Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 17:57, 25 June 2014

Template editor

• WP:RTE
• WP:RFP/T

(add request • view requests)

See Misplaced Pages:Template editor for granting guidelines. Applicants should show some evidence that they generally meet the guidelines outlined there, however administrators may use their discretion in determining which editors meet the general standard. Consider posting {{subst:template editor granted}} to the user talk page of approved users.

User:Adam Cuerden

• Adam Cuerden (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · templates created · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)

It have a lot of experience with templates - indeed, I coded the first major revision of MOTD on Commons, the system used for opera/composer of the month at Misplaced Pages:Wikiproject Opera and so on. The changes would primarily be for adding small additions to functionality and tracker categories (e.g. to track use of a template function prior to suggesting any changes to it - trivially done in most cases with a simple {{#if:{{{1|}}}|]}} - but which gives very useful evidence before suggesting more major changes.) Adam Cuerden 13:28, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

• As a former admin and long-time file-mover, I am inclined to grant you the user-right as requested (especially since I personally am likely to !vote support if this were an RfA). However, other than two days ago, you do not seem to regularly need to request edits to protected templates, and there is frankly not as much Template talk: discussion as I'd like to see, especially considering the volume of actual Template edits, which leads me to believe the user-right might not be of much use to you. Can you provide one or more specific example of edits you were or are currently unable to complete due to template-protection? ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 14:14, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

I'd be inclined to decline this one. Adam has only made four edit requests that I can find, and I'm a little worried about the mistakes I'm seeing in the code. The most recent, at Template talk:Featured picture#Edit protected, adds Category:Featured pictured promoted through delist to certain pages, but Adam didn't create the category. Really, that should be a hidden category. (Also, should that be "pictures", not "pictured"?) The two before that, at Template talk:Wikinews#Bad functionality and Template talk:Wikinews#Remove undocumented search function, have problems that were brought up on the template talk pages. (The fourth was made in 2011, so isn't representative of Adam's recent template work.) I'd like to see a few edit requests with no issues before I'd be satisfied that Adam satisfies point six of the granting guidelines. — Mr. Stradivarius 15:36, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

I checked it wouldn't break anything very carefully, and that the code was invisible. The problem was I used the wrong test cases. And that's pretty much why I want the tool - it makes it far easier to check things in practice, and make any tiny tweaks that'll get it to work. Adam Cuerden 12:28, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

@Adam Cuerden: If there were any pages in Category:Featured pictured promoted through delist, the code would have been visible on those pages as a red-linked category displayed alongside the content categories. That's why I said that the category should have been created as a hidden category. Luckily it didn't make any difference in practice, but if you had done same thing on a template that categorised thousands of articles, then other editors would probably object to seeing it among the content categories. Also, you don't really need template editor rights for testing protected templates. Special:TemplateSandbox should be enough, especially if you use it with User:Jackmcbarn/advancedtemplatesandbox.js. And it's not just the most recent edit request you made, it's that there were problems with the ones before that as well. You said that you were careful when testing the code for your most recent edit request, but given the issues with the requests you made I'd prefer to see some more evidence of your carefulness, in the form of successful edit requests, before giving you the right. That said, I'll leave some more time for others to comment here in case anyone thinks I'm being unduly harsh. — Mr. Stradivarius 13:55, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

• Adam, part of being a good template editor is making sure that you have thought through every practical use case (even the ones that are the opposite of the way you intend your change to be used but plausible) and set up testcases for them. Now, no-one is perfect, and occasionally you miss a use case, and someone will come to your user talk page crying that the world has ended, and you look over the code specific to their use case and either fix their usage (because they were using it "wrong"), fix the template to accommodate their use case (because they were using it "wrong" but their idea is valid), or you start a discussion on the talk page for the template to request assistance from other templateFu users and the community explaining the situation (explaining the other editor's use case as a positive idea, even if you don't like it (which you can mention) is a good strategy to keep the discussion moving forward and not stalling with multiple people who are upset about the situation). I'm currently not convinced you are ready to be editing the "big" templates yet myself, but I would be happy to work with you as a "mentor" of sorts if you are interested (you seem to have some sound ideas, but poor executions atm). — {{U|Technical 13}} 14:14, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

{{featured picture}} is not a highly-visible template, and the problems would have been fixed in five minutes, had I had the ability to actually make the changes (on which subject: "delist" should be changed to "Delist" - undocumented functionality of #titleparts, and there's a typo in the category name) - but the problems, let us be completely clear, were checked, and would never have caused any more disruption than a red-linked category on very low-viewcount pages. I am fully aware of how visible the templates I want to edit are, and any pragmatic judgement would show that there was no chance for widely-visible problems, even if I had screwed up the template completely before reverting it: File pages, the only type of pages it's used on, just don't have the viewcounts for that.

I'm quite aware of the need to protect Misplaced Pages while editing high visibility templates. I'm also quite aware as to what is a high-visibility template, and if there's so much bureaucratic issues that these sort of minor changes to not-that-visible templates are forbidden without so much bureaucracy that it'd take a hundred times longer than just doing it, I'm not sure I want the status. Adam Cuerden 14:41, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

User:Nsaa

• Nsaa (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · templates created · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)

Have done a lot of Template edits, and it could be nice to still be able to edit here, even if I'm not so active on the English Misplaced Pages for the moment Nsaa (talk) 17:57, 25 June 2014 (UTC)