Template talk:Asbox

Sorting of the stub templates themselves within their own stub categories

Could be

1. by tempsort parametr
2. standard * or space
3. Regardless of tempsort

Thoughts are to sort all by space. Rich Farmbrough, 18:29 26 September 2007 (GMT).

Metastub and Metapicstub

Yes I am aware of {{Metastub}} and {{Metapicstub}}. Rich Farmbrough, 08:23 27 September 2007 (GMT).

Other features possibilities please add to list

Template possibilities

1. a note field (to be trancluded to articles) <-- definitely needed
2. sfd parameter
3. date parameter
4. categorise template in a template category - or include "whatlinkshere" target. <-- definitely useful to help find new stubs - second option probably preferred by WSS
5. Support more than one categories explicitly.

   Second cat added. Rich Farmbrough, 13:20 27 September 2007 (GMT).

6. Remove conditional on template topsort per WP:WSS

   Rich Farmbrough, 11:40 28 September 2007 (GMT).

7. Add the ability to apply a border to the image (will generally be used for flags)

Retrofit

1. Standard header and/or footer on stub templates (not to be transcluded).

Maker template

1. subst: to create an Asbox call, plus any appropriate clichés.
2. includes Category:New stub template to help discover new stub templates.

Rich Farmbrough, 08:23 27 September 2007 (GMT).

Purpose

Copied (not verbatim) from User talk:Grutness

The purpose is to resolve a number of issues with existing stub templates, by

1. allowing modifications across the family of templates
2. allowing standard approaches in particular:
   1. making all templates part of their own class with a sort order of " ".
   2. allowing all templates to support a common sort-order syntax
   3. putting all templates in a category of stub templates if required
   4. allowing simple tests to identify/overrule image size
   5. getting stub boxen to line up better
3. avoid or reduce new stub templates being code which are broken.

I can very simply retrofit this to at least 95% of existing stub templates, and with a small amount of work to the rest.

Incidentally my idea would be to leave details of style and semantics in the hands of those that are expert in stubs.

Rich Farmbrough, 07:36 27 September 2007 (GMT).

Additional benefits

• Also will make discovery of new stub types easier.
• Will make discovery of substituted template boxen easier (any occurrence of the text "Asbox" in main space).
• At the same time as the retrofit, can make any other consistent changes to stub templates. (E.G add link to WP:WSS, advice nto to subst, etc. at top.
  • These changes might be better within the template anyway, in the unlikely event they are desired.
• Consistency will allow for future changes and simpler scanning for problems/features of boxen.

Rich Farmbrough, 08:36 27 September 2007 (GMT).

Status

• Tested in userspace
• Tested on half a baker's dozen score of stub templates.
• Floated at WP:WSS
• Piloted on couple of hundred stub templates.

Rich Farmbrough, 09:47 27 September 2007 (GMT).

To do

• Await more comments/changes  Done
• Implement round 1 of changes
  1. note field  Done
  2. remove conditional topsort  Done
  3. change default image size?  Done (Alai)
• User space/sandbox test.  Done
• Move to pilot  Done
• Involve more ppl?
• See if any more changes forthcoming
• Y. rinse and repeat
• N. start implementation.

Rich Farmbrough, 11:47 28 September 2007 (GMT).

Message

Please add {{pp-template}}. — redmond barry 02:11, 19 October 2007 (UTC) {{editprotected}}

{{pp-template}} is already in an includeonly tag on the (unprotected) /doc subpage as of me checking this request. It appears on the template page as needed. Nihiltres^(t.l) 03:17, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Request

I think this should have the "expanding it" plain linked.   jj137 ♠ Talk 23:12, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Me too,

<span class="plainlinks">[{{SERVER}}{{localurl:{{NAMESPACE}}:{{PAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding it]</span>

should work. — str4nd ☕ 15:50, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Interwiki

Hello, Although I want to add an interwiki link into Template:Writingsystem-stub, it uses Template:Asbox. In this case, may I add a code as <noinclude>[[ja:Template:Grammatology-stub]]</noinclude>? Thanks. --Nightshadow28 (talk) 06:37, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

whatlinkshere

I just don't see what the Template:Asbox/whatlinkshere dummy page does that http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?target=Template%3AAsbox&offset=&limit=5000&title=Special%3AWhatlinkshere&namespace=10 doesn't do, without requiring either a dummy page or the code to link to it. Since stub templates are generally not placed in other templates, there is no need to worry about separating out retransclusion. Caerwine Caer’s whines 23:13, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Use

Is this template a standard of use for stub templates? I only saw it for the first time today. Are there plans on making it's use on all stub-templates like the other {{ambox}}, {{mbox}}, etc. templates are used for message boxes? —Borgarde^talk 05:45, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

There is an ongoing discussion about the creation of a new, simpler stub template here --Blooper (Talk) 13:51, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Date parameter

Why? Stub templates are not dated. Should not be dated. Have a model coding that is covered by a long-standing set of guidelines, that is absent any concept of dating. This is the sort of "mission creep" that makes me nervous about the introduction of this sort of essentially-pointless, single-point-of-failure, resource-hog, job-queue-clogging, category-update-slowing metatemplate. This was introduced on a "pilot" basis, and seems to have achieved absolutely no consensus whatsoever. Time to cut our losses and TFD? Alai (talk) 05:15, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Category suppression

Resolved

I have fiddled with this, but cannot suppress the category. Leaving the parameter blank simply creates a blank category. This template needs a category suppression method so that is can be listed without placing the page in the category. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 19:21, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Never mind: I peeked at the code and noticed that it does namespace detection and includes the category only in articles. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 20:14, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Third category

{{editprotect}}

This template needs an option for a third category, which I have provided the code for in the sandbox. Borgarde (talk) 11:16, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

 Done. Martin^msgj 13:41, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Image borders

{{editprotected}} Could someone please check for the presence of an argument named border and, if present (and not equalling no), add a border to the image? — OwenBlacker (Talk) 18:37, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Could you confirm that the version in the sandbox does what you want? There are some examples in testcases to compare. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:32, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

External link icon on internal link

{{Editprotected}} Can an administrator remove the external link icon from the internal link? This can be done by changing "[{{SERVER}}{{localurl:{{NAMESPACE}}:{{PAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding it]" to "<span class="plainlinks">[{{fullurl:{{NAMESPACE}}:{{PAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding it]</span>". -- IRP ☎ 22:46, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

I have to disagree. I think that the different type of link makes it easier to see that clicking it does something different than clicking on other Wikilinks. For new users this may help distinguish the link from just being to another article on how to expand articles as opposed to actually expanding the one they are looking at. I'd like to see more discussion before having this edit made. --CapitalR (talk) 01:31, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

I have posted an edit request at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Request (please tell me if I posted in the incorrect place). Personally, I cannot understand why you disagree with my request. If the link title is "expanding it", then it is not possible for it to be confused with an article (especially due to the context that it is in). The icon is designed to indicate "external link", not a certain type of internal link. Even if you don't agree, do you understand my point? Do you think I'm missing something? -- IRP ☎ 02:49, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

I see what you're saying, but I don't agree that it is what all editors might think when seeing the link. If I saw the "expanding it" as an internal link, I would think it would point to something like this: expanding it as opposed to actually editing the article. Even though the edit page is an internal link, I don't think that that necessarily implies it should appear like a normal page link. I see some utility to the different link style (especially for users new to Wikipedia editing), and I think that utility may be why it has been like this for many years. That said, it's just my personal opinion and I will gladly go ahead and make the change if consensus agrees with you. --CapitalR (talk) 03:32, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

If I'm understanding this correctly, I don't think it would be an improvement. For instance, in {{Agri-stub}} the little icon after 'expanding it' would go away. In that situation, this icon signals to the reader that they are taking some action, not just viewing another normal wiki page. EdJohnston (talk) 17:44, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

I do not believe that you are understanding this correctly. The icon indicates "external link" not "action". What indicates "action" is that the link title is "expanding it". Expanding it is an action. It cannot possibly be confused with a page. -- IRP ☎ 20:23, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

I think removing the arrow is the correct approach. We have a very clear semantic distinction between the three types of links. A bluelink is an "internal link" in the proper sense of the word, a link to a page that the user may wish to read. The other link colour is for 'out of the ordinary' links that are still on-wiki: these may be interwikis, interlanguage links, or links to nonstandard pages like the edit screen. The addition of the arrow has the clear semantic distinction of "this link goes off wikimedia", a true "external link". As such, the correct appearance for the edit link here to convey the correct semantic connotations is the pale blue colour without the arrow. Happy‑melon 20:45, 3 April 2009 (UTC)