Template talk:WikiProject Ships

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Ship-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.
Template rated as template-Class on the assessment scale
NA rated as NA-importance on the assessment scale

Contents

[edit] Banner Usage

See Template:WikiProject Ships/doc.

[edit] WikiProject Ships Project Banner Design Notes

Two images were chosen for this banner to represent the dual nature of WikiProject Ships' scope. The USS Constitution represents the naval ship, the age of sail ship and an old ship. The RMS Queen Mary 2 represents civilian shipping, the steam ship, and a fairly modern ship. They are also from two of the biggest sea faring nations. --J Clear 16:17, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Changes to fix assessed/un-assessed link inconsistency

It appears that our banner sometimes points to subtlety different links depending on if the article is assessed or not.

Here are the inconsistencies I see:

Just in case I made a mistake (I freely admit that I am not a pro when it comes to editing parsed templates), here are the changes I just made to the banner:

These changes should add consistency so that regardless of if an article is assessed or not, the linked terms should now point to the same pages. --Kralizec! (talk) 01:56, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] nitpicking

pick..pick... For the Category class can the template be made to recognize the entire word category in both upper and lower case? Currently it seems to only like Cat or cat; it will display the word category if you type it in but the article stays in the unassessed class article category. Also, for project pages can we invent the class Project instead of using double NA on project talk pages? --Brad (talk) 20:14, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

I went ahead and added both "category" and "Category" to the template parser. Let me get back to you on the other half of this ... --Kralizec! (talk) 13:23, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Unfortunately it appears that I cannot splice Project into our parser as that is not one of the currently utilized parameters on the back end ({{Grading scheme}}). --Kralizec! (talk) 14:40, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks! Project was just a thought and I think we'll survive without it. --Brad (talk) 16:08, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Argh.. I knew I would return.. Let's see.. I have come across several instances of |importance=medium or Medium which makes the tag display Mid importance but it does not remove the tag from Category:Unassessed-importance Ships articles. If medium was able to translate as assessed for Mid properly, the result would likely be the automatic removal of many tags from the above category. So maybe we should also cover Med or med as being acceptable to equal mid importance. --Brad (talk) 18:02, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Done! The following alternative spellings and capitalizations have been added to the importance criteria:
  • High: Hi , hi , HI
  • Mid: Medium , medium, MEDIUM
  • Low: Lo , lo , LO
While I was at it, I also added {{pp-template}} since the template was apparently protected in December. --Kralizec! (talk) 18:46, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Great! That just removed about 40 tags based on input glitches. --Brad (talk) 19:26, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
No doubt half of those were ID-Ten-T Errors from me. Thanks for catching and reporting this! --Kralizec! (talk) 20:26, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Quality scale

Wikipedia:WikiProject_Ships/Assessment#Quality scale has apparently been improved since the template was changed to point to the WP1.0 Quality scale. I think it would be useful to switch back to the WP:SHIPS table. HausTalk 00:15, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Wrong one -- what I meant was Wikipedia:WikiProject_Ships/Assessment#Importance assessment has apparently been improved since the template was changed to point to the WP1.0 Importance assessment scale. I think it would be useful to switch back to the WP:SHIPS table. HausTalk 00:15, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Actually, I think that both links in the tag should point to the wp:ships definitions. Better to give actual examples of assessed ship articles rather than generic ones. --Brad (talk) 02:00, 18 April 2008 (UTC)