Template talk:WikiProject Computing

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Computing (Rated Template-class)
WikiProject icon This template is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 Template  This template does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
 

Category:WikiProject Software articles

I don't know how to do this, but when software=yes, the article shouldn't be placed in Category:WikiProject Software articles. It should be placed into a subcategory based on class or importance or Unassessed-Class or Unknown-importance if they're missing. --Geniac (talk) 14:20, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Issue with term "guide"

The template calls for "a comprehensive and detailed guide". But Wikipedia is not a guide; it is an encyclopedia. The formulation from the introduction transcluded on the WikiProject's home page presents two much better (and more attainable) goals: "to better organize information in articles related to areas or subjects relating to computers, computing and information technology", and "to improve the quality and quantity of information about computing technology available on Wikipedia".  --Lambiam 12:06, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Template colour

Why is this template a lighter colour than other WikiProject banners? Take a look at Talk:Ada Lovelace for an example. — OwenBlacker (Talk) 11:55, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

I dont see a difference on my computer : MSXP+Mozilla3.0.5 -- Tinu Cherian - 12:02, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Defects after converting to WPBannerMeta

  • Before the conversion there was a collapsed To-Do list for the "WikiProject Amiga" attached to this template, the To-Do list was of great help.
  • And the "amiga-importance" does not seem to work either.

Any solutions to solve these issues? --Marko75 (talk) 14:19, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

These issues are now resolved, thanks. --Marko75 (talk) 15:37, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Ratio is lost from image to template

It seems the ratio is lost between the image and the template, see in the screenshot: http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/8361/lostratio.png I'm using Firefox 3, I don't know if it's browser specific but it truncates the transparent part of the SVG. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TiCPU (talkcontribs)

This image is behaving a bit strangely. I've just specified a size of 100x70px and the aspect is looking better, but the size is a little small. But when I try to increase the size, the ratio is lost again. I actually had a go at editing this image a while back (se history of File:Computer-aj_aj_ashton_01.svg) but it didn't work either. Is there another suitable image that we could try? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:50, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Any size other than 80px seems to work ok -- WOSlinker (talk) 18:56, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Size 60px 70px 80px 90px 100px
Image Computer-aj aj ashton 01.svg Computer-aj aj ashton 01.svg Computer-aj aj ashton 01.svg Computer-aj aj ashton 01.svg Computer-aj aj ashton 01.svg
Why???? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:57, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
I don't know. -- WOSlinker (talk) 18:58, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

network-importance broken?

See Talk:Jon_Postel: network-importance=Top is rendered as Unknown-importance.--Oneiros (talk) 11:06, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Fixed. Sorry about that. It seems I cannot spell. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:10, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

If you would...

is incorrect grammar. Popular, but incorrect. *ould never goes with if. It should say Should you.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.52.129.66 (talk) 13:09, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

This template uses the generic wording, so this is something to suggest at Template talk:WPBM. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:49, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Unused categories

There is a discussion on my talk page about a lot (400+) of empty categories that are no longer populated by this template. If anyone has an opinion about them, please comment there. I intend to delete them shortly. Thanks — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:43, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

I've actually been working on this. Seems the meta-template was not set up properly to handle some of the classes that were previously used. --Tothwolf (talk) 19:05, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

writing a new article

Hi, we are running a non-profit humanitarian project from the university and we would like to write a small article describing what the project does. This would be my first article at wikipedia, so thought a bit of guidance would be great. The project is called Labdoo; I have written a sample article under my personal domain User:Jordi.ros/Labdoo (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jordi.ros/Labdoo). I was wondering if it would be proper to put this article under your category and if you would be willing to accept it. Our intention is only to be informative of the type of work the project does. Some of the concepts the project is based on, sit on what economists call commons-based peer production, or open source project. Labdoo is actually a project similar to the wikipedia project but with the goal to mobilize laptops for the developing world and to promote recycling. --Jordi.ros (talk) 14:47, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

needs-image

There are a number of empty categories under Category:Computing articles needing images which I assume where intend to be filled by this template. The current template does however not support placing in specific sub-categories. As there are less then 100 request in the category, is there any objections to deleting these unused sub-categories? Or does someone want to make the template smarter? --Traveler100 (talk) 11:54, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Well, we have more than one template, with the individual templates supporting these categories. For example, {{WikiProject Amiga}}. As far as I know, {{WikiProject Computing}} has never supported populating the taskforce and sub-project maintenance categories. {{WikiProject Computing}} really shouldn't support those maintenance categories anyway as the long term goal was to move towards separate templates due to the confusion and maintenance problems the attempt at merging many of the original templates caused. --Tothwolf (talk) 13:29, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
Understood. Was unsure as many projects are going the other way and are merging sub-project templates. Suggest updating the documentation on the other templates to show they support the needs-image parameter. --Traveler100 (talk) 15:10, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Computing-importance= parameter not in documentation

I understand 6 months ago we discussed having the automated entries of the sub projects not automatically assign the importance= parameter, so we proposed adding computing-importance=. I don't see it in the documentation. If it does exist we should also explain how the two parameters interact, when to use one vs the other, etc.§ Music Sorter § (talk) 08:02, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Just noticed this. computing-importance= doesn't exist in {{WikiProject Computing}} but it does exist in e.g. {{WikiProject Software}}. Does one of the subprojects need that parameter documented? – Pnm (talk) 20:37, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Need assistance

I am trying to get the category for image requests to be dependent on the task force (sub project) parameter. Getting into difficulty with eh if statements though. Would appreciate some tips. See Template:WikiProject Computing/sandbox section near end with WPBannerMeta/hooks/cats. --Traveler100 (talk) 13:32, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

I noticed you posted at Template talk:WPBannerMeta#needs-image too – that's exactly where I was going to suggest. – Pnm (talk) 20:36, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

redirects for WP Computing template up for deletion

See Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2012 January 7 where several shortcuts for WPComputing's banner have been nom'd for deleting. 76.65.128.132 (talk) 09:37, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Template should be changed to give link to Computing portal

Currently this template links to the "Information Technology" portal, but should point to the "Computing" portal. They both redirect to the combined "Computing and IT" portal, but the broader term "Computing" is more correct in this context. 121.45.193.118 (talk) 11:04, 26 December 2012 (UTC)