Council
This module relates to the WikiProject Council, a collaborative effort regarding WikiProjects in general. If you would like to participate, please visit the project discussion page.CouncilWikipedia:WikiProject CouncilTemplate:WikiProject CouncilCouncil articles

Archives

Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15

This page has archives. Sections older than 28 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.

On many pages (for example Talk:Deterrence (legal)) the coloured blocks for class and importance come out ridiculously large on zooming in, or when the page width is reduced, like jumping from a width of 5 em to 45+ em. Can something be done to keep the size constrained?  --Lambiam 11:45, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Can't see this myself. What browser are you using? Maybe post a screenshot to show the problem? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:41, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@MSGJ: I was able to repro on Windows 7 with Firefox 59.0.3 (on Timeless skin, if that matters). That said, it was at a zoom level that I think is generally not a workable one, but I suppose could be used by readers with poor or failing eyesight. --Izno (talk) 12:58, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

For me it happens with Firefox 59.0.2 on macOS (using MonoBook), already at relatively modest zoom levels (5 times command-+, corresponding to a magnification of about 171% compared to the default) – or by a window size reduction to 58% of the screen width (1/1.71 = 0.58) at the default zoom level.  --Lambiam 22:55, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is very odd, because a WikiProject banner is essentially a table having three rows of three columns (in this case the third column isn't used). In a table, columns are of constant width all the way down, and so the the first cell of every row in the same table should be the same width as all the other cells in that column.

In the WikiProject law banner displayed at Talk:Deterrence (legal), the first column comprises one image and two items of text (the two coloured blocks under discussion). The width of the column is determined by the widest cell, which is File:Scale of justice 2.svg displayed 55px wide, and the two others are widened to match that one.

When text is left-aligned within a cell, the second cells of each row should have their left edges aligned vertically; that is to say, the text "This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale." and "This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale." should not be displayed any further to the right than the text "This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, ...". The screenshot shows that such vertical alignment is failing, which to me suggests a browser problem.

Looking at that column-two text beginning "This article is within the scope ..." shows that the text is flowing around the image - the words "encompassed by it." are below the image and left-aligned with the image's left edge. This cannot happen if they are in different cells, so to my mind, something is merging two cells that should be distinct.

Another odd feature in that screenshot is the "Law portal" box - the white background should entirely fill the border of that box, instead of stopping short of the bottom border. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:03, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The portal box is probably an artifact of using Timeless--every portal box appears so in that skin, though I can confirm Vector and Monobook are fine. I suppose it's plausible that it's related and may indicate an error in the portal box module/metatemplate, but I am skeptical. I think Timeless is more likely missing some skin coloring or border manipulation that can be found in the vector/monobook themes. And it's that the border isn't shrinking to the background, not that the background needs to fill in the shape delineated by the border. --Izno (talk) 20:31, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request: Please change this template (or the other one; see below) so that the categories "Project-Class sociology articles" and "Top-importance sociology articles" are no longer invoked from every page transcluding it.

Background:

There is an error, either in this template, or in {{WikiProject Sociology}}, I'm not sure which. The undesired behavior is that pages including the latter template, get categorized into two article categories. One example is the Talk page for WikiProject Sociology at WT:SOCIO, which has two categories listed which are incorrect for a Talk page.

An example completely stripped of all excess cruft to make it easier to see the problem, and which also contains justification for the "undesirable" characterization, is here: User:Mathglot/sandbox/Test pages/Sociology Header noinclude thing. Thanks. Mathglot (talk) 03:00, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What exactly is the problem here? You've tagged the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Sociology page with {{WikiProject Sociology|class=Project|importance=Top}}. "Project-Class sociology articles" is simply an artefact of the underlying structure for the page categoriation. You could rename that to pages if that particularly annoys you, but nothing is broken here. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 04:15, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

'Pages' or 'articles' is irrelevant, it's still wrong. A project page is not rated on a quality scale, and thus is not a 'Top-importance sociology articles' [or 'pages']. The talk page should be responsible for declaring its own categories, and not inherit them blindly, especially not if they aren't defining characteristics of the page. In any case, 'Top-importance sociology articles' [or 'pages'] is not a defining characteristic of a Project Talk page. I'm not a categorization honcho, I made need to page some folks that can explain this better than I can. Stand by... Mathglot (talk) 11:13, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Mathglot: If you do not want WT:SOCIO to appear as a top-level article, you need to remove the rating. Nothing was being inherited "blindly". --Izno (talk) 13:13, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As for the class, that appears to be set correctly as it is indeed a project "article" (that it is called an article is an artifact more than anything--we don't care enough to change however many millions of project talk pages tagged as such just for article -> page). --Izno (talk) 13:15, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you object to the page being classified into top-importance aritcles, just don't set |importance=top in the banner. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 13:20, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, you can safely remove the |class=Project as well as the |importance=Top since the class is detected automatically for all non-article talk namespaces (Category talk, File talk, Template talk, Wikipedia talk, etc.); the importance similarly defaults to NA (putting the page into Category:NA-importance sociology articles) in those namespaces. So all that you really need on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Sociology is {{WikiProject Sociology}} with no parameters at all. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:12, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see now, I didn't realize it was coming from the parameters, and not directly from the template. You can mark this closed. Thank you one and all. 03:25, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

Either I'm really dense, or there's something I'm missing. I've removed both project class and quality scale params, leaving only {{WikiProject Sociology}} in both the project page, as well as on my test page. Both pages continue to show two categories at the bottom of the page, although not the same ones as before. In the case of the test page, the two categories shown are NA-Class sociology articles and NA-importance sociology articles. In the case of the actual project page (Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Sociology), it shows Project-Class sociology articles and |NA-importance sociology articles. What am I missing? Can I say, |class=none |importance=none or something? Mathglot (talk) 07:15, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is normal behaviour for all WikiProject banners that recognise |class= and |importance= parameters. When one or the other of these parameters is blank or absent, a default value is used. As noted at Template:WikiProject Sociology#Optional parameters:

• class – valid values are listed in the custom class mask. See the project's quality scale for details. Setting an explicit value of NA is rarely necessary; for this, either leave |class= blank or omit the parameter.

If you don't want Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Sociology to appear in Category:Project-Class sociology articles and Category:NA-importance sociology articles, remove {{WikiProject Sociology}} entirely. You cannot keep the banner and also suppress the categories other than by removing recognition for the parameters entirely (as is the case with {{WikiProject Classical music}}), which would defeat the FA/A/GA/B/C/Start/Stub grading scheme as well. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:47, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Okay, that was my question (keeping the banner and suppressing the categories) but as you say, we don't want to defeat the grading scheme. Thanks again. Mathglot (talk) 08:06, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I added a WP:AALERTS-related warning concerning mergers and moves in

• {{WPBannerMeta/locwarning}}

• {{WPBannerMeta/templatepage}}

Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 16:46, 14 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wanted to see if someone could help me out. I've noticed a few pages with infobox=no that are still getting categorized into "Needs infobox" categories. In looking at the source code, it seems that these should not be categorized but I think I'm missing something... Anyone able to provide some insight? --Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 22:34, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Zackmann08: Which pages are these? It will depend upon the coding within the individual infobox template. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:58, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Redrose64: thanks for the response. One example would be Talk:Battle, East Sussex which uses {{WikiProject UK geography}}. Sounds like what you're saying is that the issue doesn't actually lie here with {{WPBannerMeta}} but with the way that particular template (in this case {{WikiProject UK geography}}) is calling the template? --Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 23:04, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Read the Deprecated parameters section of the documentation for {{WikiProject UK geography}}. The parameter is behaving as described in the docs. -- WOSlinker (talk) 23:11, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@WOSlinker: ah ok! Thank you for pointing me to that. It is a bit bass-ackwards, but really appreciate you pointing me to the right place. I figured I was just missing something so thank you much! --Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 23:22, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Zackmann08: That's probably why it was deprecated. There's only seems to be about 38 that need updating to the needs-infobox parameter format or removing if the infobox is there now. -- WOSlinker (talk) 08:44, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Special:WhatLinksHere/Canadian Open Wireless and Mobile Communications Engineering Journal shows that Talk:Canadian Open Wireless and Mobile Communications Engineering Journal links to Canadian Open Wireless and Mobile Communications Engineering Journal.

However, I can't find any such links on either Talk:Canadian Open Wireless and Mobile Communications Engineering Journal, or {{WP Journals}}. What gives?

Does something in the metabanner need to make use of {{linkless exists}}? Possibly Module:Pagetype? Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 23:09, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Headbomb: Thanks for the ping. The talk page uses {{WikiProject Academic Journals}} which uses {{WPBannerMeta}}. That and its subpages do a few #ifexist: checks but only on pages such as WP:WikiProject Academic Journals, and there's no #invoke: for a direct module call. Those subpages do use several other complex templates which may record a spurious wikilink. I agree that {{Pagetype}} is the most likely candidate. Someone could test that theory by pretending to edit the module and previewing the talk page with the pagetype call removed. (I can't do this myself, as the modules are protected.)

As you've noticed, Module:Linkless is currently up for deletion. If done carefully, that could still allow {{linkless exists}} to keep working, but deleting the module-level interface would prevent other modules such as Pagetype from calling it.

However, I don't think that Linkless can help us here. Pagetype is not just checking for existence but reading the page to find out whether it is, for example, a redirect. I don't know any way to do that without recording a wikilink. Even if we found a way, I'm not sure that it would be a good idea: we do want the talk page banner to update if its counterpart in the main namespace changes type. Certes (talk) 23:58, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, ideally, we'd want the banner to update, but without creating a link record. Because that's pretty annoying. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 00:07, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]