This is an archive of past discussions about Module:WikiProject banner. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Doesn't work. The template doesn't show up, and it messes up the format of the rest of the banner. Note that this alerts template is included in other banners with no issue. Stevie is the man!Talk • Work21:24, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
Oh of course, sorry. Essentially the issue there is that the hook parameters are designed to allow you to do just about anything, which means you have to do just about everything:D. That means that you need to define a new table row, a new table cell within that row, enter the alert message, then close the cell, then close the row. The parameter |BOTTOM_TEXT= is better suited to what you want to do, since it does all that for you: anything you put into that parameter will display in a full-width row across the bottom of the banner. I see it's already used for something in {{WikiProject Louisville}}, but you might want to repurpose it. Happy‑melon21:48, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
The peerreview hook currently doesn't work with the category parameter as it's not used in the template. I've done a sandbox version that fixes that and also shows up on the template design page as well. I've done a sample banner so you can see it working. If it all looks ok, could someone copy it over to the live template. -- WOSlinker (talk) 17:23, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Not done for now: Hi, this may be a design feature, but could you explain why the sandbox is double the length and seems a lot more complex than the current version? And what's with the "TemplatePage" and "Live" version comments? Sorry, but I'm not familiar with these templates, and I want to double-check that we're not breaking anything.--Aervanath (talk) 16:59, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Could the qualimpintersect templates be changed to add support for a SUPPRESS_NA_CLASS which will stop the Quality/Importance Insersect category from being added to an article when |SUPPRESS_NA_CLASS=yes and |class=NA. The changes are in the sandboxes below:
I'm trying to work out whether it is really necessary to pass the BANNER_NAME parameter to the /cats hook. As the cat n parameters will be empty on the template page, it seems this could just be removed? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:40, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Ah, I see what you mean. So what we could do is point out on the documentation that is it not required in normal cases? And I think we can simplify the code slightly by using the "and not" logical operator - could you check my code on Template:WPBannerMeta/hooks/cats/sandbox? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:39, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
I think the only practical difference is that the check for whether the checklist is displayed uses pre-normalised values. Therefore it is possible to differentiate between a blank input and something like <yes/no>, which normalise to the same. It's hardly important but I think if someone fills in the parameters using the copy/paste table (i.e. with <yes/no>) then it would be helpful if the checklist displayed. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:36, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
Is there a way to mimic the formatting of <pre> without using <pre>? This would make it easier to manipulate the copy/paste code. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:50, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
For item 2, can use the source tag instead of the pre tag, although that's very similar. Another option would be a div tag with the style set to all the bits used in pre but I've not quite got the multiple spaces to work. -- WOSlinker (talk) 18:06, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
I would like parser functions to work inside the environment, so your div is the best of those I think. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:40, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
I've improved the formatting by using non-breaking spaces. But it's taking up a bit too much space and the line-height property doesn't seem to make any difference. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 22:10, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, hadn't seen that last message. Anyway, I've fixed the line-spacing by removing all carriage returns inside the section. The font was also a bit bigger than before, so I've changed it from 88% to 80%. -- WOSlinker (talk) 17:41, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
Sweet. I think that code is ready to go now, if you don't mind taking a quick check. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:54, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
How about a DISPLAY_ON_START parameter so that it is not necessary to check the output of the banner's class subpage? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:52, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
Added to /sandbox code - can you check? I guess a tracking category will be needed to find the uses which need this parameter. Or do you happen to know which ones? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:38, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
This parameter now implemented. I've added it to WPAVIATION and added a tracking category to find any others. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:48, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
Since it's only one project that would need this feature, is it worth adding? Altohugh a differnet option could be BCHECKLIST_CORE to specify a different core template rather than having CRITERION_1 to CRITERION_6 as the other difficulty is formatting the layout of the pre section correctly. -- WOSlinker (talk) 08:36, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
I guess you're right. If it's only that project which is likely to need it, then we don't need to add it. Same logic for BCHECKLIST_CORE, I suppose, unless there are any others which could use that. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:31, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
Toying with moving the check for whether the copy/paste code is displayed onto the main template with a SHOW_SYNTAX parameter. That would allow <yes/no> to be interpreted differently to a blank input. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:10, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
taskforces
I think there are several projects which will inherit the overall importance for taskforces if no specific importance is specified. However it is often not desirable to show "rated XXX-importance" if this happens, so this means that the default text cannot be used, which in turn means the importance can't be normalised before displaying. I wonder if an inherited importance feature might be worth adding to the taskforces hook to fix this problem. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:14, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
So how about one or both of the following features?
|DISPLAY_IMPORTANCE= - a parameter to control whether the importance rating is appended to the taskforce text.
|DISPLAY_IMPORTANCE=yes - append
|DISPLAY_IMPORTANCE=no - don't append
blank or undefined - current behaviour (i.e. if the default text is used then "yes" otherwise "no")
|inherit importance={{{importance|}}} - if this is defined then if taskforce importance is used but not currently rated, then the overall importance will be applied?
Any comments welcomed. There are a few tests on /testcases. The code is significantly simplified by using a separate /templatepage. And the custom code can be removed from the main /taskforce template once this is deployed. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:48, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
I'm thinking about a couple of possible adjustments:
Should the decision whether to use inherited importance check the ASSESSMENT_CAT parameter rather than the importance parameter? Currently some of the {{WikiProject Canada}} task forces use the generic importance and don't even have a parameter for a custom importance. This currently means that all the tf n importance parameters have to be passed blank which is not very tidy.
Should |tf n importance=sausage be interpreted the same as a blank parameter? This would help {{WikiProject Football}} where the task force parameter doubles as the importance parameter (and so "yes" should be ignored).
@MSGJ: Besides Football, I've found three (Cryptography, Databases, Java) that use inherited importance, but a different method - these three use code like this:
|tf 2 importance={{#if:{{{computer-science-importance|}}}|{{{computer-science-importance}}}|{{{importance|}}}}}<!-- Inherit importance if not specified -->
I'm proposing an option to display the header of a collapsed section even if the section does not collapse. This is needed for a banner which I'm working to convert. There is some code on /collapsed/sandbox which adds a DISPLAY_HEAD parameter. Any comments please. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:38, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Many projects choose to have to-do lists as part of their project banner (looking at [1] will give you some idea of the number). It is likely that these projects think they are useful, otherwise they probably wouldn't use it. As for the red links, is there any harm in having them there? Would you be concerned if they were blue links? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:55, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
I think this hook could be tremendously useful, if the hook would also put the articles with todo lists into a category, as Tulips articles with todo. That would allow the project members to figure out which articles have been marked by this hook. Unless there is some other mechanism I don't know of. Thanks! --Codrin.B (talk) 20:51, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Well, I tried adding WPBannerMeta/hooks/cats as the last hook and then the WPBannerMeta/hooks/article todolist. The todo list disappears but articles appear in the Category:Dacia articles with todo lists. If I do the opposite, the todo list appears on the talk page, but the articles don't show up in the category anymore. I am missing anything? Here is the template {{WikiProject Dacia}}. Hope you can give me a hand. Thanks a lot!--Codrin.B (talk) 21:31, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
Having the ability to assemble all article todo lists in a master project todo list would be of tremendous use.--Codrin.B (talk) 21:02, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Does this include a single category for any article that has an incomplete checklist? I'm not sure what the exact criteria are, but I know WPSHIPS and MILHIST have categories to track some sort of incomplete B-class assessment. — Carl (CBM · talk) 22:16, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
There would be individual categories for each of the checklist criteria. Would only include articles where the checklist is shown on the banner, so articles classed as stubs would not be included in the categories. Or are you after something slightly different? -- WOSlinker (talk) 22:35, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
I think (based on [2]) that the thing people are looking for is a category for articles that have any incomplete parameter in the checklist, so that the people can make a list of articles to edit. It would be more difficult for implementing that feature in the WP 1.0 bot if we have to do a union of several categories, and much easier if there was a single category for articles that have any missing part. But categories for each parameter would be OK as well, I don't think it has to be one or the other. Limiting it to articles where the checklist is shown seems right to me. — Carl (CBM · talk) 00:14, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
Wouldn't a single category be very similar to the C-Class category? Sort of depends if you are wanting to find those articles without a parameter filled in with anything or those articles without a yes in the parameter. Could have an option for either if the choice was needed. Could also include an option fo a single category as well. -- WOSlinker (talk) 07:33, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
Here's an example to try. I've added a MAIN_CAT param and also a CAT_TYPE param, which if set to "only_blank" then will not include those with params set to no. -- WOSlinker (talk) 07:49, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
{{WPBM
|PROJECT=Sausages
|BANNER_NAME=Template:Fictitious template
|category=no
|IMAGE_LEFT=Kielbasa7.jpg
|HOOK_ASSESS={{WPBannerMeta/hooks/bchecklist/sandbox
|BANNER_NAME=Template:Fictitious template
|class=start
|b1=yes
|b2=no
|b3=
|b4=yes
|b5=sausage
|MAIN_CAT=Sausage articles with incomplete checklists
|B1_CAT=Sausage articles needing attention to referencing and citation
|B2_CAT=Sausage articles needing attention to coverage and accuracy
|B3_CAT=Sausage articles needing attention to structure
|B4_CAT=Sausage articles needing attention to grammar
|B5_CAT=Sausage articles attention to supporting materials
|CAT_TYPE=only_blank
}}
}}
Having thought about it a little more, there no need for a CAT_TYPE param. What now happens is that if MAIN_CAT is set, it is used when a param is blank or unrecognised and the if individual cats are set, it is used when a param is blank, unrecognised or no. -- WOSlinker (talk) 09:42, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
Let me go ask the person who made the original request what they want, exactly. They're the ones who will be using this in the end. — Carl (CBM · talk) 12:06, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
I very much appreciate your efforts. To answer your question, WOSlinker, yes, it would be similar to the C-class now, but only to a smaller degree, as we have started adding B-class reviews (and adding/completing the checklists) now. Thus the problem is that we are losing (lost...) track of which C-class articles where simply failed and which haven't been reviwed yet. The goal of incomplete/missing B-class checklist category would be to give us a list of the articles we need to review (and add/complete the checklist), so that in the end, that category would be empty and all C-class articles would have a (Failed) B-class review. Could you point me to the new categories? Or you are welcome to annouce them at WT:POLAND. Thank you all for this effort, I think all B-class reviewing WikiProjects will benefit from this. Now, how do we notify them...? If there would be a way to easily see which projects have implemented a checklist, we could have a bot announce your new tool to them... --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 16:26, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
can't all just read "n"? It's nice to know that there are icons for every contingency, but I think the default can be pretty confusing for anyone not familiar with the B-class checklist, especially if B1 and B4 appear to have "criterion met". Yes, it becomes apparent once you add the checklist code to the template on the talk page of any album, but right off the bat, it may be a little misleading. Especially now that the class check has been moved elsewhere. Just a thought. – – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies16:19, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
bchecklist graphics
Disregard
– Apparently this isn't an issue from what I'm just seeing at another wikiproject template. – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies04:39, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
There hasn't been any dissension to my discussion above. There is no reason for anything other than "y/yes" or "n/no" to be written in these parameters. Therefore, please make the following changes to Template:WPBannerMeta/hooks/bchecklist. Replace:
Please remove the line {{pp-template}} - protection templates are automatically handled by the documentation page. Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 06:53, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
Disregard
