Template talk:Portal

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Portal template.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10: 180 days

Template:Portal is permanently protected from editing because it is a heavily used or highly visible template. Substantial changes should first be proposed and discussed here on this page. If the proposal is uncontroversial or has been discussed and is supported by consensus, editors may use {{edit template-protected}} to notify an administrator or template editor to make the requested edit. Usually, any contributor may edit the template's documentation to add usage notes or categories.

Any contributor may edit the template's sandbox. Functionality of the template can be checked using test cases.

To help centralise discussions and keep related topics together, the following pages redirect here:

Centralized discussions

Portals

	This page is within the scope of WikiProject Portals, a collaborative effort to improve portals 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.PortalsWikipedia:WikiProject PortalsTemplate:WikiProject PortalsPortals articles
Template	This template does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
	See also: List of Portals

Module:Portal/images/c/sandbox

Module:Portal/images/c/sandbox

A request at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Decrease#Module:Portal/images/c/sandbox points out that a sandbox should not be protected, and it only has 2 transclusions. Strangely, the sandbox was WP:ECP protected on 3 January 2022 by MusikBot II which claimed there were 3203 transclusions. Does anyone know a reason for that? Is there a reason the sandbox should not have the protection removed? Johnuniq (talk) 08:02, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect that something which uses Portal/images/* was tested using Portal/images/*/sandbox and inadvertently released without removing the suffix, then corrected. I can't spot any candidates; Related Changes is too busy to be useful. I don't think User:MusikBot II/TemplateProtector reverts itself in such circumstances. Certes (talk) 12:03, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Johnuniq: That was probably my fault. Turning on/off the sandbox used to be more onerous, and I messed it up doing an edit. I've made it much less onerous now (making it a single boolean variable). Please remove the protection. — hike395 (talk) 15:51, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I hate having any difference between the main and sandbox modules. Have you seen a technique like this:

local sandbox = frame:getTitle():find('sandbox', 1, true) and '/sandbox' or ''

That makes sandbox a variable which can be appended where needed. It needs tweaking when used at another project where a different name is used for sandbox. Johnuniq (talk) 23:07, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done Excellent idea, now implemented. — hike395 (talk) 16:54, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The number of transclusion is now claimed to be 593 and it's now protected again (I use WhatLinksHere and found out there are only 30 tranclusions) Thingofme (talk) 04:29, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We should add */sandbox, */testcases to the bot's ignorelist (sandboxes should not be protected) Thingofme (talk) 04:31, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've requested unprotection of most protected portal-related module sandboxes. I've excluded Module:Portal/sandbox and Module:Portal bar/sandbox, as WhatLinksHere claims that they are used by live modules. Certes (talk) 10:43, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

But should we add */sandbox, */testcases to the bot's config pages (sandboxes should not be protected)? Thingofme (talk) 13:50, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A good question. Almost all pages called */sandbox and */testcases should be unprotected. However, that's because they're linked only from small numbers of obscure pages, not because their names end in /sandbox. We try not to release anything that affects many reader-facing pages and uses a sandbox but, if it does happen, we probably want that sandbox to be protected temporarily until the underlying problem is fixed. Certes (talk) 18:13, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes when deploying the new module to the template people mistakenly called the sandbox version, so the sandbox is temporarily high-use for a while. Sandboxes may also be protected when a lot of people use it wrongly, template sandboxes are not normal sandboxes as we may only test features/bugfix of the template. Thingofme (talk) 08:31, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps the bot should unprotect templates and modules which drop below its threshold. Not just below, or it would be protecting and unprotecting daily as use fluctuated, but maybe below 50% of whatever the current usage limit is. The only problem I see is a cunning vandal removing the links, waiting for unprotection and reinstating them, but that should be spotted and would be much more work than doing similar damage in other ways. Certes (talk) 09:45, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe should not be unprotected (some are high-risk in many other ways like substituted frequently or used in system messages) Unprotection should be managed manually. Thingofme (talk) 13:13, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. I meant only templates protected by the bot, but even they might now require protection for other reasons too. We don't have a reliable list of templates protected only because of high usage. Certes (talk) 14:00, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Like template protection is only used for templates solely protected for high-use, but for templates used in sensitive page or highly-viewed pages, or system message these templates should be fully protected. Thingofme (talk) 02:13, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I moved this discussion to Wikipedia talk:High-risk templates#Should */sandbox, */testcases be unprotected for further discussion. Thingofme (talk) 02:16, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template-protected edit request on 29 March 2022

This edit request to Module:Portal/images/n has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

For this Portal : [ "normandie" ] . Now, the image is Drapeau de la Basse-Normandie.svg . The image should be Flag of Normandie.svg (better quality image, and the image generally use in Wikipedia for the Normandy flag) Oedipe23 (talk) 06:17, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. P.I. Ellsworth - ed. ^put'r there 11:05, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request to change US military logos from PNG to SVG

This edit request to Module:Portal/images/u has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Hello, can someone replace the following?

Jay Coop · Talk · Contributions 09:14, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This request applies to Module:Portal/images/u. (Its talk page redirects here.) Certes (talk) 10:50, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done Terasail ^[✉️] 11:17, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template-protected edit request on 20 May 2022

This edit request to Module:Portal/images/l has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Led Zeppelin is currently set to use File:Zoso-square-layout.svg that was deleted from commons 31 December 2021. No one appears to be using this so it could just be removed, or use File:Hindenburg burning.jpg which is the image currently used on Template:WikiProject Led Zeppelin. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 11:35, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The selected image needs to appear as a small icon:

. Would it be clearer to choose one of the other three members' corresponding symbols:

? I'd recommend Zoso Robert Plant feather symbol.svg as it's unambiguous. Certes (talk) 12:15, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Fine by me KylieTastic (talk) 17:27, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I just realised that the portal itself has been deleted, so that line of the module isn't in use. The entry could be left alone along with the other deleted portals, or removed if it's messing up any reports (Template:Portal/doc/all?). Certes (talk) 19:47, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yup as I said in the original report I can't see any uses, but it is used indirectly in the listing on Wikipedia:Userboxes/WikiProjects/Entertainers and Wikipedia:Userboxes/WikiProjects/alphabetical/16, but that is the total of the three uses I can see (including Template:Portal/doc/all). KylieTastic (talk) 20:16, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done – File:Zoso Robert Plant feather symbol.svg replaced the deleted image. P.I. Ellsworth - ed. ^put'r there 17:22, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Position not working

I have been trying to get the box displayed to the left, using |left=yes, but it still appears on the right. Is there a problem with the module or is the documentation incorrect? Keith D (talk) 16:28, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Keith D:

Fixed --- There was a bug in the CSS introduced at the end of 2021, now fixed. Sorry for the delay. — hike395 (talk) 03:32, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Hike395: Many thanks. Keith D (talk) 12:41, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Media Viewer

Icons should not appear in the Media Viewer. This can be achieved by assigning them to the class "noviewer" (class=noviewer). (See: Template talk:Icon/Archive 1#Appearance in the Media Viewer) --Nachtbold (talk) 22:53, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I know, all icons used portal links are already marked "noviewer". Can you provide an example where Media Viewer is popping up? — hike395 (talk) 02:58, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template-protected edit request on 29 June 2022

This edit request to Module:Portal/images/n has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

[[File:Nissan-logo.svg]] was deleted from commons 26 June 2022 - suggest using File:Nissan logo.svg KylieTastic (talk) 10:28, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^put'r there 18:12, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Use of "Johnny-automatic-scales-of-justice.svg"

Is it a deliberate satire? ("Portal of Prejudice", via the slanted scales) - MasterQuestionable (talk) 15:58, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

To editor MasterQuestionable: could be. That image was uploaded in early 2016 and then applied to the portal template with this edit. The user who changed it from File:Scale of justice 2 new.jpeg, editor CFCF, is no longer very active on Wikipedia. He probably just wanted to change from a .jpeg image to a .svg. You could be right though.

P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^put'r there 14:30, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@MasterQuestionable and Paine Ellsworth: The current icon is borderline offensive (IMO). How about this?

- hike395 (talk) 13:08, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Best by far imho is File:Scale of justice 2 new.jpeg

Problem is, it's a .jpeg and probably needs to be converted to a valid .svg file. Seems to be the trend on Commons, anyway. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^put'r there 13:24, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Paine Ellsworth: I could convert it to a gif, which makes low-byte-count icons, no problem. I just don't think it looks very good, see new icon above. The lines are too thin, and the scales are too close to the base.

Later: I found an SVG icon that was similar to File:Scale of justice 2 new.jpeg, but with thicker lines and more whitespace. Here's a comparison of the three proposals: Lady Justice, jpeg scales, svg scales:

Law portal	(Lady Justice)
Law portal	(Ellsworth suggested scales)
Law portal	(newly found SVG scales)

Later: I updated the live portal template to use the SVG scales. We can easily change if there is disagreement. - hike395 (talk) 02:12, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

	Hope you wouldn't mind this somewhat off-topic discussion:

	[ Quote Paine Ellsworth @ CE 2022-07-16 13:24 UTC:
https://en.wikipedia.org/?diffonly=1&diff=prev&oldid=1098571121
	Seems to be the trend on Commons, anyway. ]
<^>	The trend is?..

	----

	To Hike395, would you mind me merging (and slightly reformat) your consecutive posts in the section? For better readability.

- MasterQuestionable (talk) 22:05, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I guess it depends on what you'd like to do: I found your latest (22:05 8 August) a bit confusing and hard to read. How about you go ahead and munge my comments, and if I find the formatting unreadable, I will revert. - hike395 (talk) 23:04, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

	[ Quote Hike395 @ CE 2022-08-08 23:04 UTC:
https://en.wikipedia.org/?diffonly=1&diff=prev&oldid=1103233072
	go ahead, but I may revert ]
<^>	Of course, feel free to do it.

	[ Quote Hike395 @ CE 2022-08-08 23:04 UTC:
https://en.wikipedia.org/?diffonly=1&diff=prev&oldid=1103233072
	I found your latest (22:05 8 August) a bit confusing and hard to read. ]
<^>	I'm looking for linguistic reviews on the formatting.
	If you have the interest, please leave further details on my talk page. Thanks.

- MasterQuestionable (talk) 01:46, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

To editor MasterQuestionable: the trend on Commons is to convert files to the .svg format when possible. That has several benefits over other formats like .jpg/.jpeg, .gif or .png. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^put'r there 07:38, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, I think the superiority of SVG over GIF is highly overstated on WP. With the current software, SVG files get thumbnailed as PNG, so they produce larger downloads, even if the original SVG is much smaller than PNG or GIF. - hike395 (talk) 08:42, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Preparing for the future, supposedly. - MasterQuestionable (talk) 01:46, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]