Template talk:WikiProject The Beatles

Next phase

I'm wondering if we ought to:

• Switch to named parameters, e.g. class=. With an AWB run and a suitable regular expression we could easily fix current uses of the template.
• Add features such as "this is a Featured Article", "this article had a peer review", etc to reduce talk page clutter - see e.g. {{WPBiography}}
• Replace such things as {{WPBeatles|category}} with code which checks the namespace. Any non main space pages would get "category", "template", "Wikipedia page" instead of "article" and would automatically be excluded from the assessment categories
• Add classes for dab pages and redirects, and keep track of those in new subcategories of our articles category

Thoughts? --kingboyk 13:41, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Another idea come up in discussion at Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Index, and that is populating more than assessment category with a single template. We could, with for example a type=song parameter, share our assessment with WikiProject Songs (and perhaps even ditch their template from our talk pages if we had a "this article is also within the scope of... " message). We could if we wanted list songs, albums and other articles seperately, too, which would make deciding importance easier. In short, there's plenty more we can do with this template :) --kingboyk 16:43, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

I've got this feature working in {{KLF}}, and aim to work on {{WPBeatles}} tommorow. --kingboyk 23:31, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Show/hide policy. Link to portal. I hope to get into my sandbox later to see if I can get some of these things done. --kingboyk 13:24, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Done, and boy am I tired. I still have to finish creating some supporting categories, and then do an AWB run to fix existing instances (and a newsflash run to Project members). The template needs further formatting work. I'd propose getting rid of the zebra crossing, adding the portalpar, and making smaller still if possible. --kingboyk 15:42, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Importance box not being displayed

The importance categories are correctly assigned from what I can see, but the importance box isn't displayed. A minor bug no doubt but I can't see it at the moment. --kingboyk 16:18, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Kirill Lokshin fixed this, with thanks. --kingboyk 14:08, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Minor features still needed

Something else still needed: If the article is within the scope of WPBiography and needs an infobox, add it to their infobox needed category too. They're better qualified to fix up bio infoboxes than we are. Likewise for attention, and WPSongs if they have those categories. We also might need to display a "this article needs an infobox" banner like we do when attention=yes. --kingboyk 18:21, 13 August 2006 (UTC) (edited kingboyk 14:08, 15 August 2006 (UTC))

All done. --kingboyk 18:05, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Kingboyk: A whirling dervish of productivity

wow you were cranking right along, weren't you? So, is there anything left that needs doing? I've not much time these days it seems but if there is, I can give a boo. But looking over the above items I'm not seeing too much... Nice work Steve! LMK... BTW, interested readers should also see Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council, I've mentioned this box on the talk page. ++Lar: t/c 18:27, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Actually, yes, there's one thing: formatting, making the tranclude of {{Blp}} have less whitespace below it (living=yes), and if possible making the template a bit smaller still. --kingboyk 13:03, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

I'll give that a boo tonite then. ++Lar: t/c 17:25, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Importance

As you've hopefully noticed, I've set up a really spiffing scheme whereby our articles are now Mathbot-listed by subject. This has the positive affect of removing e.g. Badfinger from The Beatles list (where it's tenuous) and adding it to the Apple Records list (where it's fully on-topic). This has also allowed me to widen the scope a little, for example all articles relating to Handmade Films are now assessed and listed at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/George Harrison articles by quality.

What I haven't done is implement a seperate Importance scheme for these sub-topics. It would require yet more parameter complexity, and some Projects don't even assess for importance at all. So, I'm wondering if the template ought to not display the Unassessed for Importance box when the article is not in the main Beatles list. The logic is something like this:

if((((if Apple=yes then return 1)+(if George=yes then return 1)+...)>=1 and also-beatles=yes) or ((if Apple=yes then return 1)+(if George=yes then return 1)+...)=0) then

display importance box

end if

Is there an easier way to express this in the very limited logic we have available? --kingboyk 10:54, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Following on from the comments just made at the Assessment Department, let me add that importance is terribly hard to judge and is causing a few problems for other WikiProjects. I'm not proposing we abandon it, but I don't much care if we have articles unassessed for importance provided that if we assess any for importance, we have all High and Top importance articles marked as such. There is a case for abandoning the importance altogether but I won't make it just yet. --kingboyk 15:45, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Question: Does the "bio-importance" parameter actually work? I just changed it at James McCartney to use "importance" instead of "bio-importance" because it was showing up as "not rated". Stevage 09:06, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Bio-importance is the importance for the Biography WikiProject. The categories at the bottom of the talk page are the important thing, not what the template says. James McCartney isn't on the Beatles list (importance=), he's in WPBiography (bio-importance=) and the Paul McCartney list (no importance scheme implemented). That's why I have to remember to turn this display code off :) --kingboyk 11:48, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

OK, I've updated the template to only display importance/unassessed importance when the article is going to appear on the Beatles worklist (Index · Statistics · Log). The other worklists (e.g. Paul Index · Statistics · Log) aren't assessed for importance at this time.

The important thing to remember is that the categories at the bottom of the talk page are what do the actual work. Anything displayed by the template is only cosmetic. --kingboyk 13:36, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Protect?

Given that all editors who are likely to edit the code are admins (Lar, me, Oleg, Kirill and so on) and given that the instructions are in a seperate page, do you agree with me that there's a strong case to be made for protecting this template? --kingboyk 17:29, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Weak, yes. Strong? no. Is this a high risk template in the meaning of the phrase? I think not, as it never appears in articlespace and vandalization can be reverted presumably. In general I feel protection should be used very sparingly. Do we have a history of vandalism of it? ++Lar: t/c 17:55, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

I wasn't thinking of vandalism, but of well-intentioned screwups, resulting in, perhaps, the Mathbot logs getting screwed. But, no bother, it was just a thought and perhaps not a very good one :) --kingboyk 17:59, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Mate, at this point I'm as likely to screw something up (which is why I take it over to a sandbox and play, and then bring it back) :) as the rankest newb... protection ain't gonna protect us against that. Still, it won't hurt. I'm not opposed but if it's questioned on the page protection list i'm not sure there's a strong defense. But, go for it. ++Lar: t/c 18:13, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

british-english= parameter?

I'm wondering about a british-english= parameter where yes would be the default and no would turn off the British English warning. Usage of the parameter - i.e. only on articles like The Grey Album - could be monitored by way of a category. Thoughts? --kingboyk 16:18, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Why? Is it that big a problem? Maybe I am missing something?

No, not a problem. --kingboyk 08:22, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Bot changes reverted

Some bot User:CmdrObot came by and made some changes. I reverted them as they break the spacing put in the template to make the code readable. ++Lar: t/c 00:52, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Why the link with WPBIOA&E?

I would prefer that the link to WPBIO(A&E) be severed. This link has the unfortunate effect that any priority rating given from a WPBeatles PoV, is then also the priority for the WPBIO Project. For example, Brian Epstein clearly merits Top-priority for the Beatles Project, but I think not for WP:BIO in general. Errabee 08:51, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

No it doesn't. It's a seperate parameter (bio-importance=) for the workgroup. WP:BIO doesn't do overall priority, it does it only for workgroups - and I think Epstein should be Top importance for A&E. That said, you can change it without breaking WP Beatles ratings! Come on, I code smarter than that! --kingboyk 18:55, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Choice of image

A trifling point, perhaps, but why is Image:Abbey Road sin Beatles.jpg used on the template when it's not actually a picture of Abbey Road but, as the image description says, "a Parisian zebra crossing near the Champs-Élysées"? --Rrburke 18:29, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Because it looks nice. We're restricted to free (not fair use) images; if you can find a better one please suggest it here. --kingboyk 18:53, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Image changed. Robert K S (talk) 03:43, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Er, I thought I changed it. The picture's different on the template page, but not on the template's application on the Wikiproject page. What's the deal? Robert K S (talk) 04:45, 13 February 2008 (UTC) Seems to be fixed now. Robert K S (talk) 15:50, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

see below, i have a problem with this.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 03:38, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

WPBannerMeta

Any chance this banner could be converted to the {{WPBannerMeta}} format? See Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2008 June 5#Template:Needsinfobox. --Geniac (talk) 16:10, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I think we ought to, it looks a right mess on John Lennon, especially on my school's IE6...... Dendodge .. Talk^Help 18:27, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm going to attempt it at User:Dendodge/Sandbox/Beatles template...... Dendodge .. Talk^Help 18:30, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

It's hard to get the extra bits in, (the John, Paul, Ringo, George, Musician etc.) but by no means impossible, I'm working on it!...... Dendodge .. Talk^Help 18:37, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm having a couple f problems, if anyone else wants to help out...... Dendodge .. Talk^Help 18:55, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I've done the basic stuff, but I still can't do the john, paul, ringo, george etc. to work...... Dendodge .. Talk^Help 19:34, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

 Done, but I've asked at WT:TB before implementing. If I don't receive any nays, I'll go ahead...... Dendodge .. Talk^Help 16:04, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Category names have been changed and should probably be put back as they were. For example, Category:Start-Class Beatles articles has been emptied and the redlink Category:Start-Class The Beatles articles has been filled ("Beatles" vs. "The Beatles"). --Geniac (talk) 13:56, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

I know - that was unavoidable, I'm afraid...... Densock .. Talk^{(Dendodge on a public network)} 11:31, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

You can override the category by using the parameter:

|ASSESSMENT_CAT = Beatles articles

which will remove, "the" from the categories.—Borgarde^talk 14:57, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

WPBiography support

WP:Musicians has become the musician-work-group of WP:Biography over a year ago, and this template adds the text "This article is within the scope of WikiProject Musicians, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed biographical guide to musicians on Wikipedia", but it does not use the WPBio category structure (including assessment classes).

On Talk:Paul McCartney it says "<!--{{WPBiography}} removed, {{WPBeatles}} contains same functionality-->", but most of the {{WPBiography}} functionality is missing IMHO. As far as I can tell, this template's parameters musician=yes and living=yes do put tagged articles only into a few biography categories. But in my view, an article like Paul McCartney should show in Category:Musicians_work_group_articles and the related subcategories of Category:Biography (musicians) articles by quality, same with e.g. Grapefruit (band), but both of them don't. So I think either this template should add articles in question (musicians and musical groups) to all the related WPBiography categories (as {{WPMAR}} apparently does), or the WPBiography template should be used on these articles additionally. Regards, BNutzer (talk) 01:11, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

As I understand things, WPBeatles is one of several task forces by band within the WikiProject Biography Musicians Work Group. At this time, I see little ganging support for multiple Categorizations in Template:WPBannerMeta, so properly categorizing WPBeatles articles and images among Biography Articles, Biography (musician) Articles and Beatles Articles at the same time, given common Parameters, would understandably take some labor. The obvious question for me is whether it can be done in one Template. Just some food for thought. B. C. Schmerker (talk) 07:40, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Strange output

The template displays text like [[Category:Top-importance {{{PROJECT}}} articles|Paul McCartney]] and [[Category:Low-importance {{{PROJECT}}} articles|Grapefruit (band)]]. BNutzer (talk) 23:19, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I know, I'm trying to fix it...... Densock .. Talk^{(Dendodge on a public network)} 12:26, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Quality and importance scales

This banner is still a bit of a mess. I have just enabled the quality scale for some of the taskforces which was missing. A problem is that The Beatles uses the extended quality scale (including redirect-class, image-class, etc.) but most of the taskforces/workgroups do not. Therefore it will be categorising into nonexistent categories at the moment. There is also the problem that biography uses the term priority instead of importance, which this banner cannot handle so easily. Martin 08:20, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

|living=

All articles which use |living= are persons, this means WPBiography is also in their talk page. I suggest we remove support of |living= from this template. WPBiography can do the job. -- Magioladitis (talk) 12:00, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

I'd agree and also suggest removing the |musician= & |arts= options for a similar reason. -- WOSlinker (talk) 14:36, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

I've added a temporary tracking category to see which articles the banner will need updating on & possible need {{WPBiography}} adding. -- WOSlinker (talk) 16:11, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Those options are now gone. -- WOSlinker (talk) 17:41, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Great! Thanks. -- Magioladitis (talk) 00:01, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Image, redux

The current image has had zebra stripes photoshopped out, and a vw bug poorly put in, to get it closer to the original iconic image. WM commons has other free use images, one of which, the first, shows the "abbey" sign, while another shows what is probably beatles related graffiti. I feel like a 'shopped foto is not an ideal image here, id rather see one which is untouched. Does anyone else care much about this?Mercurywoodrose (talk) 03:39, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Request for "imageneeded" parameter

Could someone please add an |imageneeded= parameter, similar to Template:WikiProject Albums? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 01:05, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

MCSTJR

WP:MCSTJR has changed to "Surnames beginning with Mac or Mc are sorted as they are spelled", so the "listas" example for McCartney listed in the template should be updated to reflect this. Thanks. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 23:29, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

 Done Thanks, WWGB (talk) 23:48, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Multiple project tagging

According to User:Kaldari, using multiple project tags in one WikiProject template can cause problems for assessments tools, among other things. For example, this template allows one to add album, bio, or songs projects depending on the nature of the article directly into it (album=yes, etc.), and wouldn't have to use the corresponding project template in such articles where this one is used, if tagged accordingly. Kaldari removed such parameters from the Pink Floyd project template saying "that's not how project tagging works. Tagging multiple projects with the same WPBannerMeta template causes problems. For example, none of the tools that rely on PageAssessments will work correctly." If that's the case, this one should be changed to, shouldn't it? That would case a lot of work though because the correct project banner for albums, songs, etc. when then have to be added to the talk pages of articles in which the parameters are removed from the Beatles project banner. Thanks. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 00:50, 28 August 2017 (UTC)