From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Pokémon Portal This non-article page is part of WikiProject Pokémon, which aims to improve the encyclopedic coverage of the Pokémon universe on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project, ask for advice, and see what our current focuses are.
NA	This non-article page has been rated as NA-Class on the assessment scale.
Low	This non-article page is on a subject of low priority within gaming for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0.
PCP To-do: edit  Current focuses - Merge and Clean Lists Cleanup - Various Articles. Expand - Stubs. Assess and Prioritize articles (Log)

Contents 1 Usage 2 Discussion 2.1 Focus picture 2.2 New to do list 2.2.1 And now for something completely different. 2.3 Todo

[edit] Usage

Standard usage:

{{Pokeproject|class=|importance=}}

Required parameters
class	Set to FA, A, GA, B, Start, Stub, Image, or Template to rate the article on the Wikipedia 1.0 assessment scale. For other pages, set class=NA.
importance	Set to Top, High, Mid, or Low to rate the article's importance within CVG articles.
Optional parameters
cleanup	Set to June 2008 to place the article in Category:Pokémon article cleanup from June 2008. When using this parameter remember to create the new category by making it a subcategory of Category:Pokémon article cleanup.
todo	Set to no when being used with {{WikiProjectBannerShell}} or multiple templates are transcluding {{todo}}. In these cases, {{todo}} should be manually placed at the bottom of the talkpage banners.
small	Set to yes for formatting on talk pages using small banners.
nested	Set to yes for use with {{WikiProjectBannerShell}}.
selected	Set to yes if the article is a former selected article of the Portal:Pokémon.
dyk	Set to yes if the article is a former feature in the Did You Know...? section of Portal:Pokémon.
pic	Set to yes if the article is a former featured picture in the Featured Picture section of Portal:Pokémon.
focus	Set to yes if the article is one of the current focuses of WP:PCP.
oldfocus	Set to yes if the article is one of the previous focuses of WP:PCP.
complete	Set to yes if the article has reached the desired quality of all articles by PCP.

[edit] Discussion

[edit] Focus picture

I wanted to ask what the deal is with the little bird that's displayed when the focus parameter is set to yes. You can see it on Crawdaunt's talk page. I think it would be better and smoother if instead of adding another row of information to the template, it instead started, "This article is one the current focuses of the Pokémon Collaborative Project, which aims..." Is there any easy way to do this? --Brandon Dilbeck 23:39, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I went ahead and removed the silly picture. --Brandon Dilbeck 03:01, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New to do list

i found this template, {{to do}}, and decided it would make a great addition to all of our pokemon articles. There is added functionality that allows users to create a box on any page but display a specific article's to-do list. This can allow for more coordinated work between focus articles when their to-do list might be split up among the article's talk page, the project, and the portal. -ΖαππερΝαππερ ^Babel_Alexandria 21:40, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

If that template's needed, it can be added on its own to articles that require its use. No need to group it in here and clutter the template and the talk pages it's placed on. Right? Matt Yeager ♫ (Talk?) 02:40, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Apparently, ΖαππερΝαππερ decided to be bold and add {{to do}} anyhow. I respect his initiative; however, I have reverted that change for now. Many articles do not have the subpage that the {{to do}} template requires, in which case only an empty to-do list is displayed. Furthermore, the {{to do}} template is intended as a resource for all article editors, not only those in WikiProject Pokémon.

The addition of {{to do}} also broke support for {{WikiProjectBannerShell}}, for which I assumed you wished to continue support, as your template has implemented, though not documented, the nested parameter. I have also removed a newline that caused similar errors within the shell.

Please contact me via my talk page if you have a problem with any of these changes. Thanks! — Madman bum and angel (talk – desk) 01:01, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

i really didn't see any adverse affects on the talk pages, i tweaked usage so that if the to-do list wasn't being implemented yet, it was only a couple lines long, just enough to let people know it was an option - so i don't get the "clutter" argument. to respond to Madman, while many articles did not have the subpage created yet, it was added onto the main template to encourage people to do so - the blank page was intentional. secondly, how does my adding {{to-do}} to this template say that to-do can only be used WP:POKE? the complaint i'm most concerned with is that i broke support for another template, however wouldn't it have just been better to adjust the code? if support was broken because of inaccurate documentation that could have been fixed, rather than now breaking the pages that do utilize to-do. -ΖαππερΝαππερ ^Babel_Alexandria 15:14, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

The blank page may have been intentional, but it was useless to regular editors of the articles. If the regular article editors wanted to make a TODO list, they would have created one already; there was no need to force the issue. Moreover, WikiProjects generally have their own TODO lists, specific in nature, and unnecessary for individual editors to peruse. The problem with {{WikiProjectBannerShell}} was that {{to-do}} does not support the nested parameter and you left it outside of your WikiProject's banner; thus, when templates were nested within the shell, the TODO list "stuck out", disrupting the formatting of the shell.

{{to do}} has been removed thrice now. The articles that use it generally already have it on the talk page, and the redundancy is counterproductive. Those that don't use it have no need for the empty list that it displays. So, the point is, as a WikiProject, you can have your own TODO list; no need to assume responsibility for every article that displays your banner.

Thanks, — Madman bum and angel (talk – desk) 23:05, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

the thing is, many articles are grouped together rather than viewed as a single article by the project, so a single article rarely has a regular editor (there are of course exceptions). it often times takes a person to specifically go to the project and say Pokemon X has these problems, and then as a group we try to fix it (this is how things went on in the past... with the merger going on, the project is a little more discombobulated).

Yes, they would go to the project. They would add it on the project's TODO list. How likely is it that WikiProject Pokémon members are going to watch the TODO subpages of every article within the project's scope? Why not have a centralized TODO list instead of forcing each article to have an individual one? That's all I'm asking. — Madman bum and angel (talk – desk) 16:45, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

the wikiproject does have a centralized to-do list, it's collapsed by default on this very template. i think you misunderstood my point. the idea that 1334 pages currently in Category:Pokémon should have all their to-do's on a single page is not what i think would be a good idea. i think each page should have it's own to-do list because some people work well with lists, and it really is unreasonable to think that every person with a thought/suggestion/complaint should have to go to the project. what i meant by "it takes a person going to the project..." was that many of the to-do type items just get left on the talk page as threads. which is how most pages work. people rarely bring things to the project on their own so sometimes issues can go unanswered. my "centralizing" goal is about the project's current focus, not it's entire scope. plus the to-do list can give our focus a nice starting off point. finally, watchlisting all the species to-do pages is a lot more realistic than watchlisting all the actual articles, the to-do pages are edited far less frequently so it's something someone could realistically stay on top of. -ΖαππερΝαππερ ^Babel_Alexandria 06:03, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Zappernapper, could you please answer the above comment by Madman bum and angel? It seems like you are misunderstanding the todo template. Transcluding todo within the banner will add todo to each article page. Writing within one of those todo pages will have no effect on Pokemon project todo page, nor on any of the other pages within the scope of the Pokemon project. Shinhan 18:16, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Shinhan, Zappernapper's probably offline at the moment. I made several point-by-point replies, all at the same indent level. He/she's probably just not seen them yet. Thanks, though! — Madman bum and angel (talk – desk) 18:36, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, wasnt looking at time. Shinhan 18:58, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

you say there was no need to force the issue, but when you have 500+ articles within the scope of a project, centralized discussion becomes necessary. by forcing to-do, it would encourage people to add things to the to-do list rather than listing them on both the talk page and the project page. and then having someone have to update the portal's To-do list as well. i think {{to-do}} is a great idea and it could streamline discussions so nicely. Take a look at how it has been implemented at the project and the portal. but if to-do doesn't get forced onto each page, there's no way to guarantee that the rest of the infrastructure will continue to function properly. also, this way people who are unfamiliar with the project or the portal, but familiar with to-do, can essentially broadcast problems they see with the article to these extra avenues.

If they updated the article's TODO list, it doesn't get added to the project page and the portal page automatically. If you want a centralized TODO list, {{todo}} is not what you want. Look at how other WikiProjects do it. — Madman bum and angel (talk – desk) 16:45, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

actually, it currently DOES update our project and portal automatically, with whatever our focus happens to be, take a look at those links i provided. one focus is Houndoom, if you make a change to it's to-do list people at the project and those viewing the portal are automatically made aware. again, you seem to think i want to centralize the entire project... no, just whatever our focus happens to be. also... i don't want to come off sounding like an ass, but i don't care what other wikiprojects do. other wikiprojects do a lot of silly things, you might be surprised to know that many people think WP:POKE does a lot of silly things :) i'm convinced this is a good, time-saving idea. the only reason it's not saving me any time right now is b/c i'm having to debate about it. i'm very aware that wikiprojects centralize their entire scope's discussions, often on their project banners, just like this one. again, i'm not talking about the project's scope but current focus. -ΖαππερΝαππερ ^Babel_Alexandria 06:03, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

the problem with breaking the template seems easily fixed, why not just add nested functionality to to-do? then if the parent template (in this case, this template) gets called with nested=yes, to-do can be be called with nested=yes in the transclusion.

{{todo}} doesn't implement the nested parameter; it has no need to. It's not a WikiProject banner. It would have to be removed entirely should the WikiProject banner be nested, and I assume you wouldn't like that. — Madman bum and angel (talk – desk) 16:45, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

the point is that to-do could implement the nested parameter and your issue would be solved. ideally, every template should be compatible with sharing space with every other template. flat out refusing to add the functionality doesn't deny the fact that the complaint is essentially groundless. -ΖαππερΝαππερ ^Babel_Alexandria 06:03, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

as for how often it's been removed, Disavian removed it back at the end of April with no explanation. since i knew he wasn't an active member within the project i readded it, hoping perhaps he would shed some light on the reason why he removed it (i realize in retrospect i should have left a msg on his talk page, i forgot). it was removed again in May by Matt, and this time i contacted the person, their reasoning was that the current implementation broke when using the small version. a simple fix by calling to-do's small parameter and Matt was happy. the simple fact of removal hardly says anything more than people who are unfamiliar with how a project is being run feel it unneccessary to consider that project's needs before altering content. the original reason for removal (breaking formatting) is fixable and the alternative of dictating how the project should be run is stepping on some toes.

I also wasn't aware of any articles where to-do was being trancluded twice. that can be fixed by just removing the explicit tranclusion, give me the list and i'll do it myself - i agree 100% that redundancy is counterproductive. the articles that currently aren't utilizing to-do aren't all blank because they "don't need" it. moreso, they just haven't been utilized yet. the wikiproject is merely trying to encourage improvement of the articles by giving them a to-do list, which is a fundamental goal of wikipedia.

in short, all your qualms are fixable or seem to be trying to say how the project should run itself. i'm sorry this was long, but i hope you can understand better where i'm coming from. -ΖαππερΝαππερ ^Babel_Alexandria 16:34, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] And now for something completely different.

I'm sorry you feel that my "complaint" is groundless. I feel you are misunderstanding my points and the purpose of the {{todo}} template, but we seem to have reached a stalemate which we cannot get past. You seem unhappy that you have to "debate" this template change, and so am I; this has dragged on far too long. So, let's reach a compromise. This is my proposal.

If you wish to re-add {{todo}}, that's fine. But if you do so, please:

1. Ensure that there is a consensus among WikiProject Pokémon members favoring addition of the transclusion. I have only seen one voice from your WikiProject, and that is yours. Any change to your WikiProject's banner should be discussed before its addition. The basis of all WikiProjects, including yours, is teamwork.

2. Please put {{todo}} inside your project's banner. That is, put it before the end of the table, not after, like so:

|{{todo}}
|}

not:

|}
{{todo}}

3. Please include a parameter that will allow article editors to "opt out" of the {{todo}} transclusion. Some article editors may not like the TODO subpages, preferring discussion on the talk page. Some also may prefer to hide the empty TODO list until it is used. See {{ProjectWUSTL}} for an example of a template using a todo parameter; editors may add |todo=no to indicate that they will not use the TODO list.

Does this sound fair to you? — Madman bum and angel (talk – desk) 06:23, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

If Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Pokémon is place with most Pokemon project people, this discussion should be redirected there in order to build a consensus. (Some projects dont use their project's talk page so I had to ask)

Now Im starting to think that ToDo template (as used by PCP template) is used only for Collaboration of the Week which is in Pokemon project called "Article Focus". Take a look at the WP:ACID and note the links on the right side. I took a look only at several of them, but they all use separate template for the Collaboration of the Week. So, whichever articles gets chosen for the "Article Focus" he gets Article Focus template (which might be just a customized todo template). After another article is chosen for the focus the template is removed from the talk page that was in focus. Oh, and dont concetrate on the "oh the week" part, the time period is changeable. Shinhan 12:24, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Todo

Can we remove the todo inclusion? It makes using {{WikiProjectBannerShell}} awkward, and I don't see a reason to put it on every article. Pagrashtak 14:34, 28 October 2007 (UTC)