if ( !Table || !Button ) {
        return false;
    }
 
    var Rows = Table.rows;
 
    if ( Button.firstChild.data == expandCaption ) {
        for ( var i = 1; i < Rows.length; i++ ) {
            Rows[i].style.display = Rows[0].style.display;
        }
        Button.firstChild.data = collapseCaption;
    }
  }
}

if ( wgPageName.indexOf("Talk\:")>-1 || wgPageName.indexOf("talk\:")>-1 ) {
    addOnloadHook( expandTable );
}

The previous very simple code also worked, but the hide/show didn't work. And this one applies only to talk pages. Thanks again! Hoverfish Talk 22:51, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Whoa, that's complicated. I thought it would be possible just using CSS. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:30, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Well, I didn't write it all myself. Just copied the collapseTable code out of Mediawiki:Common.js and then modified it a little. -- WOSlinker (talk) 09:42, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
So there isn't a CSS solution? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 22:40, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Maybe but I'm not sure what it would be. -- WOSlinker (talk) 22:49, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
.wpbs table.collapsible tr { display: table-row !important; }
Won't work in IE. Happy‑melon 15:28, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Copyvio notice like BLP notice

This post is a copy of a post at Template talk:WPBannerMeta#Copyvio notice like BLP notice; please centralize the discussion there, since nothing need be done to this template unless the proposal is first accepted at that one. I just thought of a re-use for the BLP warning that appears with |living=yes in {{WPBiography}} and appears again with |blp=yes above {{WikiProjectBannerShell}} if {{WPBiography}} is put inside it. This would be a copyright warning that could be used on all song article's talk pages tagged with {{WikiProject Songs|song=yes}} or {{WikiProjectBannerShell|song=yes|1={{WikiProject Songs}}}}. The message in the warning would say not to link to lyrics pages/sites, because they are copyvios; link to WP copyright policy on not linking to copyvios; explain that lyrics are the copyrighted property of their writer(s), their label and/or their music publishing group. PS: This is just an FYI notice; please discuss here. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀ Contribs. 21:20, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Nice idea. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:21, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Visually impaired

As per Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(icons)#Remember_accessibility_for_the_visually_impaired. Add |link=|alt= . Thanks Gnevin (talk) 20:12, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Do you want some specific text in these parameters? -- Magioladitis (talk) 20:48, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
No they should be blank so a text reader ignore the icon. [[File:Information icon.svg||link=|alt=16px]] to give Gnevin (talk) 21:00, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
 Done -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:27, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Wording change request

{{editprotect}} Per the discussion at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Wikiproject tags on biographies of living people, could we change the text of this template from "This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:" to "This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:"? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 00:10, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Sounds reasonable. Shall we leave this for a while in case anyone else wants to comment? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:37, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
No comments, so  Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:52, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

BLPO=yes

The "blpo" parameter doesn't work. I used "blpo=yes" at this talk page and nothing appears. I've left it on for now. – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 17:33, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

It has to be "blp". -- Magioladitis (talk) 17:37, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
But the template page has instructions regarding blpo. The article in question isn't a BLP, but has information directly relating to living persons, definitely one in particular. So the BLPO option made perfect sense. Still, thanks for the fix; if the BLPO parameter doesn't work, then it should be removed from the template instructions as an option. – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 17:39, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
You're using the wrong banner. You tried using BLPO=yes for Template:WikiProjectBanners, not this one. I can see why it is confusing; the talk page of that template redirects to here. Gary King (talk) 17:50, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Now fixed. They're both the same template basically, but Template:WikiProjectBanners wasn't passing the parameter to this template. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 17:52, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Let's make something clear. Bands are part of WPBiography and we tag them with blp (living=yes) so they have to be tagged with blp=yes and not with blpo=yes. It's not a just a subject related with living people because usually when discussing about bands we are discussing about the people of the band. blpo is used when WPBiography uses non-bio but this is not the case here. -- Magioladitis (talk) 17:59, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Yep, I hadn't noticed I was on the "Shell" talk page. Anyway, Gary King, thanks for clarifying, Martin, thanks for making ProjectBanners work. As for blp vs. blpo, it looks like there's already a consistency as to when to use one or the other that I wasn't aware of – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 18:21, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for bringing the bug to our attention. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:19, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

1=

This is regarding {{WikiProjectBanners}}: Why is the 1= required? Though it works fine without it (to me?), I'm sure there's good technical reasons for using it. – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 21:17, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Probably just in case there is an errant equals sign somewhere in the banner. In this case, it might treat everything before the equals sign as a parameter name. –xenotalk 14:53, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
I don't believe this it is needed. An = sign inside a template call will not have an effect, and there is no reason at all for = to occur outside. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:14, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
The templates inside are a parameter of it. 1= is like blp=. I wonder why it works without it. PS Plugin++ in its current code searches for 1= to determine where the templates begin and start fixing/adding parameters. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:17, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
Because it's an unnamed paramater: the 1= is just the explicit call. What I'm curious about is why Plugin++ dies without it. –xenotalk 21:25, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
(edit conflict)The banners inside are the first unnamed parameter, that's why it works without. All templates work in this way. PS Plugin (whatever that is) should use a more efficient method than this, rather than editors having to use an unnecessarily awkward syntax. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:31, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
It's the KingbotK plugin of AWB. Remember that in the past every nested template was under its own argument. I don't find the parameter that awkward. I think it's a mixture of methods to have unnamed and named arguments together. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:56, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
When I asked you last year you said this issue was resolved. Can we now remove it from the documentation? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 22:01, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
I thought it was but recently I realised it wasn't. We can make some test runs to check again. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:04, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
That would be good. I agree it's not that awkward (only 2 extra character) but we frequently get editors asking what it is for and whether it is necessary. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 05:11, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

I readded 1 in the manual. Better avoid potential problems because of mixed methods. No problem if editors forget it, AWB will start adding it. -- Magioladitis (talk) 17:41, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

But there are no potential problems, and it's simpler without. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:37, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
|1= sets the first parameters to be the wikiprojects. I don't know if this is the logic of MW of the browser we use to be translated with as the first unnamed parameter. As a described above it's a mixture of method to have some named parameters and some unnamed and I am not sure for the potential mistakes. Anyway, we set AWB to work correctly with the bannershell templates and the editors won't notice any difference. -- Magioladitis (talk) 13:31, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
So 1= no longer crashes AWB? –xenotalk 13:44, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
It won't after we finish rewriting the template. We are moving WPBS fixes to general talk page fixes for good. -- Magioladitis (talk) 13:49, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
I am now reviewing the latest commits. I ll start doing some test edits afterwards. -- Magioladitis (talk) 13:52, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

The following is empirical, anecdotal if you prefer. I know next to nothing about the specifics of template writing but I do understand a little about arguments within a function.
If there are none of the optional parameters within the shell, the project banners are the only parameter and there is no problem, except perhaps for AWB and bots.
If one of the optional parameters is used, |blp= is probably the most common, the template needs to know when the project banners begin so that it can format itself accordingly. If there are optional parameters and |1= is not present, the shell collapses, acts as if |collapsed=yes were present.
The good news is that the project banners can be treated as a single parameter / argument. There is absolutely no need for |2=, |3=, |4=, etc..
As I said above, this is entirely, empirical. “Your Results May Vary”, “Void Where Prohibited”. JimCubb (talk) 01:02, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Since July 2009, |2= etc do not work anyway. There should be only two reasons for the |1= being required: either the value of the parameter contains "=" that are not inside another template (e.g. there is for some odd reason a non-templated banner), or someone screwed up specifying one of the optional parameters (e.g. entered {{WPBS|blp}} instead of {{WPBS|blp=yes}}). Anomie⚔ 19:02, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Bot to add banner shells to talk pages

There is an open bot request for approval which seeks approval to add WikiProjectBannerShell to talk pages with four or more banners and at least one header. Any comments would be appreciated: Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Xenobot Mk V 2. –xenotalk 14:55, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

I don't have as much time to come here as I used to have so I missed this before it was approved. I wonder why the numbers four and eight were chosen when the documentation states that the numbers are three and six. The numbers have been three and six since the creation of both shells.
There are two bits of irony in the numbers.
  1. When the numbers were being discussed there were many editors who felt that no page would ever have more than five banners. The last time anyone checked that I know about there were thousands of pages with six or more banners. I believe the current record is 22.
  2. {{WikiProjectBanners}} was changed from its original form into a special case of {{WikiProjectBannerShell}} about 18 months ago. I questioned the change at the time and asked for the reasons. The answers I received before the change were unresponsive, for the most part. After the change was made it turned out that the change was made because a handful of editors did not like the way {{WikiProjectBanners}} looked when it was expanded. The irony is that neither shell has to be expanded. One can get all the information one wants and more by either editing the page or looking at the tags at the bottom of the page.
Because a couple of us who were applying |living= and |listas= values were also applying shells where appropriate, the pages we changed would show on other editors' watchlists. We were criticized by those editors for making changes that were not necessary and cluttering their watchlists. I let the others respond as my response would have been that we were merely performing maintenance that should have been performed by those who watched the pages. You may find it helpful to put the approval, or prominent links to it, on the bot's Talk Page.
Have fun! JimCubb (talk) 21:28, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
I used more conservative values than the template indicates, to be on the safe side. I do put a redirect link to the BRFA in every edit summary. Since the bot runs with the flag, users of course have the option to hide bot edits from their watchlist. –xenotalk 20:56, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
I strongly propose that you also run the bot on pages with three WikiProject banners. Many users are doing it manually, so making your bot do it would save much manual editing work. I assume approval from WP:BRFA is needed. --Kslotte (talk) 14:46, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
Will think about it, but my bot is on a sabbatical. Can provide you the code for the shelling if you want? –xenotalk 15:16, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
Giving out the code is a good idea. Someone (maybe me) could pick up the task and start processing talk pages. --Kslotte (talk) 15:24, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
After a long break I have returned to adding sort values to |listas= for those that lack it. In the process I am adding the other no-brainer things on the pages. Most of the pages I have seen have at least three banners and almost all that do not, could have. (Think about it. There is the Biog banner, the project for the area of endeavor and the project for the native country.) I have been adding them but it would be nice if a bot were to do it. JimCubb (talk) 22:07, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
I think I can do it with some help from Rjw and Reedy. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:48, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
What would be really cool would be if your bot, that I assume you will use, could look at the article and when it says that the subject person is a footballer/politician/basketball player/tennis player from France/Hungary/Germany would check to see if the relevant banners are on the page and add them if they are not there. Asking to much? JimCubb (talk) 23:13, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
I can run in some specific categories to achieve that. Let's see. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:45, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
I have a code to add listas too! I am sending it for BRFA. -- Magioladitis (talk) 18:26, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Not nesting

For some reason, WPBS is not nesting its banners at Talk:Rudresh Mahanthappa. I can't find anything wrong with the syntax. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 17:19, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

With my settings (W7, FF3.5), the banners appear nested. -- Magioladitis (talk) 17:44, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. I did a purge and then it looked OK. Not sure what the deal was... -- Gyrofrog (talk) 17:57, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Collapse option seems dead? for the reason why. — Huntster (t @ c) 01:52, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Suggestion regarding the Biography of Living persons statement on article talk pages

I have initiated a conversation about a suggested change to the way we display the BLP banner on article talk pages at Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons#Suggestion regarding the Biography of Living persons statement on article talk pages. Please take some time and leave a comment about this suggestion. --Kumioko (talk) 20:19, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Piping unclear in documentation

{{WikiProjectBannerShell||<optional parameters>|1= leaves it unclear whether 1 or 2 piping char's are required after WikiProjectBannerShell. If the optional parameters are left out, this documentation would have two pipe char's after the template name. Could this be clarifed please? Is it of any consequence if the incorrect number are put in? Furthermore, if one literally adds in the optional parameter for instance |blp=yes, then there are still two pipe char's. SauliH (talk) 02:45, 4 August 2010

No double pipes are expected. As in all (?) templates use a pipe to separate parameters. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:31, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
So no big deal then?SauliH (talk) 12:56, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
Better remove any double pipes if you find any to avoid confusing bots, etc. -- Magioladitis (talk) 13:58, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. SauliH (talk) 16:51, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
I have been removing double pipes from the banner as well but I rarely see it. --Kumioko (talk) 22:33, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

It there away to make the loading smoother. Currently it opens out each WikiProject item and draws it out, then collapsing as it loads the page. This is kinda tough on the eyes, is there away this can load nicely? Regards, SunCreator (talk) 14:02, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

This is an issue that affects all boxes that are collapsed by default, and it would require changes to the global JS. We can't just use CSS to hide the boxes by default, or visitors with Javascript disabled would be unable to see the content of these types of boxes at all. So to fix it, the global JS would have to immediately (not waiting for onload) use insertRule or addRule to add a CSS rule to hide these sorts of boxes, which the onload JS could either remove after applying its current rules or could incorporate into its functioning somehow. I don't know why it hasn't been done already, but it wouldn't hurt to ask at Mediawiki talk:Common.js. Anomie⚔ 16:17, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
It doesn't sound like a trivial change but it sounds like it might be a good idea to explore the feasability. --Kumioko (talk) 17:38, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Question about WikiProjectBannerShell

Greetings, I am sure this has come up before but is it possible to modify this template so that projects can be more identifiably grouped within the template if multiple projects are listed. For example: In {{WikiProject United States}} we have about 25 projects that are supported in some way by WPUS and that list is growing. Some have projects and task forces that fall under them. A good example of this is US Government. There are at least 3 that fall under it including FBI. South carolina is also a good example with the Myrtle Beach project under it. When they appear in the list they just appear one after the other and when multiples are used they sometimes blend together. I was thinking it might be better if we could associate these better and offset them so instead of looking like this:

WikiProject X
WikiProject XX
WikiProject Y
WikiProject X

They could appear like this:

WikiProject X
WikiProject XX
WikiProject Y
WikiProject X

I'm sure this isn't the only way its just the only one I could think of and I don't even know if its possible but its seems like it would make it a lot easier to distinguish the relationships between projects when dealing with multiples. Thanks. --Kumioko (talk) 19:20, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

That's not really a matter for this template, it's up to the individual banners what to display. You'd have to do it on the individual templates, or get something added to {{WPBannerMeta}} that the individual banners could use. Anomie⚔ 00:23, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
Oh your right I thought it was this template but your right its the WPBannerMeta template that I wanted. Ill post the request there. Thanks. --Kumioko (talk) 00:29, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Propose additon to template

Many articles are currently under some sort of general sanctions, often per the Arbitration Committee. Would there be any way to have the banner shell adjusted in such a way that a separate apparent template is visible above the collapsed template, maybe in a way similar to the BLP template? I do ted to think that having such information clearly available, particularly to newer editors, might be very beneficial. John Carter (talk) 22:19, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Why not just put the separate template above the banner shell, instead of being all complicated about it? Anomie⚔ 06:04, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Any idea why the banner is broken at Talk:Defense Distributed ? — Cirt (talk) 16:12, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Looks like now it's fixed, no idea what happened there, oh well, — Cirt (talk) 17:05, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Potential bug

I recently noticed that when the biography banner using the |living=yes parameter is placed inside the bannershell the blp notice is omitted from view.

Project banner
Project banner inside shell

I think this is a bug to fix. Does anyone disagree, or have an idea to fix it? :) John Cline (talk) 01:53, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

I've learned from the documentation that it is expected that the user who adds the {{bannershell}} is supposed to add the |living=yes parameter; {{bannershell|living=yes|}}. I think this step is often missed and that it would be better if it could happen automatically. But that may be easier said then done. Nevertheless it does not appear to be an unanticipated bug. Cheers. :) John Cline (talk) 04:20, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
You should add |blp=yes. -- Magioladitis (talk) 10:25, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

A bug in the shell?

See Talk:Kuniyoshi Obara. The link to WikiProject Japan's "Education" task force is incorrect, although expanding it contains the correct link inside. Bug in the shell? Or something else? -- t numbermaniac c 07:40, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

It was an error in the WikiProject Japan's banner template. All fixed now. — Huntster (t @ c) 07:44, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
That was superfast. Thanks! -- t numbermaniac c 07:47, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 15 December 2013

Please add icon for WikiProject, like in {{Article history}}. Rezonansowy (talk • contribs) 18:17, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. Add it where? I suggest that (per WP:TESTCASES) you put your proposal into Template:WikiProjectBannerShell/sandbox, and demonstrate it at Template:WikiProjectBannerShell/testcases. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:18, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
Should work, please check the sandbox. --Rezonansowy (talk • contribs) 18:36, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
I don't agree with the addition. It will increase the length of the template in the pages. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:11, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
@Rezonansowy: I notice that you have changed the <th>...</th> element to a <td>...</td> element, which changes the appearance (see testcases). Why is this necessary? --Redrose64 (talk) 23:33, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
Because without this it doesn't work properly, I've copied the code from {{Article history}}. Testcases look fine to me. --Rezonansowy (talk • contribs) 23:38, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
The testcases page has two main headings: those under Template:WikiProjectBannerShell/testcases#Testing sandbox version show your proposal, notice how "This template is of interest to the following WikiProjects:" and similar text is left aligned and normal weight; whereas those under Template:WikiProjectBannerShell/testcases#Testing main template show the current version - centred and boldface. --Redrose64 (talk) 01:36, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit protected}} template. This looks like it might be a contentious change, so I'm deactivating the edit request. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:53, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

I don't agree with it, Redrose64 as well. He/she didn't consider this as consensus-needed. --Rezonansowy (talk • contribs) 14:57, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit protected}} template. Not sure what you mean by "Redrose64 as well". Anyway, to clarify, I don't agree with the change that is currently sandboxed: (i) the <th>...</th> has become a <td>...</td> without adequate explanation; (ii) the image does make the whole box taller - in the case of the basic "No options" version, the height of the outer box (excluding the 4px margin top and bottom) has changed from 78px to 97px - a difference of 18px; (iii) something else that I've just noticed - in the case of "collapsed=yes" and "collapsed=yes & banner collapsed=no", the behaviour has changed - it's not collapsed any more, so the |collapsed=yes parameter is being ignored. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:16, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
@Redrose64: I'm not a technical expert, I just wanted to add icon, like in other boxes. If you think something doesn't work properly then feel free to fix it. --Rezonansowy (talk • contribs) 16:12, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
Also, why have you: (iv) added a |currentstatus= parameter; (v) added a |small= parameter; (vi) used the hidden caption "Good article"? I can't fix these things unless I know why you've added them. Claiming not to be a technical expert doesn't explain why you've made many more changes than the original request, which was to add one image. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:44, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
You're right, I've just copied the code, but I mean just an icon. I've removed this param. Now should be good. --Rezonansowy (talk • contribs) 16:51, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
OK, so you've fixed (iv) and (v) but: (i) and (vi) are still neither fixed nor explained; (iii) is not fixed; and (ii) is still unanswered. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:19, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
I give up, could you ask somebody to insert this icon with the right way. Apparently I'm not able to do it. See how it looks in {{Article history}}. --Rezonansowy (talk • contribs) 20:43, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
Redrose64? --Rezonansowy (talk • contribs) 16:18, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
Should work now. See testcases. --Rezonansowy (talk • contribs) 17:18, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
OK, Done --Redrose64 (talk) 16:28, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Confusing article history

At talk:George Frideric Handel the article history is described but for a reason I don't understand the assessment summary page link is buried below 7 other banners, making it very hard to find. Is this a problem particular to the page or having to do with WikiProjectBannerShell or perhaps Template:Article history? Sparafucil (talk) 09:59, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

I think this is the correct behaviour. These comments pages were originally used for WikiProject assessments, so they are linked from the WikiProject banner shell. Actually we are supposed to be deleting these subpages, but this has not been done yet. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:12, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
The placement of the collapsible "Article milestones" at Talk:Johann Sebastian Bach seems far more correct to me. It's hard to see how Wikipedia:Discontinuation of comments subpages/Examples will handle large archives! Sparafucil (talk) 03:11, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Bug in WikiProjectBannerShell: does not pass living= to WikiProject Biography template when given blp=yes

This edit removed the page from Category:Biography articles without living parameter. The WikiProjectBannerShell was already given |blp=yes, but was not passing the |living=yes parameter to WikiProject Biography.

I don't know if this is fixable in the template or if some bot needs to mass-update talk pages using these templates. I suspect that many entries in that category's backlog could be easily removed. 70.133.144.10 (talk) 06:09, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

There is no technical means (as far as I know) for the WPBS template to pass parameters to the other template, so yes, it is necessary to use both |blp=yes and |living=yes — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:27, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Collapsing

Why does this template no longer collapse? DrKiernan (talk) 17:32, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

@DrKiernan: See Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 137#Collapsing not working. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:04, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

I wonder whether there is any need for this option. Using it without the collapsed=yes option (which I just found on a talk page) actually makes the banners longer as nothing is collapsed. How much is it actually used? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:16, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

I've tweaked the /sandbox to remove this option. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:28, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
And removed from the live template. I've updated the documentation. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:22, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Template:WikiProjectBanners

For many years, Template:WikiProjectBanners has called this template but defaulted to |collapsed=yes. This is rather intuitive because other than that the two templates are identical. I wonder if it would be simpler to redirect that template to this one, or perhaps we should add |collapsed=yes to those usages first? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:35, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

I have nominated Template:WikiProjectBanners for deletion/merging with this template. Please see Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2016 January 7 — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:32, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Primefac has now closed the TfD and redirected Template:WikiProjectBanners to this template. This isn't quite what I had in mind, as we now have talk pages with large numbers of banners which are not collapsed. See Talk:Barack Obama for example: the banner shell takes up a lot of space. I think we need a bot to go round and replace {{WikiProjectBanners}} with {{WikiProject banner shell|collapsed=yes}} before we can do this ... — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:29, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Also pinging Izno and PC-XT who commented in the TfD — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:20, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
I knew there would be some outliers, but per Izno's comment on the TFD I figured people could simply add the collapsed option. It's certainly better than having to remove all the extra garbage from the substituted code. For the moment, I've undone creating the redirect, but the consensus is definitely (at some point) to have WPB be a redir. Primefac (talk) 15:35, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
I have no substantive opinion besides that the end state should be a redirect. --Izno (talk) 15:48, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
4700 transclusions... A bot could replace them, or people can add the collapsed option as desired. I don't mind either way. —PC-XT+ 22:03, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

I have just posted a request at Wikipedia:Bot requests#WikiProjectBanners for a bot to do this. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:59, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks to JJMC89 for taking this on. A BRFA has now been opened. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 23:03, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
The bot has now finished its work and Template:WikiProjectBanners has been redirected to this templates. Thanks all. This is now much clearer and easier to use. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:40, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Custom text

A text parameter is available to specify custom text instead of the default "This template is of interest to the following WikiProjects". I don't know if this is used anywhere, or perhaps this functionality could just be removed from the template. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:21, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

Removed. If this is in fact being used anywhere, feel free to revert — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 23:28, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
Most of the uses of the parameter are in instances of WPBS misusing WPBS to hide things which aren't WikiProjects, or in one case, to make two groups of WikiProjects arbitrarily. --Izno (talk) 12:18, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
I see. Can you give me an example or two? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:38, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
You can probably work through my recent talkspace changes from today--"misuse of wpbs". There were also some cases where the attribute or the template were empty, and a handful of others where it was used correctly but said essentially the same as the template currently does. --Izno (talk) 18:55, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
So this was used quite extensively. Should I revert my change, or are you happy to continue the cleanup operation? How are you finding these usages? Would a tracking category help? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:35, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

For 50 removals out of ~1 million instances in Talk space, you probably should not revert your change. I was performing a search of the sort: -intitle:"/archive" hastemplate:"WikiProject banner shell" insource:/\|\s*text/" in the Talk: namespace. Only ~900 occurrences of this pattern in that namespace, the majority of which are false positives with e.g. {{tmbox}}. I got all of the ones that I noticed out of that pile. A tracking category would probably find the rest of them in the Talk namespace plus any other instances outside there, since I'm sure I missed one or two given the large number of false positives. --Izno (talk) 11:32, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

That same pattern in all talk spaces + Wikipedia space [1] yields about 980 results. Searching everything gave the same result. --Izno (talk) 11:37, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
Tracking cat: Category:WPBS using custom text — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:49, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
Will that edit capture an invoked but empty |text= as well as an invoked and non-empty |text=somevalue? --Izno (talk) 11:58, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
No, it will not detect an empty parameter, but neither did the template beforehand, so I don't think you need to worry about those — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:03, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
*shrug*. I just don't want someone copy-pasting an errant such use and expecting it to work. I'll leave the category to populate over the next week or two--most talk pages don't get too much traffic so all of the changes will be in the job queue. --Izno (talk) 12:07, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Code is in /sandbox if you really think it worthwhile — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:15, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Expression error at Talk:Kosovo

Could someone please investigate why there is an ugly Expression error: Unexpected > operator at Talk:Kosovo? It apparently stems from this template (as it only appears when it is included with anything embedded in it), but I could neither pinpoint the cause nor work around it. No such user (talk) 10:45, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

 Checking... — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:04, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
I think it's the PAGESIZE parser function in Template:Ifexist not redirect. Seems to have changed its behavior if the target is blank. Will continue to investigate. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:10, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
 Fixed. The last revision in the history of Talk:Kosovo/Comments was a move and seemed to be missing the page size for some reason. I made a dummy edit and then reverted. All seems okay now. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:20, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. No such user (talk) 11:42, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Empty template - no banners enclosed

I just made this fix. I think that we may need a tracking category for cases where |1= is missing or empty. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:48, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

That's a good idea. Primefac (talk) 17:00, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Class once

Wouldn't there be some way to just set the class once? It's kind of silly how a shell with three or ten banners cannot inherit the class rating from the parent template (and thus three/ten places need to be changed instead of one). All the individual banners are really doing in that case is giving a relative importance rating anyway. czar 21:05, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

@Czar: You should review and possibly comment at WT:COUNCIL#Overhaul of article assessments. --Izno (talk) 21:21, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
I wanted to see whether this was even feasible from a technical end. If it is easy to implement, it's something that WikiProjects could choose to opt into or out of without much fuss. (That proposal seems like much more serious business.) czar 23:17, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
The problem is that a child banner can't know the class if it is set in the shell, or in another child banner. As I commented on in the other discussion, that means a WikiProject would need to be comfortable with category intersection to understand the quality of articles in their domain, rather than actual categories. It would probably adversely impact the summary template of the numbers of articles by quality level crossed by importance; I presume a bot could be programmed to deal with that case, but right now its a trivial {{PAGESINCATEGORY}} call, I think. --Izno (talk) 23:28, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
See also Template talk:WPBannerMeta#Adding PageAssessments parser function. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:46, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Include a auto-displaying protection template for protected files?

Template:Documentation and Template:This is a redirect include some code that causes them to display a protection template whenever they are posted on a protected page. I wonder if it may make sense to include such a function on this template as well as it's posted on a lot of talk pages - or is there a better place? I believe under the terms of Wikipedia:Template editor this idea should be offered up for possible contestation first. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:57, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Jo-Jo Eumerus, I'm not sure exactly what you're asking for. Offhand, I see two possible things you could mean:
  • The templates you mention transclude things like {{pp-move}} onto a page if the page is protected. I'm not sure how well such a notification would work on the talk page of the article in question. Often the talk pages are not protected, so it could be confusing.
  • Automatically transcluding {{permanently protected}} or {{temporarily protected}} onto the talk page depending on it the article is protected. However, on pages that already have those templates, it would be redundant.
I might have misunderstood your original question, so if I'm wildly off I welcome your corrections. Primefac (talk) 14:37, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
The first one, which is something the Documentation and Redirect templates do to auto-tag protected templates and redirects (respectively). The protection icons don't display on unprotected pages, though. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 14:56, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
I think that's where you lost me. The Doc/Redir templates are used on the article itself, while WPBS is used on the talk page. There's no way to influence what appears on an Article by placing something on the Talk. You can influence what appears on a Talk page based on what is on the Article, though... but again, that would go back to my second bullet of potential duplication. Primefac (talk) 15:48, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
Ah, here I see the issue. The idea is to display a protection icon on the talk page when the talk page is protected, nothing to do with the associated article. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:56, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
In that case, adding the topicon is really just a matter of taste. Is the little lock going to stop anyone when big "this page is protected" notices are on the page, or when they go to edit it says they can't? These are hypothetical questions, and I honestly have no opinions on the matter. I do agree that some form of consensus should occur before making the change, and I will cross-post to WP:WPT in order to assist with that. Primefac (talk) 16:29, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
It's a matter of automation. As things stand, if the prot level of a talk page is increased or decreased (perhaps to unprotected), it is necessary to make a separate edit to add, amend or remove a protection template - whether that template displays a big banner or a little padlock. The proposal is to eliminate that manual edit, by having the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template detect the prot level automatically, and display a padlock if appropriate. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:21, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
Fair point, I hadn't thought about the automation side of things. I'll wait a day or two to see if there is any opposition (though I see no reason why not) and I'll chuck in the relevant code. Primefac (talk) 19:29, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
I don't see this change as desirable, as it is not within the purpose of this template to deal with such things, and it creates the special case that pages with a banner shell and without a banner shell could be treated differently by the protecting editor--something that editor would be unlikely to realize/intuitive to that editor. --Izno (talk) 12:59, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Remove or replace WikiProject Council icon

A decorative icon WikiProject Council.svg was added to this template in 2013 (diff) at Rezonansowy's request (talk archive). Two problems with this. First, the image is GFDL/CC-BY-SA, so must be linked for attribution, with alt text for accessibility. Second, it's visually detailed and becomes blurry at single line height. I left it there in my most recent edit, but I don't think it adds anything other than visual and audible clutter. Is there a visually simpler and PD/CC0 alternative, more appropriate for small decorative icon use? Or better to remove it? Matt Fitzpatrick (talk) 13:39, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

I don't see a particular need to have the image there, so if a suitable replacement can't be found then removal might be the best option. Primefac (talk) 15:05, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
Never mind! Problems solved by recent edits by User:CFCF. Matt Fitzpatrick (talk) 05:37, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Requested Change to Wiki Syntax

I'm requesting that the template code be totally replaced by the wiki syntax version in Template:WikiProject banner shell/sandbox as of this edit. (Full disclosure: the edit was made by me. I have not used that account in years, and I did not realize I was logged in).--216.12.10.118 (talk) 22:59, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit template-protected}} template. Your change is not an obvious improvement in any sense. Wiki syntax is categorically inferior for widely-used templates such as this one. Izno (talk) 23:15, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
@Izno:, so wiki syntax are certainly more difficult on templates that require parser functions in which the table has to be embedded within the function (hence how we get things like {{!}}, but this template does not fit that description. There's no reason why HTML markup would be used here; perhaps you are assuming that something is breaking and I'm being secretive about it (and if that's what you're thinking, I get it - IPs are strange). If you'd like to inform that assumption, I'd invite/encourage you to try - that's what the testcases page is for. But I'll happily wait to see if anyone objects to the change.--216.12.10.118 (talk) 23:43, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
I don't need to be invited to a test case page--as someone with the template editor permission, I'm expected to use them where I am unsure how a request works. I am simply sure that your change is a) unnecessary and b) has in fact some negative affect due to a need for some additional processing of wiki text as opposed to direct HTML. --Izno (talk) 23:52, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
@Izno: You say you know what you're doing, but frankly your edit on Template:Old moves hints that this was a little knee jerk. (For example, you apparently didn't notice that the template on the talk page, which was used to illustrate the issue, did collapse before you reverted the change saying "not an improvement" ... and then you left the template with an alignment problem that it didn't have before.) If you believe that the processing argument is legitimate, then I'll leave you to that. Though I do wonder if you might edit all Wikipedia Templates in order to remove wiki syntax, or if you're just arbitrarily invoking the argument now. I look forward to finding out!--216.12.10.118 (talk) 23:56, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
Third Opinion

Hello: So the disagreement here is whether wiki syntax would be preferable to HTML code on this template. I admit that templates embedded within parser functions create some confusing lines of code to someone not especially familiar with template coding, but this template does not fit that description. The code in Template:WikiProject banner shell/sandbox (which uses no workarounds like {{!}}) produces the exact same output as the current code. Izno says that such usage adds additional processing load, and to be clear: he is correct. But this load (which is basically nominal) has not caused template editors to rush the template space replacing wiki-syntax-bolding (''') with HTML-syntax-bolding (<b></b>).--216.12.10.118 (talk) 00:11, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Um... not to be cheeky, but how can you have a third opinion from the same IP that wrote the original request? Primefac (talk) 15:30, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
Here's one: the request starts off with an unqualified request to replace the live template with the sandbox one. No reason or explanation. The proposer should either describe the problems with the present template, and explain how their change would solve those problems; or if there are no problems, they should indicate how their proposed change would be beneficial. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:13, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
@Primefac: I wasn't pretending to be! Sorry if you got that impression. @Redrose64: Fair enough! Just to be clear though: the reason was the "wiki syntax version" (generally wiki syntax is preferred to HTML).--216.12.10.118 (talk) 02:26, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
OK, so there are no problems with the template as it stands - or if there are any, you're not saying what they are. So presumably you feel that your proposal is a beneficial change. You want us to switch to a "wiki syntax version", claiming "generally wiki syntax is preferred to HTML" - where is this stated in a policy or guideline? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 08:35, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Redirects

The following templates redirect to this template. I wonder if they are all needed? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 23:06, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Update:

Redirect Transclusions Note
Template:WPBS 12587 Former main redirect for this template
Template:Wikiprojectbannershell 0
Template:WikiProject Banner Shell 1124 Well used redirect
Template:WPBannerShell 306
Template:Wpbs 1007 Well used redirect, retain
Template:WP Banner Shell 270
Template:WP banner shell 11 Suggest delete
Template:WBPS 2 Suggest delete, unintuitive
Template:Bannershell 917 Well used redirect, retain
Template:Wikiproject Shell Banner 21 Suggest delete
Template:Wikiproject banner shell 0 Suggest delete
Template:WikiProject Banners Shell 0 Suggest delete
Template:WikiProjectBanner Shell 1 Suggest delete
Template:WikiProjectBannerShell 1088543 Former name of template, retain

I've added some proposals to the table above, basically to delete any redirect with less than 100 transclusions. Not sure about a couple of them. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 23:22, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Shell, WBPS, and Wikiproject Shell Banner were deleted. After deletion, I migrated all transclusion to WikiProject banner shell. — JJMC89 (T·C) 01:55, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Update

Redirect Transclusions Note
Template:WikiProject banner shell 163,090 The template itself. (approx.)
Template:WPBS 14,428 Former main redirect
Template:Wikiprojectbannershell 0
Template:WikiProject Banner Shell 1339
Template:WPBannerShell 334
Template:Wpbs 1,007
Template:WP Banner Shell 259
Template:WP banner shell 10
Template:Bannershell 983
Template:Wikiproject banner shell 0
Template:WikiProject Banners Shell 0
Template:WikiProjectBanner Shell 8
Template:WikiProjectBannerShell 1,097,546 Former name of template
Total 1,279,004

All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 20:48, 10 August 2016 (UTC).

Update 19 April 2017

Redirect Transclusions Note
Template:WikiProject banner shell 403,940 The template itself. (approx)
Template:WPBS 20,093 Former main redirect
Template:Wikiprojectbannershell 0
Template:WikiProject Banner Shell 2,041
Template:WPBannerShell 541
Template:Wpbs 1,202
Template:WP Banner Shell 234
Template:WP banner shell 8
Template:Bannershell 1,022
Template:Wikiproject banner shell 40
Template:WikiProject Banners Shell 0
Template:WikiProjectBanner Shell 0
Template:WikiProjectBannerShell 1,136,005 Former name of template
Total 1,565,126

Interestingly we see almost all usages growing except for the small ones. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 19:54, 19 April 2017 (UTC).

1=

I the "1=" still needed at the end of the first line? If so, why? It doesn't seem to have any function and the template appears to work just fine without it. Thanks, Jweiss11 (talk) 14:20, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

It was never technically needed. However, passing an unnamed parameter with multiple sub-arguments works best when you explicitly name said parameter. So {{foo|bar}} and {{foo|1=bar}} are functionally identical, but if the <bar> value contains template coding it could exit that first parameter early. Primefac (talk) 15:08, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
What Primefac said. It avoids any potential messiness since this template is for enclosing other templates. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 15:12, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Is this template being added to articles automatically?

If I recall correctly, there used to be a Wikipedia bot that automatically added this template to articles that were within the scope of multiple WikiProjects, like this one. Does Wikipedia have any tools that can automate the template's transclusion? Jarble (talk) 00:11, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

This is now included in the list of tasks performed by User:BattyBot. Jarble (talk) 22:27, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Request regarding [show] and [Expand]

I have noticed that when you set this to collapsed, the text that displays says "Click [show]" even though the actual button is called "[Expand]". See Talk:Tank Man for an instance of this. I'd prefer if this could be rectified by changing "[Expand]" and "[Collapse]" to "[Show]" and "[Hide]", although I'm not sure if that can be done? but I'd accept changing 

|multiple [[Wikipedia:WikiProject|WikiProjects]]. Click [show] for further details.

to 

|multiple [[Wikipedia:WikiProject|WikiProjects]]. Click [expand] for further details.

too. —A L T E R C A R I  ✍ 12:29, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

Not done: I'm not really sure what you're looking at. Both at Talk:Tank Man and a half-dozen other pages I checked, I see:

This article is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. Click [show] for further details

immediately followed by the [show] link. Primefac (talk) 12:32, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
How peculiar. I went back to Tank Man to see if I'm going insane, but the top-right button does say [Expand], and when clicked turns into [Collapse]. It's weird because all the contained WikiProject templates show [show] and [hide]. How could this happen?
—A L T E R C A R I  ✍ 12:40, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
No idea. Might be a CSS thing, might be a browser thing. Besides, there's no actual way to change the show/hide link itself, because it's being displayed due to this line of code:
<table role="presentation" class="tmbox tmbox-notice wpbs mbox-inside mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" style="border-collapse:separate;" cellspacing="4">
So I think it's user-side rather than a server-side thing. Primefac (talk) 13:40, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for looking into this. User-side like my Wiki account? Or my computer settings? Could it because I set my Wikipedia to en-gb? I'm not very tecky so I don't usually mess with settings much... I'd be surprised if this irregularity were just me.
—A L T E R C A R I  ✍ 13:57, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
That is indeed the case. I never changed it to en-gb because seeing "en-English" in the language preferences made me think there only was one en- setting. Primefac (talk) 14:07, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
Foiled again by American English, the One True English 🙄
—A L T E R C A R I  ✍ 14:19, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
@Altercari: That preference is one of the most misunderstood that we have. "en-English" is not American English - it is a generic, international form. The fact that two others (en-gb and en-ca) also exist merely adds to the confusion, especially since the system messages are normally updated for the en form, but not for the other two. Few people will experience difficulty if they switched from en-gb or en-ca to plain en. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 14:52, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

Add a |listas= parameter

Proposal: add a 

|listas=

parameter to this banner shell in a manner that would cover all the WikiProjects nested within the WP banner shell. Ping me back. Having fun! Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 22:22, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Your request will not work without adding a |listas= to all of the child templates. --Izno (talk) 22:37, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
I am requesting that the banner shell have a |listas= parameter that would flow to all the child templates. If I knew how to do that, this would be a replace-A with-B, request. Ping me back. Having fun! Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 23:42, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
I am telling you that your request is not possible to do automatically. You will still need to add a |listas= to each and every child template. Is that what you want to do? --Izno (talk) 23:58, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
@Izno: No, you don't. One |listas=, in any of the WikiProject banners that are used on a given talk page, is quite sufficient.. Indeed, on many of them (such as {{WikiProject Academic Journals}}, the documentation states:
  • listas – This parameter, which is the equivalent of the DEFAULTSORT sortkey that should be placed on all biographical articles, is a sortkey for the article talk page (e.g. for Norman Lockyer, use |listas=Lockyer, Norman so that the talk page will show up in the L's and not the N's of the various assessment and administrative categories). This is important because it is one source used by those who set DEFAULTSORT on the article; consider also setting the DEFAULTSORT for the article when setting this parameter. For more information about this, please see Wikipedia:Categorization of people § Ordering names in a category.
    If the article is using {{WikiProject banner shell}} then it is preferable to add |listas= to that template instead of a project banner template. Putting the parameter on more than one template is not required.
or similar - the names vary but the rest is the same. Note in particular the last paragraph. Almost all WikiProject banner templates recognise |listas=, and they process it in the same way: they use it to set a {{DEFAULTSORT:}}. Out of over 500 that I've checked, I only found three exceptions: {{WikiProject Ageing and culture}}; {{WikiProject Disaster management}}; and {{WikiProject Lepidoptera}} do not recognise |listas=. There may be others; but even though these don't recognise |listas=, a |listas= used in any other banner on the same page will set the sortkey for these exceptions because of the way that {{DEFAULTSORT:}} works.
@Checkingfax: Where have you found that a change such as that which you describe would be beneficial? Please give example pages. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:59, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
Hi, Redrose64. If I am hearing you correctly, the functionality is already there, in essence, and one |listas= in any child template will flow into all child templates in the banner shell. Thank you. Ping me back. Having fun! Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 08:25, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
@Checkingfax: Consider these two examples:
  • Talk:Daniel Kinnear Clark has just two WikiProject banners and no banner shell. The full WikiProject banner markup is: 
    {{WikiProject Biography |living=no |class=Start |listas=Clark, Daniel Kinnear |auto=yes }}
{{WikiProject Trains|class=start |importance=mid |UK=yes |UK-importance=mid }}
    Only the first of the two WikiProject banners has a |listas= parameter; it would not matter if that had been on the second one instead. Also, if you look in any of the categories that are unrelated to WikiProject Biography, such as Category:Mid-importance UK Railways articles, you will find the page under the "C" heading, not the "D" heading.
  • Talk:Eric Butler-Henderson has three WikiProject banners and uses {{WikiProjectBannerShell}} as well. The full WikiProject banner markup is: 
    {{WikiProjectBannerShell|1=
{{WikiProject Biography|living=no |class=start |listas=Butler-Henderson, Eric Brand |military-work-group=yes |military-priority=low |peerage-work-group=yes |peerage-priority= |needs-photo=yes }}
{{WikiProject Trains|class=start |importance=mid |UK=yes |UK-importance=mid |imageneeded=yes |Imagedetails=photo of subject |infoboxneeded=yes }}
{{WikiProject Northamptonshire|class=start |importance= |infobox=yes }}
}}
    Again, the only |listas= is in the {{WikiProject Biography}}; also again, if you look in any of the categories that are unrelated to WikiProject Biography, such as Category:Northamptonshire articles needing infoboxes, you will find the page under the "B" heading, not the "E" heading.
So it should be clear that there is no need for a |listas= parameter in {{WikiProject banner shell}}. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:46, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

blp and living parameters

The documentation for this template says do not add Don't add blp=no or living=no for dead people. IS that actually correct? And also WP:BLP mapp apply for a certain amount of time after death so an article on a recently deceased should probably have blp=yes for a few months.Djm-leighpark (talk) 08:35, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Adding |blp=no or really anything other than |blp=yes does absolutely nothing to the template, so saying "don't add it" is more of unnecessary instruction than anything. Primefac (talk) 11:58, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Name of template

Would anyone mind if we moved this template to Template:WikiProject banner shell? Splitting up the words and avoiding CamelCase? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:38, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Aren't there a number of scripts and bots that expect the present name? --Redrose64 (talk) 20:58, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
Possibly - are you aware of which ones? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:13, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
For the record, there are 17 redirects to this template, and they seem to cover pretty much all the bases. Primefac (talk) 04:27, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
I'm also sure that retaining the redirects will be sufficient to keep the bots working. Is there any opposition to this proposed rename? Shall I start a RM or just move it? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:30, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
The odd capitalization for this template always gets me (from the days when we were camel-casing our templates, no doubt, rather than providing for readability). I'd support that move. I'd also support a {{WikiProject shell}}. --Izno (talk) 15:50, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
I think {{WikiProject banner shell}} would be an appropriate move target, and {{WikiProject shell}} seems like a good name for a redirect. —PC-XT+ 21:51, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
I've made the move. Please no more redirects! We already have 16. I'm planning to nominate some of the lesser used redirects for deletion. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:21, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
So based on the whim of exactly three editors, all million plus uses of this template, which existed under its former name since its creation nine years ago, are now Wikipedia:Redirects. -- DanielPenfield (talk) 07:02, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
Essentially yes, that is true ;) Is there a problem with that? If so, I suggest we open WP:RM discussion. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:34, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
I agree with the move as it makes it more legible, however just wanted to point out that the word "WikiProject" is itself still in camel case. :-) --Jameboy (talk) 14:42, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 7 August 2019

For a long time at Talk:Global warming the various project banners have been grouped under Template:Banner shell, and the collapsed parameter has been =yes. Until recently there was a clickable "show" link, but it seems that Template:Show button is no longer working.

Last time it was working
08:39, July 30, 2019‎

In the next edit NOT working
09:44, July 30, 2019‎

Thanks for your help
NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 11:06, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

 Not done for now: I do not see an issue. The show button at right displays both for full template as well as each individual banner, and moreover works for each. Izno (talk) 11:51, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
(edit conflict) The page appears to be the same in both versions, and neither template has been edited in quite a while - {{show button}} hasn't been changed since 2010! NewsAndEventsGuy, are you saying that in the second diff you're seeing the WikiProjects not collapsed any more? Primefac (talk) 11:53, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
(A) I also checked the version history of bannershell and show button, and checked the diffs I provided and see no changes to the relevant syntax. Can't explain this.
(B) No the problem is something else. The bannershell is indeed collapsed in both version-diffs provided above. In the earlier one (8:39) there is a nice clickable show button that actually works. In the next one (9:44) the show button has been malformed, appearing partially in a second box below the expected box, and is not clickable. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 11:57, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

UPDATE I just noticed that there are many 'show' buttons on these pages and NONE of them work in the 2nd diff. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 12:04, 7 August 2019 (UTC) AH-HA!! The 2nd diff above introduced harv citations errors. Once I nowiki'd all the error-prone harv citations, the show button came back to life. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 12:21, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

@Izno and Primefac: Please look at the version in the 2nd diff again. Do any of the show buttons in any of the banners work for you? My answer is "no, they are all black and inoperable". But if you confirm they do work for you, then I suspect the explanation lies in user script code I imported to User:NewsAndEventsGuy/common.js. Your follow up help here will allow me to make an informed report to the script creators. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 12:46, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
I suspect it's something on your end - the show buttons have been there and been working for me for pretty much all the diffs. Primefac (talk) 15:22, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
100% on your end given your description of 'harv citations errors' causing the issue. You have multiple scripts in your Javascript which are related to citations. --Izno (talk) 16:25, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
 Done Thanks for the help isolating the problem. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 17:49, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

Click show for further details.

Let's just get rid of this instruction. Do we *really* need to tell them to "Click [show] for further details" on a default-collapsed template? I'd like to have a discussion about removing this, and see if there's any strong objections I haven't envisioned. This somehow reminds me of Internet 1.0, early Netscape days, where you would gently inform the viewer "click the blue link to go to the page", or the then ever-present "click here" labels. To me, it's just empty verbiage that clutters the banner, possibly eating up some vertical space on smaller devices when it wraps to another line. Gotta go check my geocities account and download my Napster tunes for the day, but I'll be back to hear your views. Mathglot (talk) 02:01, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

The identical issue exists with at least two other templates. Mathglot (talk) 02:12, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
Sounds logical to me to remove.. @Primefac: as they had this type of talk here before.--Moxy 🍁 03:26, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

An argument I hadn't even thought of earlier: those who read Talk pages are presumably a bit more savvy than the average article viewer, and yet default-collapsed Nav templates don't include such instructions. Mathglot (talk) 04:08, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Set action parameter in TfD template

Please add some value to the |action= parameter in the TfD template, so that all of the talk pages this is used on don't show that the template "is being considered for deletion". I'm not 100% sure on the wording: the "is being considered for" part is hardcoded in the TfD template. I suggest "discussion" or "default collapsing". --rchard2scout (talk) 12:41, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

 Done thanks for the tip! ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 12:48, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template_talk:WikiProject_banner_shell/Archive_5&oldid=1245548627"