Revision as of 02:34, 21 December 2024 editBearcat (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators1,566,476 edits →Redlinked class-rating categories← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 15:12, 6 January 2025 edit undoHouseBlaster (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Administrators58,721 edits →Redlinked class-rating categories: ReplyTag: Reply | ||
(17 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{User:MiszaBot/config | {{User:MiszaBot/config | ||
|maxarchivesize = 100K | |maxarchivesize = 100K | ||
|counter = |
|counter = 3 | ||
|minthreadsleft = 1 | |minthreadsleft = 1 | ||
|minthreadstoarchive = 1 | |minthreadstoarchive = 1 | ||
Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
{{WikiProject U.S. Roads}} | {{WikiProject U.S. Roads}} | ||
}} | }} | ||
== WPBannerMeta/hooks/taskforces == | |||
This template is using ] which is no longer supported. I would like to update to use the native task force support in ]. Will do some work in the sandbox shortly. — Martin <small>(] · ])</small> 10:49, 21 December 2023 (UTC) | |||
⚫ | : |
||
In order to update this template effectively, I would like to convert the syntax in the following way: | |||
:Instead of {{para|state1|AL}} | |||
:we use {{para|AL|yes}} | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | : |
||
⚫ | :: |
||
⚫ | ::: |
||
:::Actually, there's a specific reason why this just works better. Most articles are only classified into a single state or territory. Having a single prompt in the Rater gadget for {{para|state}} vastly simplifies assessing articles. It's uncommon that we need {{para|state2}} etc. In fact, the current syntax doesn't allow for an article to be tagged in more than 10 state task forces because no article should be in more than a few, let alone all 56 jurisdictions in the US (50 states, 1 district, 5 territories). <span style="background:#006B54; padding:2px;">'''] ]'''</span> 05:41, 3 February 2024 (UTC) | |||
::::The template already allows 20 {{para|staten}} and {{para|staten_importance}} parameters. So {{tq|Having a single prompt in the Rater gadget for {{para|state}} vastly simplifies assessing articles}} is already not correct. Also, {{para|AL|y}} is more simple then {{para|state|AL}} (less characters and easier to remember). ] (]) 00:20, 23 February 2024 (UTC) | |||
⚫ | :: |
||
::::I have managed to update Canada Roads, India Roads and Australian Roads to stop them using the outdated code. I am unable to use the same method on this template because of the need to support {{para|state1_importance}} and the like. I believe that any coded solution to convert these would make the template much more complicated which would result in harder maintenance by other editors. I thought about adding support for this kind of parameter naming to ] but it would increase the complexity of that module for the benefit of just one template (this one) so that idea has been discarded. My preferred option is to convert the syntax as described above, which would ensure that everything works correctly in the most efficient way. — Martin <small>(] · ])</small> 17:52, 23 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::::I notice that {{para|state1_importance}} is not mentioned anywhere in the template's documentation, so perhaps it was never properly implemented and/or not needed. If it is not needed, then I can use ] to make this template work with the up-to-date code (as I did with Canada and India Roads). If state level importance ''is'' needed, then I suggest we use a bot to convert to the conventional syntax as discussed above — Martin <small>(] · ])</small> 15:28, 16 June 2024 (UTC) | |||
⚫ | : |
||
== Redlinked class-rating categories == | == Redlinked class-rating categories == | ||
Line 39: | Line 20: | ||
:@]: this is probably related to all of the changes to the banner metatemplate itself to change certain classes from "... articles" to "... pages". I'm just waiting for those editors to stop changing stuff so we can figure out what needs to be done here. <span style="background:#006B54; padding:2px;">'''] ]'''</span> 21:22, 20 December 2024 (UTC) | :@]: this is probably related to all of the changes to the banner metatemplate itself to change certain classes from "... articles" to "... pages". I'm just waiting for those editors to stop changing stuff so we can figure out what needs to be done here. <span style="background:#006B54; padding:2px;">'''] ]'''</span> 21:22, 20 December 2024 (UTC) | ||
::Well, for what it's worth, as of right now the only remaining class-rating categories still showing up as redlinks at all are these and a bunch that have already been resolved and just haven't been emptied by the job queue yet, so that I'm just doing "null edit category members" runs on them to clear them out. I obviously can't predict with any certainty that there won't be more in the future, but this most recent run was the first time in several runs that the number of redlinked categories has ''shrunk'' instead of expanding, and the first time in several runs that it's this class-rating crap has been in the minority, so at least for now it's looking promising that this craziness is finally on a downswing. ] (]) 02:32, 21 December 2024 (UTC) | ::Well, for what it's worth, as of right now the only remaining class-rating categories still showing up as redlinks at all are these and a bunch that have already been resolved and just haven't been emptied by the job queue yet, so that I'm just doing "null edit category members" runs on them to clear them out. I obviously can't predict with any certainty that there won't be more in the future, but this most recent run was the first time in several runs that the number of redlinked categories has ''shrunk'' instead of expanding, and the first time in several runs that it's this class-rating crap has been in the minority, so at least for now it's looking promising that this craziness is finally on a downswing. ] (]) 02:32, 21 December 2024 (UTC) | ||
:], any ideas why this is still happening? ] and ] are two examples of file talk pages exhibiting this behavior. Best (and merry Christmas if you celebrate), <b>]]</b> (] • he/they) 02:03, 26 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
⚫ | ::It's because this banner template has never been converted to the new version. It is still using obsolete code which is not maintained anymore. — Martin <small>(] · ])</small> 08:32, 27 December 2024 (UTC) | ||
{{od|::}}This is both the final use of {{t|WPBannerMeta/hooks}} and a blocker on successfully finishing ] moves, so I have done some investigation. Forgive me if this is repeated information to you; I want to make sure we are all on the same page. | |||
WPUSRD has two types of ]s: "]" (e.g. ], ], etc.) and "types" (e.g. ], ]). | |||
All other WikiProject banner templates handle ]s with code like {{para|taskforce|yes}}. For instance, {{para|Trail|yes}}, {{para|]|yes}}, {{para|]|yes}} to indicate a trail that spans Maine and New Hampshire. Template instead uses markup like does things like {{para|type|Trail}}. So, the trail in Maine and New Hampshire would currently be specified with {{tlx|WikiProject U.S. Roads|<nowiki>type=trail |state1=NH |state2=ME</nowiki>}}. My proposed roadmap (no pun intended) to resolving this: | |||
# Get a working prototype of modern, {{para|trail|yes}} code working in the sandbox | |||
# Hack together some transitory code which uses the {{para|type|trail}} syntax if given any of the old parameters, and otherwise uses the new version | |||
# Enlist {{np|Cewbot}} (or another suitable bot, but it is probably best to use the one which is already ]) to do the conversion | |||
Thoughts? Things I am missing? Courtesy pings to {{yo|Bearcat|MSGJ|Kanashimi|p=}}, and I will drop a note at ]. Best, <b>]]</b> (] • he/they) 08:17, 4 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:Excellent plan. Please see ] for previous discussion — Martin <small>(] · ])</small> 13:24, 4 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::@]: let me please reiterate my continued opposition as an editor who frequently uses this banner. The vast majority of articles are assessed for a single state and a single type. When we use Rater to tag a new article, we can just fill in four prompted/required details: state, type, needs-map and needs-jctint. So when ] needed assessment after its creation, it was {{para|state|WI}} {{para|type|SH}} {{para|needs-map|yes}} {{para|needs-jctint|no}}. Four easy required prompts and done for all of the tracking metrics that matter to the project. Again, most articles are only tracked for a single state and a single type, and all should be tracked for the presence of a map and the junction list templates. | |||
::The proposed switch above will either mean wading through the full list of states/territories and types generated by the templatedata to choose the proper selections, or it will leave the required state and type unprompted, increasing the tracking burden for those of us left in the project. There would be over 60 options to wade through (50 states, DC, 5 territories, 8 types) if they were all listed, and if they weren't individually listed, people wouldn't know that setting a state/type pair is supposed to be required. | |||
::Additionally, I would further oppose any change that separates the two basic topics (they're not really task forces in the traditional sense anymore) so that types and states appear mixed together in the same line of the banner output. That may be just cosmetic to some, but it's important to us. | |||
⚫ | ::In short, things were set up this way for a reason, and I trust that our brilliant coders can continue to create templates that work for the needs and workflows of our editors instead of forcing editors to always conform to the desires of the coders. <span style="background:#006B54; padding:2px;">'''] ]'''</span> 18:48, 4 January 2025 (UTC) | ||
:::{{re|Imzadi1979}} I'll start by saying that regardless of whether they act like task forces in reality, the states and types are considered task forces by the code (both the current and the proposed).{{pb}}Let's try and work together to come up with a solution which works for all of us. I need the template to respect the ], and want the template to not use {{t|WPBannerMeta/hooks}}. I want to make sure I understand your requirements and desires, too; is this following accurate? | |||
:::#Need to continue using the {{para|state|WI}} style-input | |||
:::#Want to keep the new, additional parameters to a minimum | |||
:::#Not sure what you mean by {{tqq|oppose... types and states appear mixed together in the same line of the banner output}}. At ], I see {{tqq|U.S. Roads: State highways / Wisconsin Mid‑importance}}, which seems to violate this? Or are you requesting new functionality? | |||
:::<b>]]</b> (] • he/they) 22:49, 4 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
⚫ | ::::@]: for 1 and 2, yes. For 3, if you expand the banner, there is one line for the topics and one line for the locations in the banner output. That's the separate lines I was talking about. <span style="background:#006B54; padding:2px;">'''] ]'''</span> 23:07, 4 January 2025 (UTC) | ||
:::::Ah, gotcha. Changing number 3 to put them on one line would actually be additional work, so I can promise you that will not be happening :){{pb}}I'll see what I can get working in the sandbox. Do you have an example of a road article which spans both multiple states and has multiple types? I want to make sure the code is thoroughly tested. Best, <b>]]</b> (] • he/they) 00:29, 5 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::::@]: I'm not aware of one article that has multiple states ''and'' multiple types. ] has multiple types (US 66, USH), but as a national overview with state sub articles, it isn't tracked by state. (Multiple types would be rare, actually.) ] has multiple states (MN, WI, MI), but it's a single type (USH). <span style="background:#006B54; padding:2px;">'''] ]'''</span> 02:34, 5 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
⚫ | ::::::] has multiple types and a state. <span style="background:#006B54; padding:2px;">'''] ]'''</span> 02:39, 5 January 2025 (UTC) | ||
:::::::Thank you! <b>]]</b> (] • he/they) 04:08, 5 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
{{ping|HouseBlaster}} you might be interested to look at ] which I managed to convert by writing a little piece of code in ]. I could do the same to this template but the additional complexity of task force importance made it non-trivial — Martin <small>(] · ])</small> 05:57, 5 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
⚫ | :I think I noted before, only one state used separate importance ratings in the past when it operated as semi-independent project. That ended long ago though, and at this point, importance ratings should be the same for the entire project. <span style="background:#006B54; padding:2px;">'''] ]'''</span> 06:37, 5 January 2025 (UTC) | ||
:], would it be possible to expand the functionality of ] to accept additional value parameters (e.g. {{para|value2}}), to properly aliases? For instance, dealing with the equivalent {{para|type|I}} and {{para|type|Interstate}}. Thanks, <b>]]</b> (] • he/they) 06:38, 6 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
⚫ | ::Sounds reasonable — Martin <small>(] · ])</small> 07:32, 6 January 2025 (UTC) | ||
⚫ | ::I have added support for the plural {{para|values}}, so you may use {{para|values|I, Interstate}}, etc. — Martin <small>(] · ])</small> 11:55, 6 January 2025 (UTC) | ||
:::Thank you :) <b>]]</b> (] • he/they) 15:12, 6 January 2025 (UTC) |
Latest revision as of 15:12, 6 January 2025
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the WikiProject U.S. Roads template. |
|
Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 14 days |
This template does not require a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
|
Redlinked class-rating categories
As of the most recent run of Special:WantedCategories, there are three redlinked class-rating categories being generated by this template:
- Category:FM-Class California road transport articles
- Category:FM-Class Illinois road transport articles
- Category:FM-Class Interstate Highway System articles
So could somebody associated with this project please either create these categories if they're actually wanted, or figure out how to kibosh them if they're not? Thanks. Bearcat (talk) 19:19, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Bearcat: this is probably related to all of the changes to the banner metatemplate itself to change certain classes from "... articles" to "... pages". I'm just waiting for those editors to stop changing stuff so we can figure out what needs to be done here. Imzadi 1979 → 21:22, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Well, for what it's worth, as of right now the only remaining class-rating categories still showing up as redlinks at all are these and a bunch that have already been resolved and just haven't been emptied by the job queue yet, so that I'm just doing "null edit category members" runs on them to clear them out. I obviously can't predict with any certainty that there won't be more in the future, but this most recent run was the first time in several runs that the number of redlinked categories has shrunk instead of expanding, and the first time in several runs that it's this class-rating crap has been in the minority, so at least for now it's looking promising that this craziness is finally on a downswing. Bearcat (talk) 02:32, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- MSGJ, any ideas why this is still happening? File talk:Jane M. Byrne Interchange Traffic.webm and File talk:Bixby Creek Bridge, California, USA - May 2013.jpg are two examples of file talk pages exhibiting this behavior. Best (and merry Christmas if you celebrate), HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:03, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
- It's because this banner template has never been converted to the new version. It is still using obsolete code which is not maintained anymore. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:32, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
This is both the final use of {{WPBannerMeta/hooks}} and a blocker on successfully finishing the current article->page moves, so I have done some investigation. Forgive me if this is repeated information to you; I want to make sure we are all on the same page.
WPUSRD has two types of WP:TASKFORCEs: "states" (e.g. Maine, New Hampshire, etc.) and "types" (e.g. Trail, Junction).
All other WikiProject banner templates handle WP:TASKFORCEs with code like |taskforce=yes
. For instance, |Trail=yes
, |ME=yes
, |NH=yes
to indicate a trail that spans Maine and New Hampshire. Template instead uses markup like does things like |type=Trail
. So, the trail in Maine and New Hampshire would currently be specified with {{WikiProject U.S. Roads|type=trail |state1=NH |state2=ME}}
. My proposed roadmap (no pun intended) to resolving this:
- Get a working prototype of modern,
|trail=yes
code working in the sandbox - Hack together some transitory code which uses the
|type=trail
syntax if given any of the old parameters, and otherwise uses the new version - Enlist Cewbot (or another suitable bot, but it is probably best to use the one which is already doing similar tasks) to do the conversion
Thoughts? Things I am missing? Courtesy pings to @Bearcat, MSGJ, and Kanashimi, and I will drop a note at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject U.S. Roads. Best, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 08:17, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
- Excellent plan. Please see Template talk:WikiProject U.S. Roads/Archive 3#WPBannerMeta/hooks/taskforces for previous discussion — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:24, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
- @HouseBlaster: let me please reiterate my continued opposition as an editor who frequently uses this banner. The vast majority of articles are assessed for a single state and a single type. When we use Rater to tag a new article, we can just fill in four prompted/required details: state, type, needs-map and needs-jctint. So when Wisconsin Highway 195 needed assessment after its creation, it was
|state=WI
|type=SH
|needs-map=yes
|needs-jctint=no
. Four easy required prompts and done for all of the tracking metrics that matter to the project. Again, most articles are only tracked for a single state and a single type, and all should be tracked for the presence of a map and the junction list templates. - The proposed switch above will either mean wading through the full list of states/territories and types generated by the templatedata to choose the proper selections, or it will leave the required state and type unprompted, increasing the tracking burden for those of us left in the project. There would be over 60 options to wade through (50 states, DC, 5 territories, 8 types) if they were all listed, and if they weren't individually listed, people wouldn't know that setting a state/type pair is supposed to be required.
- Additionally, I would further oppose any change that separates the two basic topics (they're not really task forces in the traditional sense anymore) so that types and states appear mixed together in the same line of the banner output. That may be just cosmetic to some, but it's important to us.
- In short, things were set up this way for a reason, and I trust that our brilliant coders can continue to create templates that work for the needs and workflows of our editors instead of forcing editors to always conform to the desires of the coders. Imzadi 1979 → 18:48, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Imzadi1979: I'll start by saying that regardless of whether they act like task forces in reality, the states and types are considered task forces by the code (both the current and the proposed).Let's try and work together to come up with a solution which works for all of us. I need the template to respect the article-> page updates, and want the template to not use {{WPBannerMeta/hooks}}. I want to make sure I understand your requirements and desires, too; is this following accurate?
- Need to continue using the
|state=WI
style-input - Want to keep the new, additional parameters to a minimum
- Not sure what you mean by
oppose... types and states appear mixed together in the same line of the banner output
. At Talk:Wisconsin Highway 195, I seeU.S. Roads: State highways / Wisconsin Mid‑importance
, which seems to violate this? Or are you requesting new functionality?
- Need to continue using the
- HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:49, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
- @HouseBlaster: for 1 and 2, yes. For 3, if you expand the banner, there is one line for the topics and one line for the locations in the banner output. That's the separate lines I was talking about. Imzadi 1979 → 23:07, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
- Ah, gotcha. Changing number 3 to put them on one line would actually be additional work, so I can promise you that will not be happening :)I'll see what I can get working in the sandbox. Do you have an example of a road article which spans both multiple states and has multiple types? I want to make sure the code is thoroughly tested. Best, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:29, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- @HouseBlaster: I'm not aware of one article that has multiple states and multiple types. Talk:U.S. Route 66 has multiple types (US 66, USH), but as a national overview with state sub articles, it isn't tracked by state. (Multiple types would be rare, actually.) Talk:U.S. Route 8 has multiple states (MN, WI, MI), but it's a single type (USH). Imzadi 1979 → 02:34, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- Talk:U.S. Route 30 in Iowa has multiple types and a state. Imzadi 1979 → 02:39, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you! HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 04:08, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- Ah, gotcha. Changing number 3 to put them on one line would actually be additional work, so I can promise you that will not be happening :)I'll see what I can get working in the sandbox. Do you have an example of a road article which spans both multiple states and has multiple types? I want to make sure the code is thoroughly tested. Best, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:29, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- @HouseBlaster: for 1 and 2, yes. For 3, if you expand the banner, there is one line for the topics and one line for the locations in the banner output. That's the separate lines I was talking about. Imzadi 1979 → 23:07, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Imzadi1979: I'll start by saying that regardless of whether they act like task forces in reality, the states and types are considered task forces by the code (both the current and the proposed).Let's try and work together to come up with a solution which works for all of us. I need the template to respect the article-> page updates, and want the template to not use {{WPBannerMeta/hooks}}. I want to make sure I understand your requirements and desires, too; is this following accurate?
- @HouseBlaster: let me please reiterate my continued opposition as an editor who frequently uses this banner. The vast majority of articles are assessed for a single state and a single type. When we use Rater to tag a new article, we can just fill in four prompted/required details: state, type, needs-map and needs-jctint. So when Wisconsin Highway 195 needed assessment after its creation, it was
@HouseBlaster: you might be interested to look at Template:WikiProject Canada Roads which I managed to convert by writing a little piece of code in Module:If any equal. I could do the same to this template but the additional complexity of task force importance made it non-trivial — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 05:57, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- I think I noted before, only one state used separate importance ratings in the past when it operated as semi-independent project. That ended long ago though, and at this point, importance ratings should be the same for the entire project. Imzadi 1979 → 06:37, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- MSGJ, would it be possible to expand the functionality of Module:If any equal to accept additional value parameters (e.g.
|value2=
), to properly aliases? For instance, dealing with the equivalent|type=I
and|type=Interstate
. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 06:38, 6 January 2025 (UTC)- Sounds reasonable — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:32, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
- I have added support for the plural
|values=
, so you may use|values=I, Interstate
, etc. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:55, 6 January 2025 (UTC)- Thank you :) HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 15:12, 6 January 2025 (UTC)