Template talk:WikiProject Germany

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Downsize the flag and the Rating-Field

Thanks ! Lear 21 12:24, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Edit broke the WP 1.0 assesment for Munich

It now puts articles in Category:Stub-Class_Munich_articles rather than Category:Stub-class_Munich_articles.

Looks like it should be that way, but we need o do something about it somewhere. Agathoclea 11:17, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

I think only the Munich articles were so affected. It would not be easy to change the code for this banner to use different capitalisation just for Munich articles, so it would be a lot easier if the Munich banner were to be changed and the Munich categories renamed via WP:CFDS. - 52 Pickup 12:12, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
No need for process, I'll fix the categories by hand. Kusma (talk) 12:19, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
Done. Kusma (talk) 12:27, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
All working now - I just set the assessment bot to re-populate Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Munich articles by quality statistics and it all looks good. - 52 Pickup 14:13, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] unref seems broken

see Talk:German_Christmas_traditions. I just reinstated Category:Unreferenced Germany articles as I thaught its deletion was the problem. Agathoclea 16:32, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Fixed now. I must have left out that field during the upgrade in April. Sorry about that. - 52 Pickup 10:57, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Collapsible content shows as default

The template is incorporated in the WikiProjectBanner on Talk:North Sea. When the shell is opened the "Additional information" shows even though the "show" anchor is still displayed. This must be an error. This should be hidden as default and only show when the "hidden" anchor is clicked. __meco 21:33, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

I've fixed the problem with respect to this particular article by changing to WikiProjectBannerShell, however, I'm sure the problem still exists where WikiProjectBanner is applied and still needs attention. __meco 22:00, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
All templates that use this "additional information" pop-out section behave this way (eg. {{WPMILHIST}}, upon which this section was based). It is an annoying problem, and I'm still not sure how to fix it. - 52 Pickup 11:29, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] CfD affecting this template

see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 November 1#Category:Germany articles needing images. Agathoclea 08:59, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

The changes suggested over at this CFD can be easily done, but we just need to clarify just what is desired. So far, this template has two image request fields: imageneeded and mapneeded. Another can be added, or the relevant categories can be changed, or both. Suggestions? - 52 Pickup 20:44, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

My main proposal is to separate requests for photographs of locations from other image requests. When a category contains more than 200 articles someone searching for requests that they can address becomes more difficult.
One suggestion is to allow parameters to the field imageneeded. If the article is of a location then imageneeded=place would add the article to Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Germany otherwise it would add the article to Category:Germany articles needing images.
Another possibility is to have sub categories based on those under Category:Wikipedia requested photographs (e.g. arts, people, technology) but I think too many sub-categories with only one or two articles in would also not be very easy viewing. Maybe a variation would be to allow different subjects and put the article in the existing reqphoto categories as well as the German category.Traveler100 06:41, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
The level of detail in these banners should probably be kept as simple as possible, particularly because banners tend to not get updated all that often. The big issue that I see here is that many of the location articles where images have been requested probably are photo requests, so we need to separate them somehow in the simplest possible way. There are two ways to do this: either as you propose (imageneeded=place), or by introducing a new field that specifies that the article is of a location (eg. place=yes) then if both imageneeded and place are "yes", then the article would then be placed in the photo-request category instead of the image-request category.
This second option may seem the more complicated, but it has its benefits. WP Germany already has a subproject for German locations and so it might be worth tagging all locations anyway - so this would solve both problems at once. To perform this tagging, some sort of bot should (hopefully) be able to do the job.
Unfortunately, this only solves the problem with regards to locations and not to anything else - except for maps, which is already taken care of. Specifying a range of possible values for imageneeded may be the answer here, but I am certain that the field will not be correctly used by most users and, as you said, too many subcategories will only lead to trouble. - 52 Pickup 14:49, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
Mapneeded should be out of commission due to the infobox shortly. My idea would be to separate the imagerequests by state, which in most cases could be done by a bot (photocat=Bavaria). Agathoclea 17:06, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
There'll still be a (limited) use for mapneeded - such as for regions (eg. Bavarian Forest). So, given all of the above suggestions, what shall we do with imageneeded? What are the thoughts of the editor who started the CFD? - 52 Pickup 13:54, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
i left a message requesting input, but the editor has been off-line since 8/11 Agathoclea 14:18, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 November 17#Category:Germany articles needing images. I have relisted the 1 November discussion to allow more time for the details to be worked out. When an agreement is reached, please note it at the CFD, so that it may be properly closed. Thank you, Black Falcon (Talk) 05:44, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Proposal. imageneeded be removed from the template and reqphoto|in=Germany be inserted into all article talk pages that did contain this. If the article is of a geographical location then it should be placed in a sub-category of the state(Länder) it is in otherwise it is listed directly in Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Germany.Traveler100 (talk) 12:39, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment. The relisted CfD is now overdue for closure. Do people here want to agree a solution, or should it be left to the CfD closer? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 17:54, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Photorequest image

I recently had a query about the lack of an icon depicting the need for a photo. I got no particular view either way as I think most punters will come via the category rather than look at the talkpage and say - oh it needs a picture. I just wanted to mention it while changes are underfoot. Agathoclea 17:08, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Something like this should do the job. - 52 Pickup 13:56, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
certainly. Agathoclea 14:20, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Germany articles needing images

Per this CFD discussion, Category:Germany articles needing images and Category:Germany articles needing maps were merged to Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Germany and Category:Wikipedia requested maps in Germany, respectively. However, interested editors are encouraged to investigate the possibility and utility of alternate categorisation schemes, such as proposed at Template talk:WikiProject Germany#CfD affecting this template. – Black Falcon (Talk) 20:07, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Not displaying 5-point B-check for GA articles

{{editprotected}} The 5 point-check for B class does not need to be displayed for GA-class articles,

This can be changed by modifying the "more information about this article" section, changing this:

{{#switch:{{WikiProject Germany/Class|{{{class|}}}}}|FA|A|NA|List|Disambig|Template|Category|Structure|Needed=|#default=yes}} {{{portal1-name|}}}...

To this:

{{#switch:{{WikiProject Germany/Class|{{{class|}}}}}|FA|A|GA|NA|List|Disambig|Template|Category|Structure|Needed=|#default=yes}} {{{portal1-name|}}}...

The only change here is the addition of GA to the list of classes. - 52 Pickup (deal) 19:33, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Done. Kusma (talk) 19:52, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
Oops. I missed that there were two instances of this "FA|A|GA|NA|List|..." switch. There is a second one just under these comment lines:
<!---------------------- End of section ---------------------->
<!----------------"More information about this article" section ---------------------->
The GA needs to be added there, too. 52 Pickup (deal) 20:17, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
Done again, hope it's fine now. Kusma (talk) 20:57, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
Yep, works fine now. Thanks. - 52 Pickup (deal) 06:59, 4 February 2008 (UTC)