Module talk:WikiProject banner/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

Discussion

I was about to suggest the same idea. Did you propose this template somewhere just to advertise these it? 16@r (talk) 23:35, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

I'd wanted to do something like this for a while, but I asked at WT:COUNCIL first to check that it hadn't already been done. When the response was negative, I cooked this up - it's a shamless plagiarism from the Tulips example at WP:COUNCIL, along with bits pinched from WP:AFRICA, WP:BALLET and various other places. Happy‑melon 09:45, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Eek. I'm not sure where, but somewhere near the beginning of this a "br" is generated when this is used in WPBannerShell. To see what I mean, take a look at Talk:Sun Ra. From what I can tell, the namespace code at the beginning is causing that line. Perhaps a <--(newline)--> between that an the table? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 21:31, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Tighter categorisation

Hi,

I've just spent a little while improving the Geology template so it creates more specific categories: for example, "High-importance Stub-class geology articles". When you changed the template to the new "universal" format, these changes were lost. I think the idea of having a centrally maintained template such as this one is truly excellent, and wonder whether my coding could be incorporated into it? You should find it simple enough to see what I've done.

Best,

Verisimilus T 14:16, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Responded on Template talk:WikiProject Geology. Happy‑melon 15:23, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

B-Class criteria

I can't find it so I though I'd ask. Is there a way to include the B-class article checklist? If not, that's fine and I'll code it into the old project template we used to use. Thanks! §hep • ¡Talk to me! 22:43, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

There currently isn't anything hard-coded into the banner, although there are numerous places where you can 'hang' extra code as required (|BOTTOM_TEXT= and |COLLAPSED_TEXT= are good ones). How standardised are the B-class assessments between wikiprojects? If they are almost universal, I could work something into the banner; but if the assessments are customised for each project, then it wouldn't be worth it. Happy‑melon 10:29, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

According to the 1.0 Team

Commonly the highest article grade that is assigned outside a more formal review process. Has several of the elements described in "start", usually a majority of the material needed for a comprehensive article. Nonetheless, it has some gaps or missing elements or references, needs editing for language usage or clarity, balance of content, or contains other policy problems such as copyright, Neutral Point Of View (NPOV) or No Original Research (NOR). With NPOV a well written B-class may correspond to the "Wikipedia 0.5" or "usable" standard. Articles that are close to GA status but don't meet the Good article criteria should be B- or Start-class articles.

Following that the MILHIS banner seems to have the coding that does the trick. | This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status:

# <code>{{#ifeq:{{WPMILHIST/Any|{{{B-Class-1|}}}|{{{B-1|}}}|{{{B1|}}}|{{{b-1|}}}|{{{b1|}}}}}|yes| [[Image:Orange check.svg|16x16px]] | {{#ifeq:{{WPMILHIST/Any|{{{B-Class-1|}}}|{{{B-1|}}}|{{{B1|}}}|{{{b-1|}}}|{{{b1|}}}}}|no| [[Image:Red x.svg|16x16px]] | [[Image:Purple question mark.svg|16x16px]] }}}} Referencing and citation: {{#ifeq:{{WPMILHIST/Any|{{{B-Class-1|}}}|{{{B-1|}}}|{{{B1|}}}|{{{b-1|}}}|{{{b1|}}}}}|yes| ''criterion met'' | {{#ifeq:{{WPMILHIST/Any|{{{B-Class-1|}}}|{{{B-1|}}}|{{{B1|}}}|{{{b-1|}}}|{{{b1|}}}}}|no| ''criterion not met'' | ''not checked'' }}}}</code>
# <code>{{#ifeq:{{WPMILHIST/Any|{{{B-Class-2|}}}|{{{B-2|}}}|{{{B2|}}}|{{{b-2|}}}|{{{b2|}}}}}|yes| [[Image:Orange check.svg|16x16px]] | {{#ifeq:{{WPMILHIST/Any|{{{B-Class-2|}}}|{{{B-2|}}}|{{{B2|}}}|{{{b-2|}}}|{{{b2|}}}}}|no| [[Image:Red x.svg|16x16px]] | [[Image:Purple question mark.svg|16x16px]] }}}} Coverage and accuracy: {{#ifeq:{{WPMILHIST/Any|{{{B-Class-2|}}}|{{{B-2|}}}|{{{B2|}}}|{{{b-2|}}}|{{{b2|}}}}}|yes| ''criterion met'' | {{#ifeq:{{WPMILHIST/Any|{{{B-Class-2|}}}|{{{B-2|}}}|{{{B2|}}}|{{{b-2|}}}|{{{b2|}}}}}|no| ''criterion not met'' | ''not checked'' }}}}</code>
# <code>{{#ifeq:{{WPMILHIST/Any|{{{B-Class-3|}}}|{{{B-3|}}}|{{{B3|}}}|{{{b-3|}}}|{{{b3|}}}}}|yes| [[Image:Orange check.svg|16x16px]] | {{#ifeq:{{WPMILHIST/Any|{{{B-Class-3|}}}|{{{B-3|}}}|{{{B3|}}}|{{{b-3|}}}|{{{b3|}}}}}|no| [[Image:Red x.svg|16x16px]] | [[Image:Purple question mark.svg|16x16px]] }}}} Structure: {{#ifeq:{{WPMILHIST/Any|{{{B-Class-3|}}}|{{{B-3|}}}|{{{B3|}}}|{{{b-3|}}}|{{{b3|}}}}}|yes| ''criterion met'' | {{#ifeq:{{WPMILHIST/Any|{{{B-Class-3|}}}|{{{B-3|}}}|{{{B3|}}}|{{{b-3|}}}|{{{b3|}}}}}|no| ''criterion not met'' | ''not checked'' }}}}</code>
# <code>{{#ifeq:{{WPMILHIST/Any|{{{B-Class-4|}}}|{{{B-4|}}}|{{{B4|}}}|{{{b-4|}}}|{{{b4|}}}}}|yes| [[Image:Orange check.svg|16x16px]] | {{#ifeq:{{WPMILHIST/Any|{{{B-Class-4|}}}|{{{B-4|}}}|{{{B4|}}}|{{{b-4|}}}|{{{b4|}}}}}|no| [[Image:Red x.svg|16x16px]] | [[Image:Purple question mark.svg|16x16px]] }}}} Grammar: {{#ifeq:{{WPMILHIST/Any|{{{B-Class-4|}}}|{{{B-4|}}}|{{{B4|}}}|{{{b-4|}}}|{{{b4|}}}}}|yes| ''criterion met'' | {{#ifeq:{{WPMILHIST/Any|{{{B-Class-4|}}}|{{{B-4|}}}|{{{B4|}}}|{{{b-4|}}}|{{{b4|}}}}}|no| ''criterion not met'' | ''not checked'' }}}}</code>
# <code>{{#ifeq:{{WPMILHIST/Any|{{{B-Class-5|}}}|{{{B-5|}}}|{{{B5|}}}|{{{b-5|}}}|{{{b5|}}}}}|yes| [[Image:Orange check.svg|16x16px]] | {{#ifeq:{{WPMILHIST/Any|{{{B-Class-5|}}}|{{{B-5|}}}|{{{B5|}}}|{{{b-5|}}}|{{{b5|}}}}}|no| [[Image:Red x.svg|16x16px]] | [[Image:Purple question mark.svg|16x16px]] }}}} Supporting materials: {{#ifeq:{{WPMILHIST/Any|{{{B-Class-5|}}}|{{{B-5|}}}|{{{B5|}}}|{{{b-5|}}}|{{{b5|}}}}}|yes| ''criterion met'' | {{#ifeq:{{WPMILHIST/Any|{{{B-Class-5|}}}|{{{B-5|}}}|{{{B5|}}}|{{{b-5|}}}|{{{b5|}}}}}|no| ''criterion not met'' | ''not checked'' }}}}</code>
{{#if:{{WPMILHIST/Any|{{{B-Class-1|}}}|{{{B-1|}}}|{{{B1|}}}|{{{b-1|}}}|{{{b1|}}}}}{{WPMILHIST/Any|{{{B-Class-2|}}}|{{{B-2|}}}|{{{B2|}}}|{{{b-2|}}}|{{{b2|}}}}}{{WPMILHIST/Any|{{{B-Class-3|}}}|{{{B-3|}}}|{{{B3|}}}|{{{b-3|}}}|{{{b3|}}}}}{{WPMILHIST/Any|{{{B-Class-4|}}}|{{{B-4|}}}|{{{B4|}}}|{{{b-4|}}}|{{{b4|}}}}}{{WPMILHIST/Any|{{{B-Class-5|}}}|{{{B-5|}}}|{{{B5|}}}|{{{b-5|}}}|{{{b5|}}}}}||{{#if:{{{B-Class-1}}}{{{B-Class-2}}}{{{B-Class-3}}}{{{B-Class-4}}}{{{B-Class-5}}}</code>|<code>To fill out this checklist, please <span class="editlink noprint plainlinksneverexpand">[{{SERVER}}{{localurl:{{NAMESPACE}}:{{PAGENAME}}|action=edit}} add]</span> the following to the template call:<br/><small><samp><!-- B-Class-1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. --></samp></small><br/><small><samp>|B-Class-1=yes/no</samp></small><br/><small><samp><!-- B-Class-2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. --></samp></small><br/><small><samp>|B-Class-2=yes/no</samp></small><br/><small><samp><!-- B-Class-3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --></samp></small><br/><small><samp>|B-Class-3=yes/no</samp></small><br/><small><samp><!-- B-Class-4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --></samp></small><br/><small><samp>|B-Class-4=yes/no</samp></small><br/><small><samp><!-- B-Class-5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --></samp></small><br/><small><samp>|B-Class-5=yes/no</samp></small>}}
|#default=}}</code>

That looks fairly similar to the criteria set forth by WP:1. It would be nice to have it set up though, so if the article was above B-Class the checklist wouldn't appear. What do you think? §hep • ¡Talk to me! 20:31, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

As I said, implementing a checklist like that would be relatively easy, as would the trick you suggest. The question is, how widely would it be used? Remember that any addition made to the metatemplate increases the code size for all projects using the banner, on all pages where a banner based on it appears. It's only worth adding if the majority of projects which do B-class checklists use exactly this set of criteria, in that precise order, etc etc. How widespread is this system? Happy‑melon 20:38, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

I honestly don't have a clue. Would you mind putting a checklist on Template:OH-Project; I can't figure it out how to make it just appear on articles that are rated B and below with the Meta syntax. Thanks. §hep • ¡Talk to me! 20:49, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Help

Template:Ottawaproject and Template:WikiProject Toronto, both of which use this template, have spontaneously dropped the word "article" from their categories -- they are now categorising into "Stub-Class Toronto", "Mid-importance Ottawa" etc.. whereas a few days ago it was "Stub-Class Toronto articles", "Mid-importance Ottawa articles". Could someone please take a look? --Padraic 11:59, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Both

Fixed Happy‑melon 12:08, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks! They also don't seem to be indexed by the bot -- any thoughts on that? --Padraic 12:33, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Two projects I work with appear to have been affected by this problem. Both WP:HAM and WP:NUDITY have dropped "articles" from the category name. Was this a planned change? If so, I'd appreciate some direction to instructions on adjusting categories to the new standard. Thanks. --StuffOfInterest (talk) 16:40, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Ok, most importantly: to fix this problem, which seems to be fairly widespread, you need to add "articles" to the end of whatever you've got in |ASSESSMENT_CAT=. Eg these edits of mine: [1], [2], [3]. As to why it's recently started doing it, well, it was always supposed to be this way: if you check the documentation you'll see that parameter was supposed to be an omnipotent opt-out. As it is, I made a little error the first time I wrote that piece of code (I coded {{#if:{{{ASSESSMENT_CAT|}}}|{{{ASSESSMENT_CAT}}}|{{{PROJECT}}}}} articles instead of {{#if:{{{ASSESSMENT_CAT|}}}|{{{ASSESSMENT_CAT}}}|{{{PROJECT}}} articles}}) and then copied it everywhere else I needed that functionality; as such, this is really a bug which was worked around by 'breaking' all the instance templates. Happy‑melon 20:06, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

I've "fixed" the two projects I'm involved with. Thanks for explaining what happened. --StuffOfInterest (talk) 20:37, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

List as

It seems that many templates have been written to override listas parameters. Thus, when I look at a category like Category:GA-Class Chicago articles all the names are in the wrong places. Is there a reason for this? Please drop a note on my talk page when you respond to this.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 00:59, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Template:AUCK

It seems that the Wikiproject Auckland bannere located here has begun to suffer some problems, i.e deadlinks occuring that do infact have pages at the other end, although I am not positive if this is the source, these problems didnt exist before a banner appeared on the template page telling me to refer here about problems with the WPBannerMeta data, qhich i suspect is the problem. Could someone please help with the problem? Taifar ious1 03:50, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Fixed Happy‑melon 07:23, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

More task forces

Would it be possible to add the support for just a couple more task forces (I was planning on using this template for Template:TelevisionWikiProject, but it has one task force too much. — Parent5446 ☯ ^{(message email)} 12:51, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

I added three more, to bring the total to eight. I think I'll need to rethink the code that displays the link when the template is nested if we end up adding any more: it's horribly inefficient. I'm getting increasingly annoyed that wikimarkup doesn't have support for arrays/dictionaries in any fashion. Happy‑melon 14:05, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Maybe you should suggest something like an array or dictionary here, and it just might get implemented. — Parent5446 ☯ ^{(message email)} 21:13, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

One more thing needs to be fixed. When the additional task forces were put in, the {{#if:{{{TF_#|}}}| functions (which check if a task force is set) repeat as task force number five:

The current code reads:

{{#if:{{{TF_4|}}}|{{#if:{{{tf 4|}}}|
{{WPBannerMeta/taskforce|IMAGE={{{TF_4_IMAGE|}}}|SIZE={{{TF_4_SIZE|}}}|TEXT={{{TF_4_TEXT|}}}|LINK={{{TF_4_LINK|}}}|NAME=
{{{TF_4_NAME|}}}|QUALITY={{{TF_4_QUALITY|}}}|FQS={{{FULL_QUALITY_SCALE|}}}|class={{{class|}}}|IMPORTANCE=
{{{TF_4_IMPORTANCE|}}}|importance={{{tf 4 importance|}}}|ASSESSMENT_CAT={{{TF_4_ASSESS_CAT|}}}|category={{{category|μ}}} }}
}}}}{{#if:{{{TF_5|}}}|{{#if:{{{tf 5|}}}|
{{WPBannerMeta/taskforce|IMAGE={{{TF_5_IMAGE|}}}|SIZE={{{TF_5_SIZE|}}}|TEXT={{{TF_5_TEXT|}}}|LINK={{{TF_5_LINK|}}}|NAME=
{{{TF_5_NAME|}}}|QUALITY={{{TF_5_QUALITY|}}}|FQS={{{FULL_QUALITY_SCALE|}}}|class={{{class|}}}|IMPORTANCE=
{{{TF_5_IMPORTANCE|}}}|importance={{{tf 5 importance|}}}|ASSESSMENT_CAT={{{TF_5_ASSESS_CAT|}}}|category={{{category|μ}}} }}
}}}}{{#if:{{{TF_5|}}}|{{#if:{{{tf 5|}}}|
{{WPBannerMeta/taskforce|IMAGE={{{TF_6_IMAGE|}}}|SIZE={{{TF_6_SIZE|}}}|TEXT={{{TF_6_TEXT|}}}|LINK={{{TF_6_LINK|}}}|NAME=
{{{TF_6_NAME|}}}|QUALITY={{{TF_6_QUALITY|}}}|FQS={{{FULL_QUALITY_SCALE|}}}|class={{{class|}}}|IMPORTANCE=
{{{TF_6_IMPORTANCE|}}}|importance={{{tf 6 importance|}}}|ASSESSMENT_CAT={{{TF_6_ASSESS_CAT|}}}|category={{{category|μ}}} }}
}}}}{{#if:{{{TF_5|}}}|{{#if:{{{tf 5|}}}|
{{WPBannerMeta/taskforce|IMAGE={{{TF_7_IMAGE|}}}|SIZE={{{TF_7_SIZE|}}}|TEXT={{{TF_7_TEXT|}}}|LINK={{{TF_7_LINK|}}}|NAME=
{{{TF_7_NAME|}}}|QUALITY={{{TF_7_QUALITY|}}}|FQS={{{FULL_QUALITY_SCALE|}}}|class={{{class|}}}|IMPORTANCE=
{{{TF_7_IMPORTANCE|}}}|importance={{{tf 7 importance|}}}|ASSESSMENT_CAT={{{TF_7_ASSESS_CAT|}}}|category={{{category|μ}}} }}
}}}}{{#if:{{{TF_5|}}}|{{#if:{{{tf 5|}}}|
{{WPBannerMeta/taskforce|IMAGE={{{TF_8_IMAGE|}}}|SIZE={{{TF_8_SIZE|}}}|TEXT={{{TF_8_TEXT|}}}|LINK={{{TF_8_LINK|}}}|NAME=
{{{TF_8_NAME|}}}|QUALITY={{{TF_8_QUALITY|}}}|FQS={{{FULL_QUALITY_SCALE|}}}|class={{{class|}}}|IMPORTANCE=
{{{TF_8_IMPORTANCE|}}}|importance={{{tf 8 importance|}}}|ASSESSMENT_CAT={{{TF_8_ASSESS_CAT|}}}|category={{{category|μ}}} }}
}}}}

It should read:

{{#if:{{{TF_4|}}}|{{#if:{{{tf 4|}}}|
{{WPBannerMeta/taskforce|IMAGE={{{TF_4_IMAGE|}}}|SIZE={{{TF_4_SIZE|}}}|TEXT={{{TF_4_TEXT|}}}|LINK={{{TF_4_LINK|}}}|NAME=
{{{TF_4_NAME|}}}|QUALITY={{{TF_4_QUALITY|}}}|FQS={{{FULL_QUALITY_SCALE|}}}|class={{{class|}}}|IMPORTANCE=
{{{TF_4_IMPORTANCE|}}}|importance={{{tf 4 importance|}}}|ASSESSMENT_CAT={{{TF_4_ASSESS_CAT|}}}|category={{{category|μ}}} }}
}}}}{{#if:{{{TF_5|}}}|{{#if:{{{tf 5|}}}|
{{WPBannerMeta/taskforce|IMAGE={{{TF_5_IMAGE|}}}|SIZE={{{TF_5_SIZE|}}}|TEXT={{{TF_5_TEXT|}}}|LINK={{{TF_5_LINK|}}}|NAME=
{{{TF_5_NAME|}}}|QUALITY={{{TF_5_QUALITY|}}}|FQS={{{FULL_QUALITY_SCALE|}}}|class={{{class|}}}|IMPORTANCE=
{{{TF_5_IMPORTANCE|}}}|importance={{{tf 5 importance|}}}|ASSESSMENT_CAT={{{TF_5_ASSESS_CAT|}}}|category={{{category|μ}}} }}
}}}}{{#if:{{{TF_6|}}}|{{#if:{{{tf 6|}}}|
{{WPBannerMeta/taskforce|IMAGE={{{TF_6_IMAGE|}}}|SIZE={{{TF_6_SIZE|}}}|TEXT={{{TF_6_TEXT|}}}|LINK={{{TF_6_LINK|}}}|NAME=
{{{TF_6_NAME|}}}|QUALITY={{{TF_6_QUALITY|}}}|FQS={{{FULL_QUALITY_SCALE|}}}|class={{{class|}}}|IMPORTANCE=
{{{TF_6_IMPORTANCE|}}}|importance={{{tf 6 importance|}}}|ASSESSMENT_CAT={{{TF_6_ASSESS_CAT|}}}|category={{{category|μ}}} }}
}}}}{{#if:{{{TF_7|}}}|{{#if:{{{tf 7|}}}|
{{WPBannerMeta/taskforce|IMAGE={{{TF_7_IMAGE|}}}|SIZE={{{TF_7_SIZE|}}}|TEXT={{{TF_7_TEXT|}}}|LINK={{{TF_7_LINK|}}}|NAME=
{{{TF_7_NAME|}}}|QUALITY={{{TF_7_QUALITY|}}}|FQS={{{FULL_QUALITY_SCALE|}}}|class={{{class|}}}|IMPORTANCE=
{{{TF_7_IMPORTANCE|}}}|importance={{{tf 7 importance|}}}|ASSESSMENT_CAT={{{TF_7_ASSESS_CAT|}}}|category={{{category|μ}}} }}
}}}}{{#if:{{{TF_8|}}}|{{#if:{{{tf 8|}}}|
{{WPBannerMeta/taskforce|IMAGE={{{TF_8_IMAGE|}}}|SIZE={{{TF_8_SIZE|}}}|TEXT={{{TF_8_TEXT|}}}|LINK={{{TF_8_LINK|}}}|NAME=
{{{TF_8_NAME|}}}|QUALITY={{{TF_8_QUALITY|}}}|FQS={{{FULL_QUALITY_SCALE|}}}|class={{{class|}}}|IMPORTANCE=
{{{TF_8_IMPORTANCE|}}}|importance={{{tf 8 importance|}}}|ASSESSMENT_CAT={{{TF_8_ASSESS_CAT|}}}|category={{{category|μ}}} }}
}}}}

Thanks, — Parent5446 ☯ ^{(message email)} 02:32, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

I edited the template in the sandbox (so that sandbox has the fixed version), and the differences can be seen on the testcases page. — Parent5446 ☯ ^{(message email)} 12:02, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Gah!! Silly me! Fixed now... Happy‑melon 16:33, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Thats OK. I have done that dozens of times. BTW, I log in and got to my watchlist: First edit says "me = twit", and I just burst into hysterical laughter. — Parent5446 ☯ ^{(message email)} 19:32, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

More Notes

{{editprotected}} One more thing, sorry to bother you so much (if the page was not protected I would do it myself), could you add a couple more notes to the banner (not C_NOTE, just regular notes). Thanks a lot. — Parent5446 ☯ ^{(message email)} 19:34, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm reluctant to do this because you can achieve the same effect with 'bolt on' code on |BOTTOM_TEXT=. I think I'll cook up an "extra notes" 'module' to hang on that parameter, with the same syntax as the normal notes; that will avoid increasing the bytecount for other projects. Poke me if I forget this. Happy‑melon 21:20, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I've had a closer look at the syntax I've already got, and the easiest thing to do it just to call {{WPBannerMeta/note}} directly with its internal parameters. So syntax like this:

{{WPBannerMeta
|PROJECT             = 
 |BANNER_NAME        = {{subst:FULLPAGENAME}}
 |small={{{small|}}}
 |nested={{{nested|}}}
 |category={{{category|μ}}}
....
|NOTE_5              = yes
 |note 5={{{**PARAMETER**|}}}
 |NOTE_5_TEXT        = Foo bar lorem ipsum
 |NOTE_5_IMAGE       = Foo.jpg
  |NOTE_5_SIZE       = 30px
 |NOTE_5_CAT         = Somecat
 |NOTE_5_FORMAT      = 
|BOTTOM_TEXT         = <!--
-->{{WPBannerMeta/note
  |note={{{**PARAMETER**|}}}
  |NOTE_TEXT         = More text
  |NOTE_IMAGE        = Example.jpg
   |NOTE_SIZE         = 25px
  |NOTE_CAT          = AnotherCat
  |NOTE_FORMAT       = 
}}{{WPBannerMeta/note
    |note={{{**PARAMETER**|}}}
  |NOTE_TEXT         = More text
  |NOTE_IMAGE        = Example.jpg
   |NOTE_SIZE         = 25px
  |NOTE_CAT          = AnotherCat
  |NOTE_FORMAT       = 
}}
}}<noinclude>
{{subst check|{{subst:FULLPAGENAME}}}}
</noinclude>

Can be repeated as often as desired to add more notes. It's actually a lot simpler than I expected! Note that since you're using (abusing really, but it does the job :D) an internal template, there are no numbers in the parameters. Hope this makes sense - let me know if you have any problems. Happy‑melon 11:14, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

WPFood

Hello, I am trying to add the Foodservice taskforce to the WikiProject Food and drink banner, Template:WikiProject Food and drink, but cannot seem to make it work. Could someone please help me with this?

I have been testing it on the Talk:Burger King page.

Also I would like to add the "(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments, explaining the ratings and/or suggest improvements.)" to the assessment box if possible.

Thanks for any help,
--Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 17:44, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Hey Jeremy, the banner is now fixed. In the template, you set as the "tf 1" parameter. What this means is that the template will only put the task force in if you put "|Foodservice=yes". On Talk:Burger King, the template instead had "|tf=yes", which would not do anything. As long as you make sure to put the correct parameter, everything should be OK. Furthermore, I put "yes" for the COMMENT_FORCE parameter on the main template. This adds that comments notice you asked for. Hope all is well now. — Parent5446 ☯ ^{(message email)} 18:54, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your assistance. --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 02:38, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

WPFOOD, part deux

Hello again, I have inadvertently stumbled upon a project using this template. The various Food and Drink projects and task forces have seen what I did with the WPFOOD template and have asked me to unify the banners.

The problem is that the template only allows eight task forces, not five as documented. Is there any way this template could be modified to allow up to 12-15 sub-projects/task forces?

To see what I have done look at the Wikipedia:WikiProject Food and drink/Banners page.

The template is located at Template:WikiProject Food and drink --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 03:06, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

I am currently working on developing a 'hook' to allow the use of extra taskforces, for use on {{WP Australia}}. Once it is finished, I will document it properly and remove the extra three taskforces, which were a mistake ever to add, so please do not use |TF_6=, |TF_7=, |TF_8=!!! Take a look at {{WP Australia/sandbox}} and Template:WPBannerMeta/hooks/taskforces to see what's going on, although be aware that the code is currently volatile. Watch this space... Happy‑melon 11:31, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

WP Mixed Drinks

The Mixed Drinks WikiProject has made a special request as well before the begin using the WPFOOD banner:

We use two special assessments: MergeDel and Merged. Please look at the special wording in that template. These are important to our project, and it has greatly helped in reducing the number of speedy deletes against articles under our auspices. The MergeDel generates a special message that lets people know that the article has been tagged as such, requests a little time for someone to take action (which is rather spotty and something our project needs to make an effort to respond to more quickly), and categorizes the article in a special Wikiproject category for follow-up. After the article has been merged, we change the talk-page status to Merged and setup a redirect on the article page. This is important for GFDL compliance, since many of our small articles get merged into larger lists or transwikied to Wikibooks. I've not been very active here, because I'm trying to help make that transwikiing process flow a little smoother on the Wikibooks side. Over zealous Wikipedia editors have done large scale "dump and runs" into Wikibooks in the past, and the Bartending Guide has suffered as a result. That is also why there is a Bartending Task Force as part of WP:MIX

Thanks again,

--Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 03:06, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

The banner supports |class=Merge as valid when |FULL_QUALITY_SCALE=yes is set, which is kind of what you want for that area. The MergeDel notice is probably best provided with custom code. Where are you building the new banner? I can lend a hand if you need it. Happy‑melon 11:31, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Great work!

In regards to the request from the Mixed drink project? How would we add support to the banner for MergeDel.

Also, the hooks add-in doesn't support the |nested = parameter. Could it be added?

--Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 17:23, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Which hook are you referring to? I would have thought that, since each hook will only be parsed in the appropriate nested situation, they wouldn't need to know the status of the nested parameter. Can you provide an example? Happy‑melon 08:55, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

TFHOOKS addon. I would like for it to display the name of the task force when nested. --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 04:36, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Also, does the TF_x parameter inherit the importance from the main assessment? Basically would the |importance=low be assessed for both the task force and the main project? --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 04:36, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

The nested code is so far separated from the taskforce hook that I had to write a separate hook for it: {{WPBannerMeta/hooks/tfnested}}. It should be fairly self-explanatory: drop a line if you get stuck. Taskforces don't inherit importance by default, but they could be set to by setting |TF_x_IMPORTANCE=yes and |tf x importance={{{importance|}}} instead of |tf x importance={{{SomeOtherParameter|}}}. Happy‑melon 10:52, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

MergeDel class will necessitate some fairly ugly code, and is probably easier to demonstrate than describe. Where are you working? Happy‑melon 10:53, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

I am working off the main template at {{WPFOOD}}, I have using the Narragansett Brewing Company as a test article. ~~I tried your suggestion of the |TF_x_IMPORTANCE=yes and |tf x importance={{{importance|}}}, but go a negative result. What am I doing wrong?~~ I did a cache flush and it came up correctly.

My demonstration page is at Wikipedia:WikiProject Food and drink/Banners. You can see what is nesting and what is not.

--Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 17:33, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Template:LepidopteraTalk

The Template:LepidopteraTalk is not functioning correctly, and the redirect suggests referring the issue to you... The quality and Importance Classes are not displaying properly. Thanks—GRM (talk) 16:39, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Fixed The problem was that the majority of WikiProjects have their assessment departments at Wikipedia:WikiProject Foo/Assessment, while this particular WikiProject has it located at Wikipedia:WikiProject Lepidoptera/Article Classification. To override the default location, you needed to specify a link target in |ASSESSMENT_LINK=, which I have now done with |ASSESSMENT_LINK=Wikipedia:WikiProject Lepidoptera/Article Classification. Happy‑melon 17:09, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Erm, so why is the template not working on pages where it's already set? (see e.g. Talk:Heath Fritillary) Sorry!—GRM (talk) 17:41, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

It's just a caching issue: purge the page (Ctrl+F5 in IE) and you'll see the fixed version. Happy‑melon 19:50, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, not convinced. I'm using Mac Safari and clearing the cache makes no difference :-( —GRM (talk) 21:32, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

That's weird, I'm also using Safari (V3.1.1) and it's working fine on this page that I just added it to, and I can see it on the page you linked. Beeblbrox (talk) 21:37, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Imma correctly comes up with "???" as you have specified neither importance nor quality. Talk:Heath Fritillary comes up with "???" despite being assigned "A|High"...—GRM (talk) 21:42, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

OK, now I see it: the new template requires one to type "class=" and "importance=" ... can someone BOT these? —GRM (talk) 22:03, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Change Project talk to Wikipedia talk

{{editprotected}} Could Project talk= be replaced with Wikipedia talk= as the Project talk namespace doesn't appear to exist?

Not done. Project talk = Wikipedia talk. It's the canonical name for the namespace, and as such, works on non-Wikipedia projects. --MZMcBride (talk) 18:51, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

{{editprotected}} Ok then, could |Wikipedia talk=project page be added after |Project talk=project page ? As it the moment, putting the banner on a Wikipedia talk page lists it as an article. -- WOSlinker (talk) 21:45, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Done I see what you mean. Happy‑melon 10:48, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Removing the notice box

Is it possible to null the box that shows "missing" categories on {{OH-Project}}? It's not needed as we don't use those assessments, just a few of the extended ones. §hep • ¡Talk to me! 22:33, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, by creating Template:OH-Project/hide (saves passing a new parameter through the banner). That's something I need to document.... Happy‑melon 09:38, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Mess when shown on article page

{{editprotected}} I know the template shouldn't be included on an article page but when when editing one by accident, noticed that the template doesn't work properly anyway due to the warning box shown.

At the top of the template code, need to add a CR between }}{|

Change:

{{#switch:{{NAMESPACE}}
|{{ns:0}}|Image|MediaWiki|Category=<!--NAMESPACES WHERE THE BANNER MAY **NOT** BE PLACED-->
{{warning|The WikiProject banner below should be moved to this {{#switch:{{NAMESPACE}}|{{ns:0}}=article's|User=user page's|Image=image's|MediaWiki=message's|Template=template's|Category=category's|#default=page's}} '''[[{{TALKPAGENAME}}|talk page]]'''.}}
}}{| class="messagebox {{#ifeq:{{lc:{{{nested|}}}}}|yes|collapsible collapsed nested|{{#ifeq:{{lc:{{{small|}}}}}|yes|small|standard}}}}-talk"
{{#ifeq:{{lc:{{{nested|}}}}}|yes|

To:

{{#switch:{{NAMESPACE}}
|{{ns:0}}|Image|MediaWiki|Category=<!--NAMESPACES WHERE THE BANNER MAY **NOT** BE PLACED-->
{{warning|The WikiProject banner below should be moved to this {{#switch:{{NAMESPACE}}|{{ns:0}}=article's|User=user page's|Image=image's|MediaWiki=message's|Template=template's|Category=category's|#default=page's}} '''[[{{TALKPAGENAME}}|talk page]]'''.}}
}}
{| class="messagebox {{#ifeq:{{lc:{{{nested|}}}}}|yes|collapsible collapsed nested|{{#ifeq:{{lc:{{{small|}}}}}|yes|small|standard}}}}-talk"
{{#ifeq:{{lc:{{{nested|}}}}}|yes|

And then the template will be shown properly. -- WOSlinker (talk) 08:32, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Done. Simple enough. Cheers. --lifebaka (Talk - Contribs) 04:50, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

WPFood III, Revenge of the Food

Hello,

I have one more request, that is creating two banners with one tag.

This banner has a series of switches that creates a banner for child WikiProjects that is placed above the main project banner. Is there any way this can be incorporate into the WPBannerMeta template? Or could it be added to the Food and Drink template separately? I think this could do everything I was looking to do and as well as assuaging the other food and drink projects by addressing their concerns as well.

If it were to be added to this meta template, could it be setup as a hook like TFHooks? I believe that would be ideal.

The example of what I mean is here

--Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 07:12, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Your best bet is just to add code around the main call to {{WPBannerMeta}} in Template:WikiProject Hinduism. Not everything in that template has to be part of a call to WPBannerMeta! Since this is quite a specialised feature, I don't think it would be a good idea to add it to the metabanner itself. If you need any help setting it up, however, don't hesitate to ask. Happy‑melon 21:38, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

List of page types where importance does not apply

Namespaces: Category - "This page is a category and does not require a [[Wikipedia:WikiProject {{{Wikiproject}}}/Assessment|rating]]."; Help - "This page is not an article and does not require a [[Wikipedia:WikiProject {{{Wikiproject}}}/Assessment|rating]]."; Image - "This page is a image and does not require a [[Wikipedia:WikiProject {{{Wikiproject}}}/Assessment|rating]]."; Portal - "This page is not an article and does not require a [[Wikipedia:WikiProject {{{Wikiproject}}}/Assessment|rating]]."; Template - "This page is a template and does not require a [[Wikipedia:WikiProject {{{Wikiproject}}}/Assessment|rating]]."; User - "This page is not an article and does not require a [[Wikipedia:WikiProject {{{Wikiproject}}}/Assessment|rating]]."; Wikipedia - "This page is not an article and does not require a [[Wikipedia:WikiProject {{{Wikiproject}}}/Assessment|rating]]."
Article types: Redirect - "This page is a redirect article and does not require a [[Wikipedia:WikiProject {{{Wikiproject}}}/Assessment|rating]]."; Disambiguation - "This page is a disambiguation article and does not require a [[Wikipedia:WikiProject {{{Wikiproject}}}/Assessment|rating]]."

Only article space pages have importance, this template has dumped all of the images into unknown importance in the Doctor Who wikiproject. Also, importance should not show up until after the class has been established. - LA @ 17:51, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

...And probably should recognise those and behave per LA's comment, even if the banner doesn't use the full assessment scale... -- Ratarsed (talk) 18:51, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I am working on sample code now. - LA @ 22:10, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

The rough draft sample code can be found here. I need others to play with this to make sure that it won't break. Plus I don't have everything on it yet. - LA @ 05:16, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Rough draft of the code

{{#switch:{{NAMESPACE}} |Category = {{!}} {{Cat-Class}}<includeonly>[[Category:Category-Class {{{PROJECT}}} articles|{{PAGENAME}}]]</includeonly> {{!}} This is a category and does not require a [[Wikipedia:WikiProject {{{PROJECT}}}/Assessment|rating]]. |Image = {{!}} {{Image-Class}}<includeonly>[[Category:Image-Class {{{PROJECT}}} articles|{{PAGENAME}}]]</includeonly> {{!}} This is an image and does not require a [[Wikipedia:WikiProject {{{PROJECT}}}/Assessment|rating]]. |Portal = {{!}} {{Portal-Class}}<includeonly>[[Category:Portal-Class {{{PROJECT}}} articles|{{PAGENAME}}]]</includeonly> {{!}} This is a portal and does not require a [[Wikipedia:WikiProject {{{PROJECT}}}/Assessment|rating]]. |Template = {{!}} {{Template-Class}}<includeonly>[[Category:Template-Class {{{PROJECT}}} articles|{{PAGENAME}}]]</includeonly> {{!}} This is a template and does not require a [[Wikipedia:WikiProject {{{PROJECT}}}/Assessment|rating]]. |Help|User|Wikipedia = {{!}} {{NA-Class}}<includeonly>[[Category:NA-Class {{{PROJECT}}} articles|{{PAGENAME}}]]</includeonly> {{!}} This page is not an article and does not require a [[Wikipedia:WikiProject {{{PROJECT}}}/Assessment|rating]]. |{{#switch:{{{class|}}} |Disambig = {{!}} {{Dab-Class}}<includeonly>[[Category:Disambig-Class {{{PROJECT}}} articles|{{PAGENAME}}]]</includeonly> {{!}} This is a disambiguation page and does not require a [[Wikipedia:WikiProject {{{PROJECT}}}/Assessment|rating]]. |Redirect = {{!}} {{Redirect-Class}}<includeonly>[[Category:Redirect-Class {{{PROJECT}}} articles|{{PAGENAME}}]]</includeonly> {{!}} This is a redirect page and does not require a [[Wikipedia:WikiProject {{{PROJECT}}}/Assessment|rating]]. |<this is where everything else would go>

What do you think? - LA @ 17:50, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

You will need to look at it in the edit box, since it would not work as it looks on the page. - LA @ 17:52, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Or, much more easily, like this. It's a pig to find the best place to make improvements like this, I know. The banner now assumes NA-importance in the namespaces listed above. Happy‑melon 21:21, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Importance assessment wikilink

The importance link points to the WikiProject's assessment page, but if one doesn't exist for that WikiProject, the banner then points to the default Version 1.0 Editorial Team's Assessment page. I think that when it defaults, this part of the banner should point to Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Release Version_Criteria#Importance of topic instead of Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment#Importance scale, because the first link actually explains the importance scale, while the second link's anchor doesn't really exist on that page.

The part of the template that actually addresses this link is located in Template:WPBannerMeta/importancescale. I can't fully understand what the template is doing, because I am not advanced enough with the template code, so I really don't know exactly what needs to be changed. Does anyone disagree with this change? — OranL (talk) 18:12, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

While this is a good idea, this is not the default behavior of the template. The precedence chain for this link is as follows:

ASSESSMENT_LINK#Importance if |ASSESSMENT_LINK= is defined
PROJECT_LINK/Assessment#Importance if no |ASSESSMENT_LINK= but a defined |PROJECT_LINK=
Wikipedia:WikiProject PROJECT/Assessment#Importance if neither of the above defined

Those banners which create links to the wp1.0 page do so by defining |ASSESSMENT_LINK=Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment. I'm half tempted to change the default to the links you suggest, but that would require adding an (expensive) #ifexist statement, possibly more than one. It's a tradeoff. Happy‑melon 20:56, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

You know what, I'm sorry. I didn't see that it's a definable item within the template. On the project banner that I'm working on, ASSESSMENT_LINK has been defined to point to Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment. So, what I thought was a bug is really more of a feature request. I can change it on the specific WikiProject banner that I'm working on. Thank you for your help! — OranL (talk) 21:21, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

On second thought, maybe there is a problem. When I try to change the ASSESSMENT_LINK variable, it automatically appends "#Importance" to the end of the link. This would not be an issue, as I could just add an anchor to the page it's pointing to, except for the fact that the ASSESSMENT_LINK also changes the Quality Scale link to the same page. Since the Wikipedia 1.0 quality and importance scales are on two different pages (for whatever reason that may be), and since it looks like the template can't be configured manually to point to a different page for quality and for importance, I can't get it to point at the links that I want it to point at. I guess an alternative is to simply set up an Assessment department page in my WikiProject and then place the assessment scales on that page. Since I'm lazy, I had just hoped to avoid doing all that work, but I guess it'll have to be done some time, and there's no time like the present. :P — OranL (talk) 21:39, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

If you're lazy enough to wait a day, I'm working on it right now. But as you say, it's got to be done eventually... :D Happy‑melon 21:46, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

!-

On the next update of this or any sub-templates, please change {{!-}} to {{!}}-. This cuts down on the number of templates that are listed when editing. --- RockMFR 19:28, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Done Took a few edits to chase them all away, but all done now. Happy‑melon 11:02, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

A new template in the works

As this template is not working as it should and is not getting fixed in the foreseeable future, I am working on a new one which will be far simpler to set up and use. It needs extensive testing on the current features, so if there are any projects out there that want to keep it simple, please see the test banner template to run the tests. Thank you. - LA (T) 21:17, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Jeez, I go away on holiday for two weeks and everyone's got fed up and left :D! A little patience wouldn't go amiss - remember that we're not in any rush. What outstanding issues do you have with the template? I'm sure they can all be fixed without any melodrama. Happy‑melon 21:23, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Centralizing discussion here. - LA (T) 20:13, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

More MAIN_TEXT options

Sometimes I would have liked not to have set the MAIN_TEXT parameter and just used the default text but sometimes the linked article in the MAIN_TEXT is not a suitable article to include in the banner text. For example the template for WikiProject Highlander, {{HL WikiProject}}, where it was better to link to Highlander (franchise) rather than Highlander, so I had to set the MAIN_TEXT parameter. If there was a MAIN_TEXT_ARTICLE parameter which I could have set to "Highlander (franchise) articles" then I wouldn't have needed to have set the MAIN_TEXT one. It is probably better to allow the parameter to include "articles" as it can then also be used in some other situations, e.g. {{Screenwriters}} where MAIN_TEXT_ARTICLE would be "Screenwriting, Screenwriters, and related topics". -- WOSlinker (talk) 18:39, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Done (nice easy one, thanks!) as |MAIN_ARTICLE=. Can be set as a raw single page (|MAIN_ARTICLE=Foo → Foo) or as a string (|MAIN_ARTICLE=blah blah [[foo|bar]] humbug → blah blah bar humbug) (I hope - knock if there's any problems). Happy‑melon 19:57, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

class bug

It appears that when specifying the class as "Needed" (As an example, Talk:Code of Points (rhythmic gymnastics)), it displays as "Category" (but shuffles to the correct category) -- ratarsed (talk) 11:27, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Fixed - nothing to do with WPBannerMeta, as it turns out, it was in {{Needed-Class}}: [4]. Thanks for pointing that out, though! Happy‑melon 11:29, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikiproject Opt-out?

Hello, I just noticed that this banner was being used on most projects. It looks good and is a great idea, considering how similar most banners are, but I was wondering if it's possible for projects to "opt out" of using this template if their banners used to include specialized code. I'm referring mainly to {{WPAFC}}, the banner for WP:WikiProject Articles for creation. Because of the nature of our project, we employ a lot of templates and other pages that are best not categorized into a standard "Foo-class articles" category, but instead to a meta-category such as Category:Articles for creation templates (which now is all but empty). I can't see that such code would really be possible with this meta template without adding a lot of superfluous code to other project banners. Again, I don't mean to say your template isn't working or is inefficient, it's just not quite what our project needs. Thanks. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 18:12, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

You could always just substitute the WPBannerMeta template with your project-specific variables defined, and then edit the code to tweak it for your own uses. This way, it wouldn't affect other projects' templates, but you could still use the base functionality provided by the WPBannerMeta. — OranL (talk) 19:32, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

That is, IMO, not a good idea: what you will achieve is to dump a lot of code for notes, collapsed sections, comments, taskforces, etc, onto the page when you're probably not using a lot of it, which will slow down the loading of pages where the template is transcluded and also make the template code almost unreadable (the WPBannerMeta code is almost illegible without a text editor that doesn't linewrap!). What I would advise is the following (talking in general terms here, not about any particular banner):

Does it make sense to adapt to the specification of the banner? All the features (category syntax, default links, parameters, etc) of WPBannerMeta follow the most common syntax in use by the majority of WikiProjects, so it forms a sort of specification for banner templates. In many cases, the sensible and mature attitude is to realise that, while the idiosyncracies of a particular project might be well-ingrained, they make life extremely difficult for people trying to work with the WikiProject system as a whole, who get annoyed (and their bot scripts get confused :D) when they find a project has located its unassessed articles at Category:Unassigned-importance Foo articles rather than the ubiquitous Category:Unassessed-importance Foo articles, or has named their banner something incredibly cryptic like {{WPTL}} instead of the self-explanatory {{WikiProject Tulips and Lilaceae}}. In almost all cases, there is no reason for the unconventional syntax other than an honest mistake on the part of a long-departed project member, and the easiest way to proceed is just to move pages or create new categories under the standard syntax. WPBannerMeta incorporates definition parameters for the more common deviations (|ASSESSMENT_CAT= is the most obvious example), but most minor syntax errors are best fixed by just doing what the banner says and creating or moving categories as necessary.
Can you just hang the extra functionality around the main banner? Remember that the banner template doesn't just have to contain a WPBannerMeta template code. Some functionality, particularly category manipulations, can easily be tacked onto the end of the template.
Can you hack around with the banner to make it do what you want? You can do some pretty impressive customisations with the hook parameters, which enable you to add whole additional sections to the main banner; or by screwing around with the parameters that you pass through the template (putting a filter like {{#switch:{{{class|}}}|c|C=Start|{{{class|}}}}} on the |class= parameter will enable your project to opt out of C-Class while still using the metatemplate, for instance). If a core feature is doing something you really don't want it to, turn it off and write your own code, either as a hook or a direct hack (for instance, I will eventually get around to writing a hook to allow projects to use categories like Category:Top-priority Foo articles rather than Category:Top-importance Foo articles).
The above notwithstanding, there are some templates, and you seem to have found an excellent example, that just aren't suited for using a metatemplate; they're just too individual and unique. There is no point in hammering square pegs into round holes: if the banner isn't working, don't use it. I for one have been fairly proactive and bold in converting project banners to WPBannerMeta, but I always try to remember to check the history to make sure the conversion hasn't been tried and reverted before. An HTML comment at the top of the wikicode to note that the metatemplate has been tried and found wanting, should be sufficient to prevent any misunderstanding and reinventing-the-wheel. Of course, a note here to explain the reasons why the banner is lacking is always appreciated (so thanks for bringing this up!); I can't make any promises, but we can certainly work to resolve obvious idiocies.

In this case, I can see a case for using the old banner code - while it's very messy and inefficient, it does do the job you want it to. When the majority of WikiProject banners use WPBannerMeta, we can focus our efforts on maintaining that template, plus the much shorter list of 'independent' banners; rather than having to use bot scripts to make sweeping changes like we currently have to. Happy‑melon 21:03, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

I am going to revert back to the old code for the moment as the new one is not working as intended. I can see a case for standardising but will leave that with Hersfold, who is clever at the templates and knows exactly what is required for this project (and who, I am sure, will be delighted to see his code labelled "messy and ineffient"!) MSGJ (talk) 19:21, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Editprotect 2008-08-19 (Aug)

Resolved

– PEBKAC.

Why is this protected... \sigh {{Editprotect}}

Please reconcile this:

   Template:WikiProject banner/Archive 1(edit talk links history) with

   Template:Wpt(edit talk links history) so the information links to this template accept a pipetricked link...

  to whit: This template must be able to accept a link "Trivium (band)|Trivium" (which is to say {{wpt}} needs to FORM the link "REMOTELY") using some parameter (since this crappy method is used) to make: [[Trivium (band)|Trivium]] which needs handled in {{wpt}}) via the call to this template which at first blush, seems not to have provision for pipetricked page linking. [Yet another great design.]

Thanks. the two fixes will fixup a number of pages. // FrankB 20:06, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi, there wasn't any need to modify this template, I've used the |MAIN_ARTICLE= option directly on {{wpt}}. -- WOSlinker (talk) 20:37, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, WOS. If I could make three requests, they would be 1) please read the documentation and have a look for a parameter that does what you want before running to the editprotected template; and 2) if you do think something needs to be changed, please be as clear as possible about what you think the problem is and how best it can be fixed. I haven't got a clue from what you've written above what the issue is, except that it involves piped links somewhere in amongst thirty thousand characters of code on one of fifteen separate pages. Again, thanks, WOS, for resolving this issue. Finally, a little politeness wouldn't go amiss - you're crapping on hundreds of hours of volunteers' time (not just me, numerous others as well) because you didn't get the result you expected when you expected it. I'm always keen to improve my coding style in general, and this template in particular, but when it turns out that the only reason you had a problem was because you didn't read the documentation, you already look rather ridiculous, and having taken an aggressive approach only makes you appear more so. Oh, and why is this template protected? Because it's used by three hundred and seventy eight WikiProjects other than yours, and is transcluded on over four hundred thousand pages, and all of those people would have been most upset if you had proceeded to 'fix' something that was not, in fact, broken. Yours, Happy‑melon 21:21, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Can we make the text customizable?

Resolved

– Feature already present.

In the instance that the project covers all articles on wikipedia (like, say, a collaboration effort), then the current text won't work, so can we make after "a collaborative effort to " customizable?--daniel folsom 01:07, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

To change the whole text on the banner, you need to use the |MAIN_TEXT= option. -- WOSlinker (talk) 06:38, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh ok - sorry I can't believe I missed that parameter.--daniel folsom 13:29, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Reassessment

Hi,

I wonder whether it would be possible to create a "needs reassessment" parameter, that classifies the article into a category "XXX articles needing reassessment". I have felt that such a feature would be useful in a couple of instances: firstly, when I have expanded an article myself and don't want to assess it too, to avoid bias; secondly, where an article has been expanded beyond a stub, but I do not have the expertise in the subject to judge what standard it has attained. There would also be the potential for bots to recognise articles that had not been assessed for a long period of time, but had been expanded significantly, and flag these for reassessment.

Thanks,

Martin (Smith609 – Talk) 21:00, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Too much space

There is too much space above "More information:" when "Comments: edit · history · watch · purge" also appears (or if you put something else here with BOTTOM_TEXT, such as a collapsed todo list, that has a "[show]" or "[edit]" to the right). The gap is rather huge. Also, the comments thing has an extra extraneous space before each bullet (i.e. it is "Comments: edit · history · watch · purge" instead of "Comments: edit · history · watch · purge"), and consequently looks weird. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 06:56, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Can you show us an example? (also)Happy‑melon 10:06, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, I basically did, if we're talking about the main issue (the extraneous spacing in the comments edit/history/watch/purge line is self-evident) - turn on the comments and more information features on the same template. A more glaring example is at User talk:SMcCandlish/Banner (which is using code from the non-talk page that's attached to). The deployed version at {{WikiProject Cue sports}} has the to-do list in the expanding "More information" area, without this spacing problem, but I can't figure out why it didn't work as expected where I put it the first time, as shown on the page in my userspace. The to-do was too big to reasonably put there anyway, but this spacing problem happens regardless what comes before "More information". — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 06:04, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

COMMENTS_FORCE problem, page/article distinction

The COMMENT_FORCE parameter should have no effect if a) the page to which the a banner is applied is not in article-talk-space, or b) the page is in article-talk-space but is a /subpage. I'm not sure if it is actually feasible to determine if something is a subpage or not (is there something like {{PAGENAME}} for that?), and if not it would be good if it at least excluded the common ones like /to do (there may be variants of that one), /Comments and /comments, /Sandbox and /sandbox, /GA1, /GA2, etc., /archive*, /Archive*, etc. There are others I'm probably not thinking of. We don't need to encourage people to create /Comments files for redirects, categories, templates, /Comments pages (!), talk archives, etc.

Also, it is weird and counterintuitive that the COMMENT_FORCE and COMMENT_CAT params are singular but COMMENTS is plural. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 06:17, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh, duh, it also shouldn't do anything if |class=redir or |class=disambig are set.

With the exact same conditions as the COMMENTS_FORCE issue above, the template should say "This page" instead of "This article"; it's rather odd to see a template label a category, a /Comments page or another template an "article". :-) If it simply cannot be done for article-talk-space subpages, it would at least be great it if made more sense in all other non-article contexts. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 06:29, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh, actually, the obvious was staring out at me: If it's in article-talk-space but |class=NA is set, then (as with Redir and Disambig, above) we know it's not an article (or list) - no need to try to detect whether it is a subpage at all! Easy-peasy, I hope. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 07:02, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

I'll have a look at these issues when I get back (wouldn't be able to do anything from this account even if my internet time wasn't at premium-rate!)... (also)Happy‑melon 09:19, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Extended quality scale

It appears to me that if you use the extended quality scale with this meta, you automatically get the whole lot even if only a few of the additional classes are required. For example, if a WikiProject does not use Image-Class, you can still tag a page as being Image-Class and it will be placed in a non-existant category. This is not ideal; it would surely be preferable to treat the page as "Unassessed", or at least have the template display a warning that an invalid class has been entered. Would it be possible to have the template disable those classes that are not required? Small-town hero (talk) 13:01, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

A radical idea: Mostly get rid of Template:WPBiography

Something that occurred to me back when I was working on my own meta-banner (this one beat me to deployment, so I abandoned mine) was supporting all of {{WPBiography}}'s parameters and gimmicks in the meta-banner (mandatorily - they would not be disableable). If this were actually done, WP:BIOGRAPHY's banner could mostly just go away and stop cluttering up hundreds of thousands of bio articles' talk page (many of which already have a {{WikiProjectBannerShell}} for 4 or more projects in it), only appearing on talk pages of WP:BIOGRAPHY templates and other biography project internal resources, and on talk pages of bio articles and categories not within the scope of other, more topical WikiProjects. WP:BIOGRAPHY is really a meta-project, so it does not need banners on every bio page, as long as other banners can do what it does. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 06:29, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Todo'd (also)Happy‑melon 09:17, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm really not sure what is being proposed here. Are you suggesting that WP:BIOGRAPHY limit its scope? In what way does the Biography banner "clutter" up article talk pages (as opposed to other project banners)? I really don't agree with the notion that "WP:BIOGRAPHY is really a meta-project" and "does not need banners on every bio page"; frankly, I'm bemused by it. In any case, this is something you should be suggesting to the WikiProject, not here. PC78 (talk) 13:14, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

I thought I wrote pretty clearly. Of course I'm not saying Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography's scope be limited. It can't be, since it was mandated by WP:OFFICE to shepherd WP:BLP concerns. Please just re-read what I wrote; it would take almost as much material as I wrote the first time to re-explain it. In answer to your clutter query, {{WPBiography}} is very, very large when many of its features are used, and its assessments are redundant with those of other projects when other projects' banners are present. Even if stuffed into a bannershell, it would simply be redundant en toto if its features were supported by the topical project banners, such as flagging an article as a BLP. The only potential concern would be editors turning on the same bio features in more than one project banner one talk pages with several of them; only the one at the top would need them activated for that page. Someone somewhere is likely to object that WP:BIOGRAPHY could assess an article as Stub/Low, while a topical project might say Start/Mid. I suppose there could be a lean {{WPBioAssess}} banner that had nothing but the assessment tags features, if WP:BIOGRAPHY wanted to dispute another project's assessment (and not added unless that is the case), though honestly I find this to be a fairly uncommon situation. Another option would be for WPBannerMeta to support new |bio-class= and |bio-priority= parameters. That would probably be cleaner. Anyway, it's just an idea. I'm not sure I'd "to-do" it right off the bat, as objections may be numerous, and the amount of work to do it would be huge. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 06:32, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Obviously you didn't write that clearly, and I still don't see where you're going with this idea. What makes a WP:BIOGRAPHY assessment "redundant" as opposed to other WikiProjects? Besides the fact that WP:BIOGRAPHY should reserve the right to assess articles independently of other WikiProjects, it has a clearly defined importance scale (these are generally project specific anyway) and work group structure, things you can't reasonably expect to incorporate here. What do you envisage when you refer to "a lean {{WPBioAssess}} banner" – have you actually looked at {{WPBiography}}? Most of the banner is already geared towards assessment; how will stripping away a handfull of certain features, such as flagging an article as a BLP, be beneficial? What about the many articles that only use {{WPBiography}}? BLP is the province of WP:BIOGRAPHY, and the BLP tag is already where it needs to be; it has no place in banners such as {{Architecture}} or {{Album}}. Clutter isn't a concern, as {{WikiProjectBannerShell}} already takes care of the BLP and ActivePol tags. No offence – I'm all for brainstorming ideas – but this one seems to be particualry ill-conceived. PC78 (talk) 11:11, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

I think that what he's getting at is that if an article is within "WikiProject Biography of Welsh Sign-Writers" and "WikiProject Famous Welshmen", then the "WikiProject Biography" banner is unneccessary clutter. Martin (Smith609 – Talk) 11:48, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

As far as I'm aware, such WikiProjects do not exist. These things are typically catered for by the work groups of WP:BIOGRAPHY. PC78 (talk) 13:15, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

A quick-'n'-dirty shortcut for B-class criteria fields (b1, etc.)

If your project(s) use the |B_CHECKLIST=yes feature and its |b1= thorugh |b6= fields, you're going to love {{B}}. You can enter all those fields (defaulting to "unassessed") into a project banner on an article's talk page, and the class, with nothing but {{subst:B}}. Has various options to set values, too. Fully documented. I've used it more than a dozen times today. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 07:57, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Combined categories with both importance and class

Hi. Is it possible to have articles populate categories that include both importance and class, for example, Category:Start-Class, High-importance Economics articles? Thanks. --Patrick (talk) 01:37, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

As in Category:FA-Class and Top-importance blahblah articles? Considering this system would create huge number of new categories for any given project, and we already have an infrastructure for handling the categories separately, I'm not sure it would be a good idea to encourage such development. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 04:51, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Needs image category

Resolved

– Feature already present.

I'm considering changing {{Mountain}} to use this meta template. There is one issue that needs to addressed first. {{Mountain}} takes a needs-photo parameter which when set to "yes", puts it into Category:Mountain articles needing photos. I can see how I can use the NOTE_1 parameter to display a note if this parameter is set but I really need the ability to place the article into a category. Should I leave the code that's currently in the Mountain template there that deals with this or would a hook be a preferred solution? Or modify this template to support this feature? RedWolf (talk) 19:42, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

You can look at how Template:WikiProject Star Trek does this. We just used the collapsible note instead of the normal note to use for the needs-picture flag. — OranL (talk) 20:38, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

{{WikiProject Cue sports}} also does this with no problem. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 06:06, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll take a look at both of them. RedWolf (talk) 05:45, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Useful tip: Stop your banner from self-categorizing

Many of us already know about |category=no, to stop example templates (e.g. on your project's page or templates sub-page) from categorizing that page. You can stop your projects' banner itself (i.e. [[Template:WikiProject ProjectName]]) from self-categorizing (e.g. into [[Category:Unassessed ProjectName articles]], by configuring it with the following |category= line:

|category=<noinclude>no</noinclude><includeonly>{{{category|μ}}}</includeonly>

Maybe this should be added to the documentation? — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 08:03, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

No categories should be implemented on the template page. If the project banner is appearing in categories like this, it's likely that the value of |BANNER_NAME= is wrong. (also)Happy‑melon 22:13, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Needs Infoxbox

I tried adding needs-infobox to Template:WikiProject Typography but it didn't seem to work, did i do something wrong?? (and i tried to test it on Talk:Fairfield_(typeface) Peachey88 ^{(Talk Page | Contribs)} 03:08, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

I've made a change, (see here), as it's now working. -- WOSlinker (talk) 10:35, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Check my work please

Would it be possible to get someone to check User:Peachey88/Sandbox3 compared to {{WikiProject Event Venues}} to make sure i did it correctly? only minor changed i made was the name-space detection to make sure it appeared correctly. Peachey88 ^{(Talk Page | Contribs)} 05:36, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Sussex banner needs-photo broken?

Please can someone have a look. For example Milton Gate Marsh is using Template:WikiProject Sussex with the needs-photo=yes parameter, but nothing is displayed in the banner, and no needs-photo category appears. It used to work before the Meta conversion. Thanks ++ MortimerCat (talk) 06:42, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Done The Note2 switch wasn't turned on, i had the same kind of issues with infobox needed command. You can see the difference (here). Peachey88 ^{(Talk Page | Contribs)} 08:33, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

I think enough is enough. Todo'd to remove the need for these switches. Happy‑melon 09:39, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

~~I am afraid it is still broken - see Milton Gate Marsh, it still does not show anything relating to photos.~~ ++ MortimerCat (talk) 19:06, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Must have been a cached version. MortimerCat (talk) 20:48, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Place to recommend Banners to be updated?

Is there a place were we can request that banners be updated in someones freetime, i tried to look at {{football}} but its just too confusing for me. Peachey88 ^{(Talk Page | Contribs)} 12:11, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

I've had a go at it in Template:Football/sandbox displayed on Template:Football/testcases. —Borgarde^talk 09:58, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Weird spacing problem

Anyone know why there is a bunch of whitespace above the first banner in this instance of {{WikiProjectBannerShell}} (not just this one; it may be all of them that are using {{WikiProject Cue sports}}). This wasn't happening before. It is also not happening in cases that use the simpler {{WikiProject Snooker}}, though both are based on {{WPBannerMeta}} — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 09:00, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

That was a pain to track down. It seems to be due to an interaction between {{WPBannerMeta/comments}} use of HTML-style markup for its table row combined with the assumption in {{WPBannerMeta}} line 54 that wikimarkup will be used for table rows (and/or that BOTTOM_TEXT will be specified). Changing the <br> on line 54 to   will fix {{WikiProject Cue sports}}, but I have no idea if it will break anything else. I leave it to the regular editors here to determine exactly how to fix it. Anomie ⚔ 12:55, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Fixed inadvertantly when converting to tmbox classes. You're quite right about the br: it should have been changed to an HTML space a long time ago. Well spotted Anomie! Happy‑melon 16:49, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the fix guys, this was occurring in the {{wpfood}} template as well. --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 02:43, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Recent changes broke a template's optional parameters

The {{WikiProject Mountains}} template has optional parameters needs-infobox and needs-photo. This was working just fine until the last few changes and now articles do not have the associated notes and images but also are not being placed into the categories. RedWolf (talk) 06:20, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

This is the same for {{WikiProject Baseball}}. It was working fine until the last few changes. —Borgarde^talk 03:13, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Additionally, the "note1" parameter appears to be broken.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Smith609 (talk • contribs) 12:03, 7 October 2008)

Also, "maindykdate" isn't working in {{WikiProject National Register of Historic Places}},either. Daniel Case (talk) 17:30, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

I HATE WIKISYNTAX!! (Occasionally). This is one of those times.

Fixed, I think. Serves me right I guess for not programmign defensively in the first place... Happy‑melon 23:15, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Happy-melon, it seems to be working now. —Borgarde^talk 05:22, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Yup, appears to be working for the mountains template as well. Thanks. As a side note to your comment about wiki syntax, I think the developers who thought up the template syntax were former APL programmers. :) RedWolf (talk) 04:10, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Alignment

There appears to be a problem with alignment when an article is unassessed. The importance line is indented to the left of the quality one. This is fixed when an article receives an assessment and only appears on a banner with no assessment. —Borgarde^talk 12:47, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Can you give an example? It's almost certainly to do with the new tmbox classes. Happy‑melon 14:50, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Check this Talk:Box score (baseball). It should show there. Or if this image helps. —Borgarde^talk 18:47, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

when nested broken?

Every Ohio-Project banner that I have come across which is nested breaks Template:WPB. When I remove it, the rest of the banners are fine. I see there were recent changes to both templates, but don't know when the problem started. Any ideas? §hep • ¡Talk to me! 19:51, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

<Also on Template:OH-Project, when you click [show] and then [hide] the box gets bigger.

This is more evident in the food banner, linked above. §hep  •  ¡Talk to me! 05:53, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

I tested this in FF and it didn't make the box larger. But I'm sure there's a large enough percentage of users who use IE to make this an issue? Also, the box is not as wide as regular banners. See Talk:Maynard James Keenan where Tool and Biography are larger than the others which have been converted to meta. Also see Talk:Nine Inch Nails discography as another example. §hep • ¡Talk to me! 20:22, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

The {{OH-Project}} issue is Fixed, don't ask me what was wrong but removing that mangled mass of code seems to have fixed it :D. The slight sizing inconsistency is a consequence of the (currently incomplete) transition between the 'messagebox' and 'tmbox' CSS styles, which use completely different ways of sizing and spacing the boxes and so don't look exactly the same. We're waiting on a few exciting extra pieces of CSS and JavaScript to decache before converting the rest of the banners, when we can take the opportunity to dramatically improve banner handling and shelling (say goodbye to |nested=yes!!). The code will decache completely on October 31, so we're going to have to live with the slight inconsistencies for the rest of the month. Happy‑melon 15:35, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Sounds good. Thanks! §hep • ¡Talk to me! 19:34, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Adding all articles with one Wikiproject template to another

I recently made an edit to Template:ProjectGreyhawk to make all articles with that template automatically part of the D&D Wikiproject. This sort of worked; however, I only want to have articles that actually do not have a D&D project assessment showing under the Category:Unassessed D&D articles - and instead, it shows all ProjectGreyhawk articles as being unassessed. Recently, I had noticed that someone has accomplished this with Template:WikiProject Dragonlance and I was trying to do the same with the one mentioned above. Help? :) BOZ (talk) 07:03, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Er, I'm honestly not sure what you're trying to do, but unilaterally adding all Greyhawk articles to Category:Unassessed D&D articles is definitely not the way to go about it! Given the relative scope of the two wikiprojects, surely you would be best served to make the Greyhawk project a taskforce of D&D, or at least use the same banner template. Then you could have Greyhawk as a taskforce of D&D and use WPBM's build-in functionality for this. If not, you're going to be looking at a whole world of messy code on the Greyhawk template to get the result you want. Happy‑melon 13:40, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, the thing is, I'd like to get all D&D articles assessed. Greyhawk is part of D&D, so therefore technically all Greyhawk articles should have D&D assessment ratings, especially since the Greyhawk template does not all for assessments. For an example, see Talk:Mordenkainen. I'll admit to having no idea on how to work with code, and thus did not get the result I wanted. :) My intention, to speak it clearly, is that all Greyhawk articles which do not currently have an assessment rating should show up under the unassessed D&D articles. The Dragonlance template, as noted above, already does this, but the Greyhawk template does not yet. If there is a way to do this without having all Greyhawk articles show up as unassessed D&D articles (whether they have been assessed or not), this is what I want to know; otherwise I will have to revert my change on the template and just look at each article one at a time. :) BOZ (talk) 14:05, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Naah... don't really want to muck around with adding an assessment scheme to Greyhawk - I think the D&D assessment is good enough. If there's no easy way to do what I'm trying to do, then I'm not all that concerned. :) BOZ (talk) 19:20, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Give me a minute... :D Happy‑melon 19:22, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Well OK, problem is, I can't see anyone using it... the D&D assessment scheme should supercede it. But hey... maybe I'm wrong. ;) I'll still be adding D&D assessments to all the Greyhawk articles either way. BOZ (talk) 19:24, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

For an example of what I was looking for, I pointed to Talk:Mordenkainen above. Any article that has the Greyhawk template but does not have the D&D template, I would like to show up as an unassessed D&D article - this way I can look in the Unassessed D&D articles category and spot the Greyhawk articles that still need a D&D assessment. See what I mean? If there's no easy way to do this, it will take more work from me, but I prefer to be lazy when I can. ;) I'll look at each and every article instead if I have to, I was just looking to save myself some work not create more work for someone else. :) BOZ (talk) 19:29, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Here's a better example. Take a look at Talk:Oerth. If this was working the way I was looking for, this one would have Category:Unassessed D&D articles at the bottom before slapping Template:D&D on it. See what I mean? BOZ (talk) 19:32, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Ok, what I've done (and feel free to object if you don't like it) is to create a taskforce on the main {{D&D}} template, which is the WikiProject banner for the main D&D project. As every article within the scope of the Greyhawk project is also going to be within the scope of D&D, it makes little sense for them to use separate banners. So what you can now do is to 'merge' the two banners together. I've converted Talk:Pelor (diff) as an example. There are 142 talk pages which contain both {{ProjectGreyhawk}} and {{D&D}} (list), which would need to be converted in this fashion. You could take the opportunity to go through and assess any that aren't assessed already. There are also 162 pages which only have the Greyhawk template (list). You could either change these to read {{D&D|greyhawk=yes}}, or (once the duplicate pages have been changed) redirect Template:ProjectGreyhawk to Template:D&D using a soft redirect.

There isn't really any other alternative given that the Greyhawk banner doesn't currently support quality assessment. If you don't like the above, I can try and work something out, but I think this is the most obvious way forward. Happy‑melon 19:40, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

I think I was asking for something that I had imagined - it's probably not possible. ;) I think you have a good idea there, though. I'm not sure that I want to put that much work into converting the templates, although maybe there is a bot that can do it? I'll probably just hook them up over time or just leave 'em as they are. ;) As I add the D&D template to the ones that don't currently have it though, I will be adding them as you have done with Pelor. There is no priority to this though, and if it never gets done no one will be crying. :) thanks though, probably the most important thing you did is to create that list of 162 pages that have only the greyhawk template - i'll be printing that out now to work on at my leisure. :) BOZ (talk) 19:56, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I can see how you wouldn't want to spend too much time doing them methodically. There are bots that would do the conversion (I run one myself, but I don't have time or bandwidth at the moment, unfortunately); you could try asking at WP:BOTREQ. Happy‑melon 20:04, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

It's no biggie - thanks again, I think I have enough to go on now. :) BOZ (talk) 20:19, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Auto-Documentation

Just thinking it might be good to include the ability to automatically produce template documentation based on the parameters configured for each banner. I've started something here, although it probably needs a bit more work. There would also need to be some way to switch it on or off, e.g. |DOCUMENTATION=off (should it be on by default?). I've only currently covered the QUALITY_SCALE & IMPORTANCE_SCALE options in detail. -- WOSlinker (talk) 22:06, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

This has always been at the bottom of the todo list, but I've never got around to it. Template:WPBannerMeta/templatepage is unprotected, so anyone is welcome to have a crack at writing something. Currently all that's there are the automated warnings about missing categories, which are extremely poorly written and also incomplete (they don't, for instance, cover taskforce categories, needs-attention/infobox cats, etc). I'd encourage anyone who wants to to have a go - you can see the parameters that are passed to the /template page at the bottom of the main banner code, and I can easily pass other ones if you need them. Happy‑melon 11:56, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Could you add something like |DOCUMENTATION={{{DOCUMENTATION|off}}} to the parameters that are passed through (or something similar) so that I could go and switch it off on some of the templates that already provide documentation (such as Template:WikiProject Food and drink) before I add in some documentation for the other templates. Thanks. -- WOSlinker (talk) 18:45, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

A slightly arcane feature I added to one of the category warnings is a check against the existance of /hide, using {{#ifexist:{{FULLPAGENAME}}/hide||...}}, which saved adding another parameter (extra bytecount on all 500,000 transclusions). Perhaps a similar check to suppress the documentation if the template's /doc subpage exists? The code you suggest would represent an opt-in system, off by default; is this what you think should happen? Happy‑melon 20:31, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

So it would, I relly meant |DOCUMENTATION={{{DOCUMENTATION|on}}}. -- WOSlinker (talk) 22:02, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Nesting again...

Can you explan this phenomenon? When a nested OH-Project is within a banner shell, it pops open everything when the shell is opened. The words don't make sense, sorry; but something's not right at that page. §hep • ¡Talk to me! 23:24, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Other than a sizing issue caused by the page using the wrong shell template, I'm not seeing any problems. Can you explain more... clinically... please :D Happy‑melon 23:49, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

A picture says a thousand well formed words. There is no option to hide/show the comments or edit guidelines. They are just there. §hep • ¡Talk to me! 04:33, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Gotcha, I see what you're getting at. The issue is that the CollapsibleTables javascript has failed to load for some reason, most probably because there is an error in some JavaScript higher up the page. When loading that page in IE7 with debugging enabled, I see a JS error in MediaWiki:Wikiminiatlas.js, which may be the cause of the issue. Can you confirm A) whether this affects just this talk page, or a set of pages, or all pages using a particular object, B) which browser you see this on (and ideally, whether it also occurs in other browsers on the same computer) and C) does the effect remain after, eg, logging out, logging back in, logging in under another account, purging, null-editing the page, dummy-editing, clearing or disabling your .css and/or .js files, etc etc. Intermittent errors, those which are not easily reproducible, are much harder to track down. Happy‑melon 21:46, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

I see the same problem on Talk:Sangiovese using IE7. The WikiProjectBannerShell template has worked fine on every other page I have used it, except that one. I get a small "Error on page" message on the Talk:Sangiovese page. The effect remains after logging out, purging my cache and history, editing the page, etc. It seems totally reproducible for me. ~Amatulić (talk) 00:30, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

It is the same problem, but with {{WikiProject College football}} rather than {{OH-Project}}. I've placed an editprotected request at Template talk:WikiProject College football with the proper fix. Anomie ⚔ 00:58, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Hm, somebody fixed something. Today I'm not seeing the problem on any of those pages. ~Amatulić (talk) 18:15, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

I am not especially involved in this template, but anyway:

Amatulić: Thanks for reporting that it now works. (Many users are to lazy to report when things work again, and then we don't know if the fixes really work or not.) And yes, Anomie and Happy-melon did the fixes that Anomie figured out, and most likely that is why it now works for you Amatulić. And thanks Anomie for figuring this out.

--David Göthberg (talk) 20:25, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, somehow this got off of my watchlist, oops. It was doing it on Vista IE7, seems all better now. Thanks for the fix guys. §hep • ¡Talk to me! 22:15, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Discussion

Tighter categorisation

B-Class criteria

Help

List as

Template:AUCK

More task forces

More Notes

WPFood

WPFOOD, part deux

WP Mixed Drinks

Template:LepidopteraTalk

Change Project talk to Wikipedia talk

Removing the notice box

Mess when shown on article page

WPFood III, Revenge of the Food

List of page types where importance does not apply

Rough draft of the code

Importance assessment wikilink

!-

A new template in the works

More MAIN_TEXT options

class bug

Wikiproject Opt-out?

Editprotect 2008-08-19 (Aug)

Can we make the text customizable?

Reassessment

Too much space

COMMENTS_FORCE problem, page/article distinction

Extended quality scale

A radical idea: Mostly get rid of Template:WPBiography

A quick-'n'-dirty shortcut for B-class criteria fields (b1, etc.)

Combined categories with both importance and class

Needs image category

Useful tip: Stop your banner from self-categorizing

Needs Infoxbox

Check my work please

Sussex banner needs-photo broken?

Place to recommend Banners to be updated?

Weird spacing problem

Recent changes broke a template's optional parameters

Alignment

when nested broken?

Adding all articles with one Wikiproject template to another

Auto-Documentation

Categories

Nesting again...