| Revision as of 03:26, 16 May 2005 editSlimVirgin (talk | contribs)172,064 edits prefer Grace Note's← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 09:39, 21 May 2024 edit undoPrimefac (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Bureaucrats, Checkusers, Oversighters, Administrators208,797 editsm update template callTag: AWB | ||
| (110 intermediate revisions by 42 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{talkheader}} | |||
| It has not been suggested by God Almighty, nor in the media, nor in the course of debate even, that the article might not be "significant" enough for Misplaced Pages. It's been decided by someone who has looked at the editor and cannot be bothered writing a message to your talkpage or that of the article explaining what their problem is. My formulation is much more gentle and much more general, not aimed at the originating editor of the article but at anyone who stumbles across it. Clearly, the originating editor believes its subject is significant enough for Misplaced Pages; that's why they wrote the article. ] 02:37, 16 May 2005 (UTC) | |||
| ==Re-purpose== | |||
| :This template was '''created''' because editors were taking it upon themselves to unilaterally remove all instances of a '''different''' tag that referenced ] because '''that''' was "non-policy". This template was carefully created to convey the message "Yes, if you only take those items marked 'policy' as policy, you may think that an article on 'X' will be perfectly accepted by everyone; however, if you actually want to deal in the ''real'' world, you should be aware that articles ''do'' regularly end up on VfD and ''do'' regularly get deleted because the articles gives absolutely no indication why the subject would be found significant by anyone other than the person posting it." This '''is''' the gentle formulation, thank you very much. Create your own damned tag instead of castrating this one and unilaterally misrepresenting what everyone who has already applied this tag ''meant when they applied it''. Do you somehow think you're acting in some kinder and gentler spirit when you decide that everyone who put on a tag saying "I see reason for concern about whether this subject is significant" will now be saying "Oh, there ''might'' be concern about whether this subject is significant, but just '''delete the tag''' and '''ignore''' the possibility if '''you''' don't think it's necessary!" No. People have a right to their opinion, and you really don't have a right to go introducing new clauses to modify their opinion, just because your opinion is different. -- ] 02:57, 16 May 2005 (UTC) | |||
| This template is due to be re-purposed imminently. Please use its target {{Tl|Notability}} and fix any documentation referring to the old use. The template has been orphaned in article space. ''] ]'', 22:12, 2 September 2009 (UTC). | |||
| :Thanks to Rich we have now been able to move this template to its proper place. — Martin <small>(] · ])</small> 08:16, 3 September 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ::Yay! {{tag|happy dance|single}} ]‑] 12:50, 3 September 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :::Not arguing with this or anything, but I thought Importance was used in the WikiProject sense as opposed to the Notability sense. (I came here as Rich changed the TL in one of my handy-links-boxes, but Notability was linked there too). Out of curiosity, what will the new TL|Importance be? Something I'd want to keep in my bag-o-tricks anyway? Thanks! | |||
| ::::Ah, I see the old Importance was already deleted, and this one is what I thought it was for anyway! :) So now I'm wondering what the old one was for.... ]] 14:55, 3 September 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :::::The old use was an ambox like this: | |||
| {{ambox | |||
| | type = content | |||
| | text = This article '''needs context or references with which to establish the ] of the subject matter'''. Please by providing context and ] which back up the subject's importance for a general audience. | |||
| }} | |||
| and was redirected to {{tl|notability}} several months ago. — Martin <small>(] · ])</small> 15:17, 3 September 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :And what is the new template for? ] (]) 20:43, 8 May 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :: See its documentation? It's used in assessment ratings. Note that ] still points to the old issue. --] (]) 22:09, 8 May 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::I think I prefer Grace Note's version, mainly because of the "it has been suggested" in the other version, as though the suggestion has come from on high. The active voice is better English and more accurate. The only part of Grace Note's I disagree with is the "Please remove this notice if you feel this has been done or is not necessary." I would get rid of "or is not necessary," because lots of editors will take that as a sign to remove it, especially vanity-page creators, who often believe their own significance is beyond needing to be explained. ] <sup><font color="Purple">]</font></sup> 03:26, May 16, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| :: While we're at it, I could use this opportunity undelete these old revisions and place them in the history of that template, which was actually its old name once. --] (]) 22:11, 8 May 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :: Hmm, now that I said that, I don't actually know how to do it :) I'd have to undelete them here, move everything to Template:cleanup-importance, then delete the old revisions again, then move it back here, and then undelete the old revisions over there. Trouble is, since this template is transcluded to hell and back, these actions could easily be disruptive as mediawiki runs through various triggered back-end actions back and forth. Anyone have a better idea? --] (]) 22:15, 8 May 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :::Hehe, no better ideas, but if it would make you happy then just go for it. No one will notice if you do it quick enough :) — Martin <small>(] · ])</small> 23:01, 8 May 2010 (UTC) | |||
| You could try this: | |||
| #Move ] to ] leaving a redirect behind. | |||
| #Put a (temporary) copy of the template over the top of the redirect. | |||
| #Delete ] and restore the old history. | |||
| #Move it to ] or wherever you want it, supressing the redirect. | |||
| #Restore all remaining revisions of ]. | |||
| #Move it to ], supressing the redirect. | |||
| — Martin <small>(] · ])</small> 10:45, 25 May 2010 (UTC) | |||
| : Thanks. In the meantime I brought this up on ] and got the same answer (AFAICT). I'll try that then. --] (]) 20:07, 25 May 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :: OK, it's done. Two of my HTTP requests timed out on the proxies, but the back-end performed fine. --] (]) 10:35, 26 May 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == Class? == | |||
| What's the class parameter for in this template? ] (]) 23:14, 3 September 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :Confusingly enough, it's the partner to {{para|style}}: it's for adding extra CSS classes to the cell. Nothing to do with WP1.0 class. ]‑] 10:54, 4 September 2009 (UTC) | |||
| == IMPN == | |||
| I've just noticed that this template uses {{para|impn}} whereas {{tl|WPBM}} uses {{para|IMPN}} and {{para|IMPORTANCE_SCALE_NAME}}. Maybe we should try to standardise? — Martin <small>(] · ])</small> 13:08, 7 September 2009 (UTC) | |||
| == Use as column heading == | |||
| {{FPER|ans=yes}} | |||
| Per suggestion at ], I have sandboxed an amendment to allow {{tag|th}} to be used instead of {{tag|td}}, and this is tested at ] as working, so please copy ] over ]. --] (]) 20:22, 12 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
| : {{done}} Couldn't wait? ;) ]] 00:49, 13 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
| == Protected edit request on 10 April 2015 == | |||
| {{FPER|Template:Importance|answered=y}} | |||
| As discussed in ], this template (and its importance-specific equivalents) undesirably links to problematic categories when the category parameter is undefined. I attempted to fix this in , but this is clearly broken. I am not knowledgeable enough about templates to fix this myself, so someone would have to find a proper code. I simply tried turning <nowiki>"]" into "if (category) { ] }"</nowiki>, but that is not parsed as I would have expected. | |||
| ] (]) 15:29, 10 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :It's still not at all clear why you need this doing, nor what is "broken". ] '''Not done:''' please establish a ] for this alteration before using the {{tlx|edit protected}} template.<!-- Template:EP --> --] (]) 15:55, 10 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::{{Reply to|Redrose64}} The is broken. It shows uninterpreted lexemes ("<nowiki>{{#if:|] (]) 19:31, 11 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :::Probably means that the brackets are unbalanced. Make sure that you close the same number that you open, and in the reverse order. --] (]) 19:46, 11 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :::: {{Reply to|Redrose64}} I have look attentively enough to be confident that the numbers match. However, are you sure that the order needs to be reversed, and if so, does that mean that ''bar'' needs to be duplicated? Otherwise, are you aware of a syntax highlighter? --] (]) 16:07, 12 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :::::What I mean by "in the reverse order" is that if you open brackets in the order <code><nowiki>{{ {{{</nowiki></code> (two, three) they must be closed in the order <code><nowiki>}}} }}</nowiki></code> (three, two); similarly, <code><nowiki>{{ ] }}</nowiki></code> (square, curly). --] (]) 16:15, 12 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :::::: {{Reply to|Redrose64}} Yes, so that means what I attempted cannot work, right? If so, is there a way to make the link conditional without duplicating ''bar'' (variable assignment)? --] (]) 01:36, 13 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
| == Removing <code>attr</code> parameter == | |||
| As part of a broader project to overhaul the way assessment-metric templates are implemented, I'm planning to remove the <code>attr</code> parameter of this template. It appears to be unused: a <span class="plainlinks"></span> returns no results. This does come with an immediate one-time cost of invalidating the cache of about 4 million pages, but since they're going to be mostly talk pages the performance impact shouldn't be too bad. In the longer term, it's helpful because <code>attr</code> and so on are black boxes of functionality that can't be handled cleanly in Lua HTML-generation code. If there's a need to add a specific attribute for some special cases, then that can be added separately. For example, when I removed the corresponding <code>attr</code> parameter from {{tl|class}}, a <code>rowspan</code> parameter was added to handle a few cases that couldn't be cleanly removed or replaced with use of the <code>style</code> parameter instead. | |||
| If no one objects, I'll make the change probably sometime this weekend? <span style="white-space:nowrap;">{{] |] |]}}</span> 18:21, 8 December 2017 (UTC) | |||
| :Sounds like a plan. We should remove dead code when we find it. <span style="white-space:nowrap;font-family:'Trebuchet MS'"> — ] ] ] ><sup>ʌ</sup>ⱷ҅<sub>ᴥ</sub>ⱷ<sup>ʌ</sup>< </span> 16:01, 9 December 2017 (UTC) | |||
| ::{{done}}, though admittedly I left this hanging far longer than necessary. :) <span style="white-space:nowrap;">{{] |] |]}}</span> 01:18, 23 December 2017 (UTC) | |||
| == Change background colour of unknown == | |||
| A change has been made to ] which changes the background colour of unassessed to #dcdcdc, see ]. Would it make sense to make a similar change to this template for unknown importance? — Martin <small>(] · ])</small> 11:45, 9 May 2023 (UTC) | |||
| :{{done}} — Martin <small>(] · ])</small> 11:49, 30 June 2023 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 09:39, 21 May 2024
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Importance template. |
|
Re-purpose
This template is due to be re-purposed imminently. Please use its target {{Notability}} and fix any documentation referring to the old use. The template has been orphaned in article space. Rich Farmbrough, 22:12, 2 September 2009 (UTC).
- Thanks to Rich we have now been able to move this template to its proper place. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:16, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
- Yay!
<happy dance />Happy‑melon 12:50, 3 September 2009 (UTC)- Not arguing with this or anything, but I thought Importance was used in the WikiProject sense as opposed to the Notability sense. (I came here as Rich changed the TL in one of my handy-links-boxes, but Notability was linked there too). Out of curiosity, what will the new TL|Importance be? Something I'd want to keep in my bag-o-tricks anyway? Thanks!
- Ah, I see the old Importance was already deleted, and this one is what I thought it was for anyway! :) So now I'm wondering what the old one was for.... Arakunem 14:55, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
- The old use was an ambox like this:
- Ah, I see the old Importance was already deleted, and this one is what I thought it was for anyway! :) So now I'm wondering what the old one was for.... Arakunem 14:55, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
- Not arguing with this or anything, but I thought Importance was used in the WikiProject sense as opposed to the Notability sense. (I came here as Rich changed the TL in one of my handy-links-boxes, but Notability was linked there too). Out of curiosity, what will the new TL|Importance be? Something I'd want to keep in my bag-o-tricks anyway? Thanks!
- Yay!
 | This article needs context or references with which to establish the notability of the subject matter. Please help out by providing context and reliable sources which back up the subject's importance for a general audience. |
and was redirected to {{notability}} several months ago. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:17, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
- And what is the new template for? Bwrs (talk) 20:43, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
- See its documentation? It's used in assessment ratings. Note that Template:Cleanup-importance still points to the old issue. --Joy (talk) 22:09, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
- While we're at it, I could use this opportunity undelete these old revisions and place them in the history of that template, which was actually its old name once. --Joy (talk) 22:11, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
- Hmm, now that I said that, I don't actually know how to do it :) I'd have to undelete them here, move everything to Template:cleanup-importance, then delete the old revisions again, then move it back here, and then undelete the old revisions over there. Trouble is, since this template is transcluded to hell and back, these actions could easily be disruptive as mediawiki runs through various triggered back-end actions back and forth. Anyone have a better idea? --Joy (talk) 22:15, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
- Hehe, no better ideas, but if it would make you happy then just go for it. No one will notice if you do it quick enough :) — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 23:01, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
You could try this:
- Move Template:importance to Template:importance/temp leaving a redirect behind.
- Put a (temporary) copy of the template over the top of the redirect.
- Delete Template:importance/temp and restore the old history.
- Move it to Template:cleanup-importance or wherever you want it, supressing the redirect.
- Restore all remaining revisions of Template:importance/temp.
- Move it to Template:importance, supressing the redirect.
— Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:45, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks. In the meantime I brought this up on Misplaced Pages:Village pump (technical)/Archive 76#moving revisions around? and got the same answer (AFAICT). I'll try that then. --Joy (talk) 20:07, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
- OK, it's done. Two of my HTTP requests timed out on the proxies, but the back-end performed fine. --Joy (talk) 10:35, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
Class?
What's the class parameter for in this template? PC78 (talk) 23:14, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
- Confusingly enough, it's the partner to
|style=: it's for adding extra CSS classes to the cell. Nothing to do with WP1.0 class. Happy‑melon 10:54, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
IMPN
I've just noticed that this template uses |impn= whereas {{WPBM}} uses |IMPN= and |IMPORTANCE_SCALE_NAME=. Maybe we should try to standardise? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:08, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
Use as column heading
 | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Per suggestion at Template talk:Class#Use as column heading, I have sandboxed an amendment to allow <th>...</th> to be used instead of <td>...</td>, and this is tested at Template:Importance/testcases as working, so please copy Template:Importance/sandbox over Template:Importance. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:22, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
Done Couldn't wait? ;) Anomie⚔ 00:49, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
Protected edit request on 10 April 2015
| This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
As discussed in Template_talk:Grading_scheme#Protected_edit_request_on_7_April_2015, this template (and its importance-specific equivalents) undesirably links to problematic categories when the category parameter is undefined. I attempted to fix this in , but this is clearly broken. I am not knowledgeable enough about templates to fix this myself, so someone would have to find a proper code. I simply tried turning "]" into "if (category) { ] }", but that is not parsed as I would have expected. Chealer (talk) 15:29, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
- It's still not at all clear why you need this doing, nor what is "broken".
Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit protected}}template. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:55, 10 April 2015 (UTC)- @Redrose64: The version of the sandbox I created is broken. It shows uninterpreted lexemes ("{{#if:|
- Probably means that the brackets are unbalanced. Make sure that you close the same number that you open, and in the reverse order. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:46, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
- @Redrose64: I have look attentively enough to be confident that the numbers match. However, are you sure that the order needs to be reversed, and if so, does that mean that bar needs to be duplicated? Otherwise, are you aware of a syntax highlighter? --Chealer (talk) 16:07, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
- What I mean by "in the reverse order" is that if you open brackets in the order
{{ {{{(two, three) they must be closed in the order}}} }}(three, two); similarly,{{ ] }}(square, curly). --Redrose64 (talk) 16:15, 12 April 2015 (UTC)- @Redrose64: Yes, so that means what I attempted cannot work, right? If so, is there a way to make the link conditional without duplicating bar (variable assignment)? --Chealer (talk) 01:36, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
- What I mean by "in the reverse order" is that if you open brackets in the order
- @Redrose64: I have look attentively enough to be confident that the numbers match. However, are you sure that the order needs to be reversed, and if so, does that mean that bar needs to be duplicated? Otherwise, are you aware of a syntax highlighter? --Chealer (talk) 16:07, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
- Probably means that the brackets are unbalanced. Make sure that you close the same number that you open, and in the reverse order. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:46, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
- @Redrose64: The version of the sandbox I created is broken. It shows uninterpreted lexemes ("{{#if:|
Removing attr parameter
As part of a broader project to overhaul the way assessment-metric templates are implemented, I'm planning to remove the attr parameter of this template. It appears to be unused: a search for its use returns no results. This does come with an immediate one-time cost of invalidating the cache of about 4 million pages, but since they're going to be mostly talk pages the performance impact shouldn't be too bad. In the longer term, it's helpful because attr and so on are black boxes of functionality that can't be handled cleanly in Lua HTML-generation code. If there's a need to add a specific attribute for some special cases, then that can be added separately. For example, when I removed the corresponding attr parameter from {{class}}, a rowspan parameter was added to handle a few cases that couldn't be cleanly removed or replaced with use of the style parameter instead.
If no one objects, I'll make the change probably sometime this weekend? {{Nihiltres |talk |edits}} 18:21, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
- Sounds like a plan. We should remove dead code when we find it. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ >ⱷ҅ᴥⱷ< 16:01, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
- Done, though admittedly I left this hanging far longer than necessary. :) {{Nihiltres |talk |edits}} 01:18, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
Change background colour of unknown
A change has been made to Module:Class/styles.css which changes the background colour of unassessed to #dcdcdc, see Template talk:Class#Change colour of unassessed. Would it make sense to make a similar change to this template for unknown importance? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:45, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
- Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:49, 30 June 2023 (UTC)