From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
WikiProject icon Council
WikiProject iconThis template 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

Add tracking categories

@ MSGJ Can you help add some tracking categories of {{ WPBS}}?

  1. Disambiguation pages or redirect pages are assigned classes.
  2. Contains incorrect attribute values, e.g. living=no}.

If we already have such tracking categories, please let me know, thanks. Kanashimi ( talk) 08:07, 6 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Hi Kanashimi
  1. It should be impossible to assign classes to non-articles. Or rather, the template will just ignore those classes. Do you mean you want to find these incorrect parameters to remove? Wouldn't that be classes as a cosmetic edit, if the parameter is being ignored anyway?
  2. Do you want me to track any values which are not valid as "yes" or "no"? That would be everything except yes, y, true, t, on, 1, no, n, false, f, off, 0. Yes that should be possible.
— Martin ( MSGJ ·  talk) 09:24, 6 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  1. GoingBatty mentioned that for these type of articles, the robot needn't inherit the class. I think if there is a tracking category like this, the robot can just delete the class.
  2. Yes, Ipigott mentioned that wrong parameter values could cause template errors. If there is such a tracking category, I think the robot can help to correct them.
Kanashimi ( talk) 09:38, 6 February 2024 (UTC) reply

MSGJ Thinking of tracking categories, is there one like Category:WikiProject banners without banner shells but just for articles (well article talk pages), i.e. not userspace or draftspace, etc. Would it be useful...? I'm thinking partly to see how much the PIQA bots have left to do in that area. Thanks. - Kj cheetham ( talk) 16:53, 15 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Not yet, but would be simple enough to set up. Alternatively, shall we propose adding the banner shell to other namespaces too? That is kind of out of scope of PIQA, but it seems that it has been universally accepted in article space, so editors might expect to see them in other namespaces too — Martin ( MSGJ ·  talk) 14:58, 3 March 2024 (UTC) reply
@ Kj cheetham I created Category:Articles with WikiProject banners but without a banner shell — Martin ( MSGJ ·  talk) 20:57, 24 March 2024 (UTC) reply

I notice that Talk:48th Brigade (United Kingdom) is tracked as not having a banner shell, but it does have a banner shell — Martin ( MSGJ ·  talk) 14:57, 3 March 2024 (UTC) reply

 Fixed — Martin ( MSGJ ·  talk) 20:58, 24 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Invalid parameters

Code on Module:Banner shell/sandbox for tracking any invalid values of |blp=, |living=, |blpo=, |activepol=, |collapsed= or |category= and will place them in Category:Pages using WikiProject banner shell with invalid parameters — Martin ( MSGJ ·  talk) 16:07, 3 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Code deployed — Martin ( MSGJ ·  talk) 20:40, 6 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Anyone else want to lend a hand at Category:Pages using WikiProject banner shell with invalid parameters and we can get these cleaned up — Martin ( MSGJ ·  talk) 08:03, 13 March 2024 (UTC) reply

I've fixed about 70 of the 100-odd talk pages in the category, mostly those with either simple typos in the living/blp parameter values, or those where an {{ Image requested}} tag was mistakenly in the banner shell. There's about 27 remaining, most of which are where the blp status is unknown or conflicting. Harryboyles 09:20, 13 March 2024 (UTC) reply

living/blp on categories

Should |living=no/|blp=no be removed on category talks only, since there are no categorization changes whether or not they're used? I've seen them on a small-ish # of very old {{ WP Years}}+{{ WP Biography}} categories.

Presumably, |living=yes & |blp=yes should be kept even on categories, since the category is then added to Category:Noindexed pages?   ~  Tom.Reding ( talk ⋅ dgaf)  16:02, 8 March 2024 (UTC) reply

@ Tom.Reding: If you remove those parameters from a talk page with {{ WP Biography}}, then the talk page will appear on Category:Biography articles without living parameter until the parameter is readded. GoingBatty ( talk) 17:33, 24 March 2024 (UTC) reply
@ GoingBatty: that's true on article talks, but not for category talks. |living/blp=no seem to be useless on cats, so I've started removing them while doing more significant changes.   ~  Tom.Reding ( talk ⋅ dgaf)  19:27, 24 March 2024 (UTC) reply
@ Tom.Reding: Thank you for setting me straight. GoingBatty ( talk) 20:56, 24 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Possible bug?

What's gone wrong with Talk:Abu Bakr Rabee Ibn Ahmad Al-Akhawyni Bokhari still having WikiProjects saying they are Unassessed when |class=stub is in the banner shell? Is the length of the article title an issue at all? - Kj cheetham ( talk) 19:52, 18 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Kj cheetham, fixed, there was a stray } which presumably messed up the pattern matching. —  Qwerfjkl talk 19:57, 18 March 2024 (UTC) reply
Well spotted! Thank you. - Kj cheetham ( talk) 20:02, 18 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Add assessment date and/or assessed revision for article quality ratings

Reason: This way, others can figure out if an article needs a reassement (or if it's just a diffrence of opinion) without going through talk page history and article history, and only need to compare the revisions. OrdinaryGiraffe ( talk) 23:15, 22 March 2024 (UTC) reply

We have this for FA and GA (possibly A-Class too), but not for B-Class and lower. However, I am certain that this has been suggested and rejected on several occasions - just not on this page. -- Redrose64 🌹 ( talk) 01:12, 23 March 2024 (UTC) reply
I figured that might have happend. I'm just not sure where the old discussions are, so if you know, could you link it? OrdinaryGiraffe ( talk) 16:10, 23 March 2024 (UTC) reply
I'm not dead set against the idea, but unless there was a concerted effort (or even a requirement) to use this parameter then it would rapidly become useless — Martin ( MSGJ ·  talk) 17:24, 24 March 2024 (UTC) reply
Could you explain why? OrdinaryGiraffe ( talk) 17:25, 24 March 2024 (UTC) reply
If it was implemented, I honestly can't see it getting regularly updated other than by a bot. I'm also not convinced of the benefits of having it at all. - Kj cheetham ( talk) 17:28, 24 March 2024 (UTC) reply
Oh. Never mind. I was thinking it would help, but I guess there's no point if it's just a random date. OrdinaryGiraffe ( talk) 17:37, 24 March 2024 (UTC) reply
It's a nice idea, just difficult in practice. - Kj cheetham ( talk) 17:49, 24 March 2024 (UTC) reply
@ OrdinaryGiraffe: Some WikiProject templates have an assess-date parameter (e.g. {{ WikiProject India}}). If there's a particular WikiProject that you think would benefit from an assess-date parameter, you could discuss it on that WikiProject's talk page. GoingBatty ( talk) 17:30, 24 March 2024 (UTC) reply
Is there any point in having these parameters in WikiProject banners now that the quality rating has been moved to the shell? (I guess it could refer to the importance assessment.) — Martin ( MSGJ ·  talk) 18:17, 24 March 2024 (UTC) reply
That was my original idea., because importance ratings usually aren't supposed to change. Quality is. OrdinaryGiraffe ( talk) 20:53, 24 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Conflicting ratings

See also: Template talk:WikiProject banner shell/Archive 10 § Conflicting ratings

A few suggestions to help process articles with conflicting quality ratings:

  • If the conflicting ratings comprise no more than a third of the total number of banners THEN use the majority rating
    • Rationale: the majority rating is more likely to be correct rather than an anomaly
    • Example: [1]
  • If there is only one conflicting rating AND it comprises more than a third of the total number of banners AND it differs by no more than one grade THEN use the higher rating
    • Rationale: the higher rating is more likely to be more recent as articles tend to improve over time
    • Example: [2]

I think these would resolve a lot of the conflicting ratings. Please suggest any more with rationale and example — Martin ( MSGJ ·  talk) 14:07, 4 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Proposal changed from 25% to a third because that still represents a clear majority — Martin ( MSGJ ·  talk) 14:14, 4 April 2024 (UTC) reply
I noticed that some television season articles are in that category because they are marked incorrectly as a list ( Talk:A Certain Scientific Railgun season 1). Not sure how many of those are there, but those are an easy fix. Gonnym ( talk) 09:49, 6 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Is there an easy way to detect if an article is a list? — Martin ( MSGJ ·  talk) 10:40, 6 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Television season articles are not lists as they should have sections detailing various aspects of them. If they look like a list that is just because they are at a start level. So any that are marked as a list are just wrong. Gonnym ( talk) 07:30, 7 April 2024 (UTC) reply
A GA, FA or A rating should override the others. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:19, 6 April 2024 (UTC) reply
This information shouldn't be removed by bot. I know the number of articles involved is very large but the rules of thumb you propose are highly error-prone. In many cases the minority rating will be the correct one because an editor re-rated the article (e.g. because its quality had improved) but only changed one banner (because they were a member of that WikiProject or because they forgot to change the others etc.). This is actually what happened in the example you give, where B-class was what should have been used in the banner: it was the most recent rating given by a human assessing the article's quality (though I've now re-appraised the article and in my opinion it's C-class).
We still need to look at these on a case-by-case basis, but ideally we can group many articles into the same case: for instance, Talk:43rd People's Choice Awards, Talk:44th People's Choice Awards, Talk:46th People's Choice Awards will likely all have the same resolution, as might many other pages in some common awards category.
The starting place may be to identify how contradictory "List"/non-list assessments should be resolved. My suspicion is that the "List" assessment will be correct in most cases, but note that sometimes the intention might be to rate the list's quality like MilHist does and so this information shouldn't be removed without discussion by the WikiProjects. — Bilorv ( talk) 09:44, 7 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Use of Template:Banner holder

Module:Banner shell is currently calling Template:Banner holder. I'm not overly keen on a module calling a template, but in this case the module overrides most of the default functions of Banner holder. So I'm wondering if this template could be bypassed and its functionality merged into the module? Ping @ Izno who was involved in some 2022 changes — Martin ( MSGJ ·  talk) 14:53, 3 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Banner holder is intended to be 1) a generalization for WPBS, which you reimplemented in this module despite using the general name, and 2) a holder for tmboxes that aren't WikiProject banners. I don't see an issue merging it into the module, but it would be prudent to separate out the WikiProject-specific parts into their own part of the module and then call the holder function, which should be a public API. And given the name of the module, that function should probably be the "main" function, with the WikiProject specific portions in some p.wikiproject_shell. Izno ( talk) 17:59, 3 March 2024 (UTC) reply
Okay let's merge it into the module. I don't think the name of the module and its functions are particularly important, but no opposition to your ideas. — Martin ( MSGJ ·  talk) 12:54, 4 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Started in sandbox [3]. Lots more work and testing needed yet — Martin ( MSGJ ·  talk) 21:55, 18 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Template_talk:WikiProject_banner_shell&oldid=1219625390"