Hi CB - thanks for the note; I noticed it when I'd been editing Rudbeckia laciniata (a plant); it added a couple of extra lines in the taxobox filled with triple curly brackets with 'subdivision' (if I remember rightly) in the brackets. The dinosaur one comes up very different; it was like this a week or so ago; I was able to correct that by changing the layout to:
but it seems to have been changed back again resulting in the peculiar additions at the top of the page. I must admit I don't like the new taxobox style, thought the old one was much better (and still use it when making new articles), it was much less prone to these unpredictable formatting peculiarities, and also much easier to add extra details like author citations. Hope this helps! - MPF00:21, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I seems that the "Fossil range: Triassic – Cretaceous" is a lot larger than it should be, and I don't know how to fix that. A good example of how it should be is on the Hampster page. --Khoikhoi03:23, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! By the way, another thing that's bothered me ever since the creation since the Taxobox template is the the size of the conservation status. I like the size on Quagga, would you be able to fix it? Thanks. --Khoikhoi03:37, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Conrad. (1) I've just updated my weeble sandbox example User talk:Ligulem/work/WeebleTrick using the new "if=" style. Example B1 still fails due to the missing "if=". (2) I agree with you that adding "|if=" to template calls isn't that of a big deal, I mean I would go for this if I were allowed to. It's not that difficult to add that to template calls. But of course it might get forgotten and looks a bit strange. Clearly we are in "everthing costs something" land (nothing new in engineering :-). Ligulem17:05, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I find his behavior annoying. He takes out little things like whether true or so is the right name. But instead of only saying true is the wrong word etc. he could also have answered. From his initial accusations/concerns not much is left, the template is not used anymore in articles, I have no problem if he does not like the dab tag etc... but he abused his admin power by blocking a page move and moving it to what maybe only one party wants. This two-class WP is annoying. If I would have eaten more today I would like to vomit. This kind of admin behavior is really bad. abuse is abuse is abuse. Tobias Conradi(Talk)22:49, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Cyrius is the abuser. He moved a page to a page that was edited - you can't do this as a regular user. Now the page is blocked for moves - I don't know why, how, but strongly assume Cyrius did it with his admin privelges.
can you run a bot? we need to convert certain things in the articles, e.g. colornames should be changed to familynames, then the color array could be reduced in size. The bot should also change the ref from Template:Language to Template:Infobox Language - we should use standard name for the template. Of course the original language template should be moved there in advance. The bot could also convert some not optimal variable names
nation=list of countries in which it is an official language
better: official=
Ok, the quilt should be better now. Let me know if there are other issues. On the questions above. No, I haven't looked into bot use yet. It seems like the current template uses 'nation' and Netoholic's has 'official'. It is easy enough to make that change, but then all the calls have to be updated that way also. --CBD☎✉16:38, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The call to the template is slightly different than it used to be. This was necessary in order to convert it from a meta-template based on Template:Switch into a single template. I had updated the calls to it in Template:Language, Template:Language/quilt, and so forth but probably missed some individual calls like these. I updated the calls on that page to use the new format. --CBD☎✉02:47, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Conrad. Many thanks for your work. Certainly I'm interested and of course I will look at User:CBDunkerson/Sandbox4 as you posted on TfD of qif. I will repost here (I also put this page on my watch). Don't know if I find time today. Shure tomorrow. Thanks again. See you later! Ligulem20:05, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yup, I didn't have the 'Date' parameter in the template at all. It wasn't listed in the blank parameter list on the 'Book reference' talk page. Must have been updates since that was put in. I'll check if there are any other missing parameters like that. --CBD☎✉22:44, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Couple of things: I added a space before the 'Date'... current template doesn't have it, but I think there should be one. Also, the template has a problem when there is no author name and/or article link... should be able to resolve that, but need to work on it a bit. I added the 'cite' style and category link from the original template... though I'm not really sure how the 'cite' is supposed to work. Finally, about the '|if=' in the call to the template... there is a way to get rid of that so existing template calls can remain unchanged, but it would double the length of the template and users with the Lynx browser would always get the full list of parameters - just as '{{{Editor}}}' and such if they were not filled out in the call. I prefer this method with the extra 'if' parameter, but can really be done either way. --CBD☎✉23:24, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Are you really suggesting that we pursue that solution? It involves an empty parameter that we have to add to hundreds (thousands) of articles. -- Netoholic@23:44, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm open to either (though the 'crap' comment was less than helpful). For templates with lots of potentially suppressed parameters like this I like the non-CSS version, but if we don't care about the Lynx users I'm ok with the longer form - which is why I mentioned it as an option above even before you stepped in. --CBD☎✉23:58, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've tested your new weeble variant. See User talk:Ligulem/work/b-refCBD/weeble/2. It's damn close to the original book reference but there is a problem with the point at the end. There is also a problem with the rendering, but that's not due to your template. I've seen that earlier already but could not reproduce it. My guess: it has to do with the pre sections. So don't worry about that for now. Testing CSS variant now (will post that later). Ligulem12:51, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I put a comment about the 'period at the end' issue on both versions. It needs to appear only when neither Publisher nor ID are set. Anyway, it is solvable for both variants. I've just been trying to come up with a solution that doesn't involve having an entire conditional section just for the trailing period. --CBD☎✉15:03, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The folks on articles using book ref are pretty nitpicking. Such a missing point at the end is sufficient to gather complete refusal from them. I remember though that there was an old debate whether book ref should emit that trailing point or not. But however, if it does not it should at least not do so in all cases to be consistent. I've tested the CSS version at User talk:Ligulem/work/b-refCBD/CSS/1 there is a problem with ISBNs appearing on a new line. The CSS version has also a similar point-at-the end problem. Ligulem16:30, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I must I say that a the moment I tend rather to the CSS variant for book reference (and not to the weeble variant). Mainly because book reference is often used more than once in the same article, so that nasty |if= paramter hurts definitely more than on templates that are only included once per article. I also strongly think that, especially for book reference, there would be resistence among the article people if we add that ugly |if= en masse to articles. So I must say I'm with Neto. BTW I made a variant of your and Neto's work here. Test cases are here. I added line breaks and comments. Ligulem23:13, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That's ok. Given the number of existing template calls it makes sense to use the version which doesn't require those calls to be changed. It'll be messy for the Lynx users, but that's a small population. I use a mix of both as appropriate (and indeed the 'CSS version' isn't 100% CSS). It actually may be possible to implement this without any use of either '|if=' or CSS at all, but it would be pretty ugly code (see the way I handled the 'id' reference in the cite section on CSS and the 'ending period' in both versions)... something I just came up with while working on this. Need to experiment more to see if it can be made 'prettier' while retaining the capabilities - and I'd like to know if there are ways to do the same things in CSS without funky 'Weeble style' parameter default tricks. --CBD☎✉23:35, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Conrad, I don't know what browser you use, but your recent change to Portal screwed it completely on all the browsers I have on my machine (FF, IE & Op8.5 on Windows). I reverted it, then decided to try and fix it myself. I think I managed to get the template:click template to work in there. Cheers, nick16:53, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Assuming you have reverted my reversion (I won't bother to check), see Talk:Michelle Bachelet and look at all those empty cells in the infobox. That's what I call a mess up. It was perfectly fine before. —Cantus…☎03:08, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot for your help with the infobox on Zwolle. I've now incorporated the flag and the coat of arms of Zwolle (which I'm hoping to bring up to featured article status) in the infobox and the article. I've got another question though. In the country infoboxes, you get a link to Flag of X and Coat of arms of X below the flag and the coat of arms of the country. I would like to do the same in the Zwolle article, because I've got articles for the flag and the coat of arms in the pipeline. Do you know how I can get this done? Thanks an awful lot in advance, AecisMr. Mojo risin'15:31, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Is the single taxobox preferrable? I've seen it done both ways all over the place, just wondering which was the more appropriate method. -Dawson18:36, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It was recently brought to my attention that Opera does not display the single taxobox format properly. It eliminates the border around the binomial section. It probably is something that should be rectified. -Dawson18:36, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, the version that you just showed me looks worse. The grey line at the bottom of the taxobox is thicker than I've ever seen it. --Khoikhoi22:51, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I seem to have broken Centrarchidae and I'm not sure why (the generated HTML doesn't seem to correspond to the template source). I would be grateful for your help. Gdr00:02, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for looking at this. It looks to me as though the
from the expansion of the range map gets turned into
<div class="center"><small>Sunfish range</small>
at some stage. I don't know why this happens: some thing that tries to fix up HTML, maybe? Anyway, the </div> gets omitted (or maybe postponed — there is one late on).
Hi Cool Cat. I've been looking at the templates and they could definitely be condensed, but I guess the best way to restructure them depends on what you want to use them for. You could make a template like, {{insignia |country=BE|force=army|rank=1a}} which displays any given insignia based on the parameters passed to it, but at that point you might as well just use the 'image:' markup. Alternatively the template could just look for 'country' and 'force' as parameters and then, based on those two, conditionally display the list of insignia indicated. That would just involve copying the info from all the existing templates in and putting conditional logic around it. Another option would be to put the ranks in the parameter names like; {{insignia |BE-ar-1a=1|US-nv-9=1}} and then have the template logic display the insignia for which parameters have been set. It all depends on how you are looking to use the images I guess. Are they just going to be on a few comparison pages or would they be displayed on the pages of individual commanders and the like? --CBD☎✉22:04, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I am not happy with the templates as they are not generic enough. No argument there. When I created the templates an if/else structure did not existed.
One reason I am not sure how to handle the templates is that I do not have one solid patern. See luxembourg one for example or italian. How would I handle all that in one template.
The templates will be used just for comparasions AND are used on individual army pafes. For example see what links to the US, UK, Tr, GR etc ranks.
What I want to achive: Few/One generic template(s) that does what 26 templates are doing. I also dont want it to change the apperance (aside from perhaps condensing width a bit)
I put together a partial test at User:CBDunkerson/Sandbox2. Feel free to play with it. Changing the country in the template call on the first line should change the insignia displayed. Somewhat glitchy, but a general concept for how one template could include the contents of the 26 and conditionally display info for the country or countries called. --CBD☎✉02:19, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm.... You are tossing all images into one template. What I want to achiheve is to use a template repetively. (Use one templae for all countries). Template should be passed countries name, name of the ranks, branch of military... etc... Is this doable? Catchi?13:25, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I am thinking of using one or two enbeded switch statements to do this. However I am not certain how the table should look like... Catchi?14:04, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That can certainly be done, but the tricky part would then be the formatting. How to tell the template to arrange particular insignia vertically rather than horizontally. That's why my first draft copied all the images/formatting in and then just displayed the requested set. I guess the '1' and '2' settings in your lists above are meant to indicate which row each insignia should appear in. Since it seems like the insignias for a particular country/force are always displayed together I'd suggest moving everything out of the call except {{insignia|Code=Tr|Branch=Army|Type=OF}}... which officer ranks exist for that country and the names assigned to them can be kept in the template code itself rather than having to be written into the call each time - unless you want to be able to do things like just display officer ranks 9, 8, 5 and 3 of the Turkish Army. Then all that detail needs to be in the call to the template. I'll work on it for a while now. --CBD☎✉23:43, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I somewhat like User:CBDunkerson/Transition, the only thing I do not like is it being passed something so simple. I want the rank names to be passed. The look of the teomplate shuld be achieved with passed parameters. Then I can do rank comparasions withg out editing the template. Also I want rank insignias and text be aligned. Not all of the current (static) templates achieve this but some do (see above). Catchi?03:05, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
When above is passed images such as this will work: [[Image:{{{Code}}}-{{{Branch}}}-OF##.{{{Ext}}}]]. The ## will be determined if R10 is null then the default should be No Equavalent if R10 is passed 0 it should be a coming soon if it is passed 1 then there is only one rank insignia per this "cell". If passed 2 there are two vertical insignias (such as how it should be for R9)
No that was the easyone. And you did help me greatly. Now, can you find a way to simplify this one (and make it much more generic)?
I'll take a look. Also, a couple of things on the current template. For the little flags - UK needs 'the United Kingdom' to get the flag file name right, but then prints 'the United Kingdom' next to it instead of 'United Kingdom'. If I recall correctly there is a version of those flag templates which works off the country code (UK) which would leave 'Country' free to be just the text displayed. For {{Rank insignia OF/N}} (or OF/D) it might make sense to change it from |'''No {{{1}}}''' to just |{{{1}}} so it could be set to the UK's student officer text, "single white stripe", the US "Various", or whatever... one template with configurable text parameter. Could also add a second parameter for a label below it (like Officer Candidate). --CBD☎✉23:28, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Do you think you can make a variant of this template, maybe {{day+1 underscore}}, that gives the date with an underscore to make it compatible with links? I try to have link to edit tommorow's POTD and I get this: 2,_2024&action=edit Edit because the template includes a space. If you get me started, I'll even put in the underscores where they are needed. Shouldn't you be able to copy and paste the data from the regular template and start from there? Please investigate this for me.--HereToHelp13:07, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The browse links on the tips of the day are cool. I'll add them to the rest when I get the time.
BTW, I was looking at the code for that template to see if there was an easy way to adapt it to a 20 day or even a one-month warning system for Picture of the day (which we have stocked one month in advance). But the last 20 days/month of the year becomes problematic. --Go for it!15:05, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I can help with the browse links if people feel they are warranted. The 'warning system' is something which hadn't occurred to me. It could theoretically be done with something like, {{day+1|{{day+1|{{day+1|{{day+1|{{day+1}}}}}}}}}} = December 6 (effectively 'day+5'), but that would be ridiculously calculation intensive. However, a separate 'day+20' or 'month+1' template could be made for a 'warning system'. --CBDunkerson15:15, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, you caught the 31sts, and the leap year's extra day -- I hadn't even thought of those. But I couldn't see in the code where December 15, 2006 (for instance) is turned to January 15, 2007 rather than January 15, 2006. --Go for it!21:22, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Are there more? Could you create a category for them? My full wishlist was here, where people pointed me to the rather comprehensive fr:Catégorie:Modèle calculant une date. What I would like to see most is somthing like {{day+1month}} or {{day+1day}} so constructions like Today is day {{CURRENTDAY}} of {{CURRENTMONTH}} can be paralleled by Tomorrow is day {{day+1day}} of {{day+1month}}. I just need the templates to make sure tomorrow's and next month's Portal:Germany won't have any formatting erros, but I'm sure there's many other uses. Anyway, thanks again. Kusma(討論)04:39, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I just recently happened across WP:FC and thought it was very neat idea! Yesterday, I went looking for it (I hadn't bookmarked it) and couldn't find any link, actually I didn't even remember what I was looking for except for the every minute refresh. I asked for and received help finding it at WP:HD#WP:???. Anyway, I wanted to stop by to thank you for starting that and to let you know that I've added it at WP:WP. :-) --hydnjotalk13:15, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
(copied from User talk:Hydnjo) Thanks, I'm glad you like the page. I responded to your question about when it was created at WP:HD#WP:???. Like most things it was a process rather than all at once. The 'main page redesign' project was looking for a way to link all the featured content to the Main Page and decided to use what I'd built at Portal:Featured content for that. Hence the name change and shortcut. --CBDunkerson13:59, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
BTW - if you're interested in how it works (I was), there's a subpage (like a template) that selects which date to display based on the current hour and minute (see Wikipedia:Featured content/SetDate). You get a different result (different date) every minute, but if you look at it at the same minute within the day you get the same results every day (i.e. it's distinctly not random). -- Rick Block (talk) 19:02, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
True. However, the order of the dates displayed each minute is randomized and I update it every couple of weeks to include the latest 'of the day' materials... re-randomizing the order each time. So unless you hit the page at the same minute within a few days of each other it will usually display a different result for that minute. Not truly random, but giving the appearance of such in most cases. --CBDunkerson11:06, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
(end copy)
Conrad - this was not meant as a knock of any kind. I actually think it's quite cleverly done. I don't know if Joe (or Heidi) has in mind to copy the technique anywhere, but thought they might be interested in how it works. BTW - if you want it more random you could write and register a bot and rerandomize fairly frequently (every couple of hour perhaps). There's also an uninstalled extension to mediawiki (called choose) to select a random entry from a list - it's used at Uncyclopedia but not installed here since I don't think anyone has made a case for a legitimate use for it. If you want to pursue this, you might have a chat with User:Brion VIBBER. -- Rick Block (talk) 16:38, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Rick. No worries, I didn't take your comment as a 'knock'. I've explained elsewhere that it isn't truly random, but wanted to let you (and Hydnjo) know about the 'behind the scenes' re-shuffling which helps mitigate that. The 'choose' extension sounds like a perfect solution, but failing that a bot may be the way to go. Even just updating the random sequence once per day would prevent it from showing the same material at the same minute (unless that was randomly selected). I'd considered using {{NUMBEROFARTICLES}} and/or {{NUMBEROFFILES}} as additional 'seeds' to increase the randomization, but they grow so fast that doing so would either require a huge switch or updates every couple of days... but a bot could theoretically handle that as well. Thanks for the comments. I'll look into these options. --CBDunkerson17:03, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hey guys. Conrad, I dropped over (first) to tell you that I had copied that very interesting thread going on at my talk over to FC's talk and here I find that you and Rick have started without me. Thanks to you both for your comments, they helped a great deal in my understanding of how it all worked, my markup skills are minimal and I appreciated that. And Conrad, you have been quite clever in your use of the available tools in implementing your FC solution.
I also wanted to spill out some thoughts:
This seems like a fairly high maintenance project for you (or anyone).
Another complication is that FAs sometimes lose their featured status which would result in losing that day's featured picture as well so,
Ideally there would be two lists and decouple FAs and FPs.
Also, it would be nice to be able to "click here" for a refresh (like Random article) and,
The choose feature seems like a good way to implement that as it seems that mediawiki is math challenged (no innate math functions).
Once decoupled from the mainpage date you could then decide to include all 930 FAs rather than only those that have been on the mainpage.
A bot could then be used to keep the lists current leaving you with, well... nothing to do ;-)
Does any of the clever date templates give this already? The simple-minded construction
{{Portal:Germany/Anniversaries/{{CURRENTMONTHNAME}}/{{tomorrow}}}}
unfortunately fails on the last day of the month. Of course I could just grab this from one of your templates, but I guess you'll find a better naming convention and a way to simplify it from the code in {{tomorrow}} than I could. Thank you, Kusma(討論)20:57, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hello again. Our paths began to cross when I inquired at the HD about a place that turned out to be WP:FC. Well, from there I, after some additional prompting from Rick, I decided to learn more about the underlying wiki markup. I was astonished at the amount of code required to do something as seemingly simple as providing a random selection of our best and featured stuff, at that time I had no inkling of switch or case. Anyway, I then saw how you you took a routine like day+1 and used your skills to re-implement it as tomorrow and I said wow! From there I found your RfA still in progress and AzaToth's recently failed bid (I have notified him of my intent to support him in his next bid). Hmmm... I forgot why I started this conversation... ooh ooh, now I remember, is there a place for me (or anyone ) to learn about all of the wiki markup available to us or do we need to learn it piecemeal by studying the works of folks like yourself, Rick, and Aza (you... you... template masters you). Thanks BTW for your very detailed response to my thoughts about "improving" FC, it seems that you have thought it out quite thoroughly without my meddling. As for my own skills, a true challenge for me was to find a way of recoding a program on an HP 48 to accomplish in 1 minute what was requiring 10 minutes (perhaps that's why I admire your template work so damn much). hydnjotalk23:14, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Hydnjo. There isn't a single 'training guide' for markup and templates, but there are a number of useful pages. The best single page to start at is Wikipedia:Markup#Wiki_markup... which contains an overview of all aspects of Wikipedia 'coding'. From there Help:Table is the standard document for table markup - though MediaWiki:Common.css is also critical for understanding the pre-defined CSS styles used in most tables. From there the real 'coding' aspects can be found in Help:A quick guide to templates, Help:Template, and m:Help:Advanced templates... which are progressively more detailed (and less organized) examinations of template and parameter logic. Finally, Help:Magic words, Help:Variable, Template:Wikivars are largely redundant pages for information on special tags and commands which are often very useful to templates (both WP:FC and the various date templates rely on these to work at all).
All that being said, I think I picked up more from just jumping in and seeing what was out there than I did from the help documentation. The above links are good resources for looking up details, but experimenting is the most certain way to learn. Believe me, it doesn't take long - a few months ago I didn't know what a Wiki-template was. The best place to look for good examples of existing templates (and most of the 'utility' templates which make others easier to write) is Category:Wikipedia special effects templates and especially the 'if templates' and 'boolean templates' subcategories there.
Finally, you might just keep an eye on the contributions of User:AzaToth, User:Netoholic, User:Locke Cole, User:Ed Poor, and other skilled template writers to see what sort of template work they are doing currently. Alot of this stuff evolves as people come up with new ways of doing things and then we all debate the pros and cons of each methodology. --CBDunkerson23:55, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Your changes to Template:Good Job are great; thanks. Since you seem to be an expert on templates, could you help me with User:Iamthejabberwock/Welcome? When I use, for example, {{subst:User:Iamthejabberwock/Welcome|user=|article=Wikipedia|topic=Rush|portal=Music}} - for welcoming an anonymous user who edited Wikipedia, is interested in Rush and might want to visit Portal:Music - it produces a result that looks good, but contains the original variable formatting: {{{anon| }}}. Could you advise me of a way to either (1) stop this formatting from being included or (2) switch to a more effecient method of varying the contents of the message? Thanks, TheJabberwock02:14, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, nvm, the formatting is still there. See here. It's not a huge problem, but I'd like the welcome to look less mechanized if the user happens to click "edit." TheJabberwock20:33, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
...on merging the two US Senator boxes. That kinda bugged me that there were two -- redesigning and redirect is a nice simple solution. Well done. -- Sholom20:04, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Conrad. I'm attempting to implement your nice Babel-X template here on Memory Alpha, and I'm not having any luck in getting it to work. For some reason, the HTML <tr> and <td> tags don't seem to be working (but if I recall correctly, they did work before the latest MediaWiki upgrade). As far as I can tell, both MA and Wikipedia are running the same software versions, so I'm not sure where to look. I also noticed that the title line isn't centering properly, either. Thanks in advance for any help you might be able to provide! -- Renegade5415:54, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. There were three problems. First the '{{#if:' format relies on new features that were just implemented for Wikipedia yesterday. I confirmed that Memory Alpha isn't using those and then reverted back to the '{{{if|' format. The centering difference was due to CSS differences between the two sites - basically, Wikipedia has predefined formatting at MediaWiki:Common.css and Memory Alpha doesn't have exactly the same pre-defined formats. I put in the centering manually to get around this. Finally the HTML tags were behaving oddly. I have no idea what was causing this... the first few sets were displaying as text, but then they were kicking in and evaluating correctly. Normal wiki table markup (i.e. |-, |, !, et cetera) can't be used because the '|' character confuses the '{{{if|' logic. To get around that I created a 'Template:!' which just inserts a '|' character. This allows wiki-markup to be mimicked and doesn't interfere with the other logic. I wrote up a version using that methodology and copied it out for up to 20 babel boxes. Can be extended if need be. --CBDunkerson17:00, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for giving me some examples of how to use Tim Starling's #expr: feature. I've joined you in converting some of my old-style templates to the new format, and they seem a WHOLE LOT faster. I've also renamed a few, replacing the User:Ed Poor/ bit with Template: to publish them.
Hey Cool Cat. In reference to the DefCon boxes which you marked for speedy. Would you object to them instead being 'de-userfied' into template space? It seems like alot of people are using them currently. --CBDunkerson14:39, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The wikipedia comunity (made out of few determined users) have hammered me for creating the defcon template etc.. They forced/ordered me to move them to my userspace or else they would vandalise/maliciously edit the templates in question. So if you want to move them to templatespace, good luck.
I dont care what happens to it so long as it isnt in my userspace since I am not allowed to participate in rc patrol, I do not want anything implying I have anything to do with WP:CVU.
Just bringing to your attention Category:Conversion templates(edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) and specifically a note on the talk page suggesting that we standardize on a naming convention for future template functions. I'll be passing this note along to AzaToth and Ligulem; feel free to post it/mention it anywhere else you think it would help to raise awareness and avoid the duplication of work. =) —Locke Cole • t • c01:58, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Conrad. You wrote [2] that parts of PF (ParserFunctions) already have been removed. I'm just curious: what has been removed from PF? --Ligulem07:00, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh noes! Seen it. The random function. But I don't believe that #if has any chance to ever get removed form PF. This was the major driving force for Tim to create PF because I believe he felt that qif was starting to get a problem and all endevours to extinct it had failed :-). So he had to accept the fact that it is needed. This was demonstrated by using good faith wiki-process. If he would remove #if this would be massive vandalism and it would take less than 24 hours for the community to restore the current situation, i.e. using qif again. --Ligulem07:09, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that it seems unlikely that #if: would be removed at this point. However, we don't know for certain. There were and still are some problems with the way it works. Changes have been made to the #if: processing and syntax which required some of the calls to it to be rewritten to work properly. More such changes could be made going forward. Further, some people are arguing (quite strenuously) that #if: should be removed. All I've been saying is that we ought to proceed in a deliberate fashion rather than jumping out and performing mass conversions before the feature is fully tested, stabilized, or approved. As to 'restoring prior version in 24 hours'... and during those 24 hours Wikipedia would be a complete mess. Worse if 'qif' and other conditional templates were actually deleted because then reverting templates relying on them wouldn't fix the problem. Essentially we're risking a major Wiki wide mess for no good purpose. Chances are it won't happen, but it's just foolish to take a risk that gains absolutely nothing. --CBDunkerson16:52, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with you. The problem was created because Tim already activated #if on all wikis. I would have expected some thorough testing on a sepearate test wiki before releasing it into the wild. After this had been released, people started migrating templates to #if. This is a logical consequence of the releasing. Once released, there is no way back. Safest thing we can do now is putting use load on #if. qif is under heavy destructive pressure now. Let's move the use pressure over to #if. I'm confident that it works. And it is easy to make it working if it doesn't. Tim is capable for taking care of this. There is no need to protect wikipedia from him. He's doing a bangup job. However, if this were a live critical system or even critical for business revenue, I would fully agree with you. Wikipdia is special in this. But it's quite successful with this approach. --Ligulem17:13, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed that you recently changed {{Infobox_Bridge}}. For some reason, some of the bridges I've recently worked on are displaying the text "style="vertical-align: middle;"" outside the infobox, in the main part of the page. I've narrowed it down to the "coordinates" parameter -- if "coordinates" is specified, then the spurious style information is inserted. If "lat" and "long" are specified, then this problem doesn't show up. For examples, see Franklin Avenue Bridge, Intercity Bridge, and Fort Road Bridge. If you could take a look at this template and fix whatever might be wrong, that would be great. I'd consider fixing it myself, but I'm not really well-versed enough on template syntax to make sure I wouldn't break anything else. Thanks. --Elkman - (talk)03:22, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
His is explicitly written to only work inside tables (not by itself). You might try adopting some of the HTML/CSS he uses (leaving stuff configurable), but IMO some of his changes are just plain ugly.. —Locke Cole • t • c12:55, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I figured out that 'inside tables only' was the problem. I wrapped a table around it to deal with that... then becomes a table in a table when called on the header box templates. It is rather convoluted, but it eliminates the '#if:' in the call so that's somewhat beneficial. --CBDunkerson13:17, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Re {{guideline}}, remove the includeonly's from around the | (pipe) in the {{shortcut}} call, it looks like a stray |} is being inserted when a shortcut isn't provided. I don't know that avoiding a #if was this important either, FWIW; the parameter default incurs a similar number of CPU cycles on the server side I'm sure, and from a code POV, I think people will grasp #if easier than the funky parameter default magic going on at shortcut. =) Having said that, if it'll give us peace, leave it alone. ;) —Locke Cole • t • c13:44, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently you are one of the valiant crew replacing {{qif}} and {{switch}} with {{#if}} and {{#switch}}.
I would encourage you to ensure that you add clients of these functions to Category:Templates using ParserFunctions for the time being, this being our only method of tracking usage until we get some sort of "What links here" facility for these functions.
Obviously if you are already doing this…thank you.
HTH HAND —Phil | Talk10:32, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
{{JD-month|123}} gives 3 = 15. As far as I know, there is no 15th month ;). Perhaps that template only works for days after a certain date? I'm working on simplifying the calculation, but I don't know how to make the right calculation in the first place. User:dbenbenn00:25, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. The JD-month template assumes conversion to months in the Gregorian calendar... which came into existence in 1582. Thus, before that it would be producing 'months' for a calendar system which did not exist yet. A Julian date of '123' would be one-hundred and twenty-three days after the start of the Julian period... in 4713 BC. :] The formulas for this and the related JD-day and JD-year templates should work correctly for all dates in the Gregorian calendar system. For anything prior to October 1582 we get into hypothetical calendaring and it's fairly meaningless. The formulas can be derived from the Julian date article or the {{JD}} template. --CBDunkerson00:51, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Another question: I noticed that {{JD-day|{{JD}}}} right now is giving 21, not 22. Julian day explains that the day rolls over at noon, but the Gregorian calendar still rolls over at midnight. So is that a mistake? I guess the fix would be to subtract 0.5 from the parameter to JD-day. User:dbenbenn05:23, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi CBDunkerson, a change you made recently to the Template:Infobox River seems to have had an unwanted effect. If you compare this previous version to the current one you'll see the change in the appearance of the Infobox (the disappearance of the boldface headings Origin, Length, Basin Countries etc.) I'm not familiar with the workings of templates; would you be able to fix it? Thanks kindly -- Malepheasant00:21, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
As Malepheasant said the headings of each row had disappeared. I din't understand what you tried to do, so for the time being I have reverted to the previous working version. thanks --Raghu05:49, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've seen you've edited the template to implies the new #if Parser Functions. However, some articles that using the template has been broken. (it shows this part [style="vertical-align: top; font-style: italic; font-size: smaller; background: #EFEEEF;" style="vertical-align: top; font-style: italic; font-size: smaller;"] before the infobox). See Stirling railway station, Perth for example. As before, I've reverted this template into previous working revision. But seems maybe you didn't noticed that such changes would have those effects on those articles and reapplied the #if Parser Functions. Maybe you can revise those article that using the template before apply the changes. ;) --Shinjiman ⇔ ♨10:58, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Shinjiman. Sorry about that, I was just looking at the infobox itself and didn't notice the extraneous line of text in the article. I made an adjustment which should resolve it. --CBDunkerson13:12, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the heads up on the Pro-Life template. I was wondering if you could direct me to a list of all available templates? Thanks again--Ian01:58, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much for making the template. Its not the fact that im incompetent, its just that at the mediawiki page for templates there is so much info bull that i dont need. and taht was exactly what i was looking for. --Zack3rdbb23:12, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Since #rand got nuked, I thought you might find this useful. It seems you can now use "R" (for raw) as a parameter to the various NUMBEROF magic words (there's also a new NUMBEROF magic word; NUMBEROFUSERS). Samples:
Magic Word
Value
Raw Value
{{NUMBEROFARTICLES}}
{{NUMBEROFARTICLES}} = 6,918,054
{{NUMBEROFARTICLES|R}} = 6918054
{{NUMBEROFFILES}}
{{NUMBEROFFILES}} = 930,528
{{NUMBEROFFILES|R}} = 930528
{{NUMBEROFUSERS}}
{{NUMBEROFUSERS}} = 48,343,785
{{NUMBEROFUSERS|R}} = 48343785
You could probably use some combination of these, together with {{REVISIONID}} maybe, to produce some semblance of randomness. Just an FYI. =) —Locke Cole • t • c09:23, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know if you heard the reason for #rand's removal, but from what I heard on IRC from Tim Starling, it had something to do with a concern by Gmaxwell (talk·contribs) (NullC on IRC) over vandals using #rand to perform "random vandalism" (vandalism that only appeared randomly).
At least NUMBEROFxxx can now be used. Same issues with the cache as #rand had; you'll need to do &action=purge on pages to get them to update. But you could always automate that with wget and (if you're using Windows NT/2000/XP/2003) a batch file in conjunction with AT. Though I'd still like to see #rand return. Bah. :P —Locke Cole • t • c11:00, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know if you remember, but a while ago you helped me with my welcome message. You suggested the use of {{{nocode}}} to evaluate the subst: when the template is subst:ed. Turns out there's a much simpler way:
Turkish Land Forces[1]
British Army[2]
United States Army[3]
.
HTH HAND —Phil | Talk 10:32, 21 April 2006 (UTC)