User talk:Davidgothberg

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Note: During the summer part of the year I am mostly away from Wikipedia.

[edit] David's talk page

If I wrote on your user page you can answer there since I do put such pages on watch for a long time.

Put new messages at the bottom of this page or under the appropriate heading if there already is one. And don't forget to sign with your user name!

    .../David Göthberg

[edit] Linking templates

Hi again David. As a now-official template guru (congratulations!), here's something which I hope has an easy solution that I'm overlooking. Linking a template, such as Template:Nobel Peace Prize, is straightforward, but how do you link to a template and pass parameters to it at the same time? Sardanaphalus (talk) 11:35, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh, thanks. Or perhaps it is a curse...

Short answer: Well, you can't.

Long answer: Well, linking to a template and using a template is two very different things:

1: When you link to it you only point at it and say "the template is over there, if you want to take a look at it go there". And that is done by writing [[Template:Nobel Peace Prize]]. But then the template is not executed, the template is in fact itself in no way involved in that link. Except for that MediaWiki is smart and shows a red link if the template does not exist. But if you click the link and go to the template page you might see the template since then it is run once to render itself on the template page. But then you are on the template page and that has no relation to the page you came from. So there is no way the other page can feed any parameters to the template then. But the template code itself can contain default values that it can use if it doesn't get any parameters, like when it is run on its own template page. Often good for demonstration purposes. There are several ways to make default values. Perhaps it is default values you are asking for?

2: When you use the template you transclude or substitute the template onto a page. That means you actually fetch a copy of the template and run it, right there in the article. Transclusion is done with the code {{Nobel Peace Prize}} and then you can also feed parameters in several ways: {{Nobel Peace Prize|parameter one|parameter two}} or {{Nobel Peace Prize|color=blue|size=big}}. And the other way, substitution, well I don't recommend using substitution since that usually is a bad thing™ so I think we can skip the explanation of how that works.

3: But could you describe more in detail what you want to achieve?

--David Göthberg (talk) 12:45, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your comprehensive response, as ever. It looks like what I'm after isn't possible (and probably for good background reasons) as I don't think your point 1 above is what I'm heading toward. The current {{Nobel Peace Prize}} is one of a number of award templates I've seen that have separate smaller templates for each group of years -- e.g. see Nobel Peace Prize navigational boxes, Academy Award for Best Actor templates, etc -- so, in the case of {{Nobel Peace Prize}}, I made an amended version of the template (here) that should remove the need for the smaller templates (and then serve as a model for converting the other award templates similarly). I was hoping the new design would extend to the links provided in the below section of the template, which is where template links that also pass parameters seem to be needed. I think, though, I may've overreached myself, or maybe I'm overlooking something simple. Hope so and hope all this makes some sense. Sardanaphalus (talk) 03:34, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Ohhhh! Now I see what you are after! Man, you ARE smart! This is a problem that has been discussed hundreds of times all over Wikipedia. And you actually have the solution right there. You cracked it! Apart from a last small technical thing but that one I know how to solve for you! You and me are going to make the best navbox of that type ever! (And to 99% it was your idea.)

So, ideally what we want is to have a smaller variant of that navbox in each article, say one that lists some years before and after the "current year" for that article. But we don't want to have to manage one template for each year. (About 93 years so far in the Nobel case...) And that is why people instead have made a handful of navboxes covering some fixed time ranges instead. But that is not so nice for the articles that is in the first or last year of such a smaller time range.

But you pointed out that we can use parameters, and I know the technical details how we can do that. There are several ways we can do this, here is one way:

1: We can make one single huge navbox with all years and with the full names of the laureates. But it should have no year range groups in it. Instead it should take the "year" for the article as a parameter and then simply display some years before and after that. So in the articles the full template will never be shown, just a smaller view of it.

At the footer of the template we should have the "complete roster" link, but I think that one can simply link to the template page, since that means the template will be run without the "year" parameter and then it should display all years. (Or perhaps to a special page that displays the full template but doesn't display the template documentation below it.) We won't need the range links you have now at the bottom of {{Nobel Peace Prize}}.

That's how I see it. And that I know how to code it up. What do you think?

2: We can also do a slightly different variant, but I think this one will display less good in articles and it takes more template pages to manage:

We can have year groups in the big template like you have now. But the big template should display the full names of the laureates. The template should take a "year" parameter and then it will just display that year group when shown in an article. (And perhaps not show the group header then.) This will of course be slightly bad for articles that is in the last or first year of such a group.

At the footer of the template we can have the "complete roster" link, which will go to the template page that will display all years. Or perhaps to a special page that displays the full template but doesn't display the template documentation below it.

We can actually also have range links there like you have now. (But I don't really see any point in them.) They can link to one template page for each range. But those template pages will not need any managing, since all they will contain is a view of the bigger template with the year as parameter.

--David Göthberg (talk) 07:15, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Wow. I had no idea I'd stumbled over and found a solution to something that's been bugging people. I almost didn't bother you (or myself) with it as it only seemed to apply to a few award templates. I can see now, though, how it may be appropriate to use in templates with many and/or lengthy subsections. I'm also glad you realized the intention behind User:Sardanaphalus/Template workspace#Template:Nobel Peace Prize with parameter as I realize I forgot to explain it above!

Your point 1 is what I had in mind and I agree that the solution to trying to reproduce the range links is not to try -- if someone wants to see more years, they may as well go straight to the overall template. So a single '''[[Template:Nobel Peace Prize|Complete list]]''' link should be enough. Once I had a solution to this situation, I was planning to let AWB work through a list of all the articles transcluding the various smaller templates replacing e.g. {{Nobel Peace Prize Laureates 1901-1925}} → {{Nobel Peace Prize|1901-1925}}, etc. If all that needs to be done is to replace the range links with the single link, I could do this and move straight on to AWB.

However, if you think the bigger picture means something like your point 2 is worth pursuing, naturally I'll wait until all's ready. But if the only difference between the point 1 and point 2 approaches is surnames vs. fullnames, I'm wondering whether it's worth the extra work..? (But perhaps you're seeing that it'd be useful elsewhere.) Sardanaphalus (talk) 08:37, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Right, this can be used on many sports templates and so on. Even in cases where the range number is not shown. In such cases we can use the numbers internally in the template code anyway, but perhaps (optionally) show the numbers on the template page so it is easy to see which item has which number.

I think it was pretty clear what you were after once you written your second section above and I looked at the template. After all, I have worked with this problem several times in the past together with others, without coming up with a solution. Now that you presented the idea of feeding a parameter to the template it suddenly was "obvious". (And the "obvious" solutions are usually the hardest to discover.)

Right, solution 1 is by far the best. I just mentioned solution 2 as a comparison since that one is more similar to today's solutions.

Well, since I will be doing calculations on the year parameter (using #expr:) and comparisons, then the parameter has to be a number, or two numbers. So I was thinking it would look like one of these:

• {{Nobel Peace Prize|1913}} – In this case the template will have code to decide what range to show. That is, the template programmer will decide how many years (or what years) to show before and after 1913.
• {{Nobel Peace Prize|1901|1925}} – In this case the article writer decides what range to show.

The {{Nobel Peace Prize}} is a very good template to start with since it has gaps in the years, thus we have to take that into consideration too. This makes me lean towards letting the article writers set start and end year since then they can handle the gaps and they can choose any size of the template they like in their article. Like in an article with many other navboxes they might choose to show a smaller range. But on the other hand letting the template programmer handle the gaps is nice to, since then the article writers just have to give one year and not think about the gaps.

Much to think about for us...

I will code up a meta-template that should handle most of this so it will be easy to do inside the navboxes.

--David Göthberg (talk) 10:08, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Sounds like what you're thinking of is a whole dimension beyond what I had in mind. Anytime you have something to try or introduce, I'd be glad to know/contribute. Sardanaphalus (talk) 11:28, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

I have built a first working version. Check out {{range}}, {{range/testcases}} and {{range/nobel}}.

While I was at it I threw in nowrap handling in the {{range}} template so we save some code in the Nobel navbox. And that happens to solve the Firefox nowrap bug at the same time! Wasn't even my intention. Sometimes life is nice.

There is one issue left: Currently there is a trailing dot after the last item when showing a subrange. I think I know how to fix that and will code that up later.

--David Göthberg (talk) 16:36, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Have just had a look at {{range}} and the examples and think I understand the machinery (and probably how you might sort out the trailing dot). Clever stuff. I hesitate to add the following, because I'm aware I'm coming from those award templates, but: Do you think it might be over-engineered? On the other hand, you may already know that broad fixed ranges like 1901-1925 might be fine for award templates and their articles but too chunky for sports and other templates you've seen. Just thought I ought to voice what crossed my mind. I'm not sure and may well have changed it a few minutes from now! Sardanaphalus (talk) 17:57, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, it might be over-engineered. Personally I like the fixed ranges since I have no problems with handling a couple of navboxes for one big list.

But I have seen over and over again that many other editors do not like that and I have had lengthy discussions with them. They resort to things like the {{Navigation bar}} in-spite that it seriously breaks some browsers, or they simply make humongous navboxes but perhaps set them to default hidden. Both those "solutions" also mean the whole list gets loaded even though it isn't shown, which makes page loading very slow for modem users (and costs bandwidth for Wikipedia). Our new {{range}} solution means the list first gets shrunk at the server end before sent over the Internet.

So I think we should continue work on {{range}} for a while and see how it feels. I hope it can be an alternative for those editors who refuse to use fixed ranges.

--David Göthberg (talk) 18:16, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

I certainly think {{range}} should be useful, if not very useful. Would you say the editors not happy with with a few fixed 20/25-year ranges are those into sports templates? I don't know as I haven't seen many of these templates yet. Sardanaphalus (talk) 11:37, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, the ones that I immediately remember I have talked to are makers of sports navboxes, but also of cities and towns navboxes (both in Britain and I think in Asia). Then I have talked to many others that I don't know or don't remember what kind of navboxes they were doing.

--David Göthberg (talk) 21:53, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

I have added "trailing dot" handling to {{range}} now. See examples at {{range/testcases}} and the change in the code that use it in {{range/nobel}}. The new code for {{range}} is slightly large but seems to work very well.

--David Göthberg (talk) 11:36, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm impressed because you seem to be busy in so many other places. I haven't tried testing {{range/nobel}} "to destruction" but agree that the code looks sound. I hope the awards and sports folk appreciate and adopt your work. Sardanaphalus (talk) 16:25, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		Thanks for being so patient and helpful with my questions about image space templates! Kelly hi! 01:02, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Eh, I just answered some questions. That was nothing. But well, as I think is the right response in English: You're welcome.

--David Göthberg (talk) 01:12, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/CapitalR

Cheers for that, it did look a little odd when I added my very brief comment. Alexsanderson83 (talk) 09:58, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] {{shortcut}}

You're welcome. I came across CAT:SHORTFIX totally by accident, and had nothing else to do at the time. Do you know of any other Wiki maintenance that can be fixed by a non Admin? -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 18:15, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Sure, I have two other such lists that I am responsible for:

• Wikipedia:Template documentation/List
• User:Davidgothberg/Nowrap problems

They are a bit more tricky than the {{shortcut}} fixing. But if you read up on them you will learn some useful stuff at the same time. And of course, an easy way to see what needs to be done is to take a look at the diffs for some of the items in those lists that have already been done.

--David Göthberg (talk) 02:20, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Cool. I'll take a look. Thanks! -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 02:52, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Underlining changes in diffs

Hello Davidgothberg:

I saw a note about the new code and it sounds like a very useful thing to me. I waste too much time looking at diffs, wondering what is different. However, when I copied the code into my file User:Wanderer57/monobook.css nothing happened.

Probably the problem is that I am missing other code that is required, Because I do not know the syntax of the css, I am stuck. I would appreciate if you would take a quick look and then tell me if there is an article that i should read to learn what I did wrong (or did not do)

The problem was solved after I logged out and back in.

Please what would be the code to make links more prominent. So that for example, I would see Adam instead of Adam?

What I should really ask is where I can find basic instructions about CSS coding in Wikipedia.

Thank you, Wanderer57 (talk) 00:32, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia uses the normal W3C standardised CSS since that is what the web browsers understand. So you can learn more at www.w3.org. Check out their menu on the left side. There you have "CSS" which points to a page with another menu with "Learning CSS" and "Specs 2.1". One of the best ways to learn CSS is to code your own web pages locally on your hard drive. Since then you don't have any of the caching problems. Just change the code and reload the page from disk. You will have good use of the "CSS Validator" (W3C main page left side menu again). If you don't already know much about HTML coding then you need to start with that. See their main page, left side menu again: "HTML" goes to a page with a menu to the right with the specs "HTML 4.01" and "XHTML 1.0", and learning stuff below that. Also check out the "HTML Validator" (main page left side menu again).

There are several ways we code CSS for Wikipedia. The easiest one is to use CSS in the style="" tags of things, especially when we code templates. Another is to create CSS classes that are used in class="" attributes. Or even to code CSS code for classes and situations that already exists, like for what you asked above to make all links bold. Then you often have to view the source code of a page (using "view - page source" or so in your browser) and study what markup and what classes MediaWiki produce so you can write the correct CSS code for that. Thus you need to be able to at least partially understand the XHTML you see there.

If you are seriously going to code this stuff for Wikipedia or for your own web sites then you also need to install several different web browsers so yo can test that what you create works in most browsers.

Expect this to take some months of study.

--David Göthberg (talk) 03:35, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. I will set limited goals and hope to make some progress.

The .diffchange code that I put in my monobook.css to underline the changes works fine. Am I correct in thinking that that code is overriding other code stored elsewhere?

If that's the case, where is the "other" code? Are there multiple locations? (I understand that I should not even think about editing that code. It might be informative to look at it.

One more question, then I'll go away. What does "monobook" stand for?

Thank you very much. Wanderer57 (talk) 03:48, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I'll answer this in backwards order compared to how you asked, since that is a better order:

MonoBook is the default skin for Wikipedia. Look in your user menu (usually at top of page) - "My preferences" - "Skin". There you'll see the default skin is MonoBook. Try some of the other skins and you'll see what "skin" means. And prepare to be somewhat chocked at first.

Those skins are mainly specified as different .CSS files. But there are also a little Javascript involved.

First a number of MediaWiki default CSS pages are loaded, those can only be edited by the MediaWiki developers or so. Then MediaWiki:Common.css and MediaWiki:Monobook.css are loaded, and those can be edited by us admins and thus we can override and extend the default MediaWiki CSS. And last your own monobook.css is loaded where you can override all the others and add your own new classes. That means you can customise your skin and test new classes.

If you look at the top of the talk page MediaWiki_talk:Common.css there is a box listing the CSS pages for the different skins, and a link to Wikipedia:Catalogue of CSS classes. That catalogue is not complete, but it covers most of the files and classes involved.

The same system applies to the javascript pages, they are also listed in that catalogue.

The default .diff classes are specified in en.wikipedia.org/skins-1.5/common/diff.css. That CSS file is only loaded when viewing diffs. (I just discovered that file was not listed in the catalogue, so I fixed that.) And you are kind of right that the .diffchange code you have in your monobook.css "overrides" the .diffchange code in the default diff.css file. But since the default class specification did not have any borders you are technically not overriding but instead adding to or extending that class. That is, the diff view will still have bold red text.

If you use Firefox you can get the add-on named "JSView" from the Mozilla website. (Firefox menu - Tools - Add-ons - lower right corner: Get extensions.) It is a tool that gives you a little status bar icon where you can click to see and list all active CSS and Javascript pages when you are looking on some web page. Very helpful. I think there are similar tools for other web browsers too.

MediaWiki adds a class name to pretty much every object it renders on the pages. Not all those classes are used in the CSS files and many are not yet listed in the catalogue. So do view the source code of a page to see what classes are on what objects. And off course, different kinds of pages on Wikipedia use different classes. For instance the .diff classes are only used in diff views.

--David Göthberg (talk) 06:29, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for your help with Template:Shortcut

		The Template Barnstar
		Thanks for fixing the {{Shortcut}} template list subitem bug. --Teratornis (talk) 20:02, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh, thank you!

--David Göthberg (talk) 02:22, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] User:Davidgothberg/Nowrap problems

I have completed every entry in the list, except for two that are too difficult for me. I won't be around after today because I'm moving out of my apartment tomorrow. I was supposed to move into my new one on Wednesday, but the old tenants trashed it so the landlord has to put in new appliance, carpet and paint and it won't be ready until May 12 now, so until that time I'm living in my truck (!), and don't have internet access. When I return though, I'll be more than happy to continue with some wiki maintenance. Cheers! -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 02:23, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! And you are crazy, you should not be editing Wikipedia today, you should be packing. I'll already taken a look at those two and I know how to fix them, will do that later. Hope to see you soon.

Cheers! --David Göthberg (talk) 02:30, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Everything's packed except for the desktop! :) -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 02:39, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] A strange float problem with Template:Shortcut compact

Hello, I started the {{Shortcut compact}} template which we discussed here:

• Template talk:Shortcut#Double-bullet problem in lists - (Permanent link)

I thought my problems were over, but not so fast. For some reason, the template does not want to float to the right correctly on the WP:EIW#Editor's index, so I did not commit my use of the template there yet. I illustrated the problem by copying the WP:EIW#D section to:

• User:Teratornis/Sandbox2#D

If you scroll down a bit on the page, you will see four subitems that have {{Shortcut compact}} templates. When I view the page, each one of the templates only floats as far to the right as it can without moving under the {{Shortcut}} or {{Shortcut compact}} above it. Needless to say, this is annoying. I saw the same problem on my smaller test:

• User:Teratornis/Help desk notes#Shortcut template testing

although the problem is not visible there just now, after I monkeyed around with things a bit. I tried reducing the margins and padding in {{Shortcut compact}} as that seemed to matter, but even after I reduced them all to zero, the refusal-to-float-right problem occurs on my excerpt from the Editor's index. If you could look at it, I'd be thankful. --Teratornis (talk) 06:37, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

As you probably have seen I did spend some hour experimenting with it. It seems it is a trickier problem than we thought. The same problem seems to occur no matter what code we use and also with the old shortcut templates. And I think we'll see it with any kind of object using float:right such as image thumbnails. I will investigate more in some day.

--David Göthberg (talk) 05:33, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Imbox

David, is it all right to start converting boxes to the {{imbox}} format, or should I wait until work on the template is done to reduce server load? Kelly ^hi! 17:35, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh no, the code there is currently just a mockup. It can not be used to make message boxes yet. We should probably state that on that page.

I hope this won't scare you off: Since this is a major standardisation thing we first need to announce it at the village pumps, then discuss it at the imbox talkpage, then deploy the CSS classes for it in MediaWiki:Common.css, then wait a month for the CSS caching in people's web browsers to time out so they get the new CSS code, then we can start converting templates to use {{imbox}}. Though we can speed it up by hard coding the CSS into the imbox so we don't need to wait the month for the CSS caching. (That will be some dirty coding, but I guess I'll do that.)

I suggest we announce the {{imbox}} and {{catbox}} at the same time. Coloured borders and coloured background have been the two main suggestions in the past, if people can see that both are needed but for two different namespaces then the discussion will be much simpler.

Could we wait some day to announce this until the new {{ambox}} have been deployed? That also gives us some time to fix the code for the {{imbox}} and {{catbox}}.

--David Göthberg (talk) 17:58, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Sure, I'm in no rush. God knows there is plenty of image work to be done aside from this, and it's worth waiting to make sure it's done right. Please let me know if there is anything I can do. Kelly ^hi! 18:01, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, there are some things you can do now:

• Checkout the first section of the {{imbox}} doc. I added some text there but left your signature since you started it out. Check if you still want your signature there or modify the text in such a way that you still want to sign it. That means you will be seen as the "manager" of the standardisation of {{imbox}}. If you remove your signature I will add mine there instead. If you like both you and I can sign both imbox and catbox?
• "Respond" on the talk pages of imbox and catbox to get the "discussion" started. Say what you think of the designs I suggest there and perhaps code up your own suggestions. If you look at the source of my examples on the talk page you'll see how to do it. Or ask me there if there is something unclear in those examples, since others are likely to wonder the same thing.
• Add anything else that you think of.

--David Göthberg (talk) 18:16, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh, by all means take my signature out of there. I only thought of the name and wanted to "reserve" it, you're doing all the work. I guess another thing I can do is to start drafting a proposed MoS page for image boxes, and to start compiling a list of templates to be converted. (This will be a job, as the image templates are not well-organized right now.) I also have to cross-check the templates for compatibility with the Commons versions to ensure they're not "lost" when images are transferred to Commons by bots. I'll also check to make sure there are no categories of image templates that won't fit into the organization scheme we have now (and might possibly need a new class) - nothing comes to mind right now but you never know. Kelly ^hi! 18:50, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Really, take your signature out of there? Ah well, I had hoped someone else would take care of managing the about 100 Wikipedians that will be frantically discussing this when we announce it. I am still recuperating after the ambox standardisation last summer...

But still, I would love your "response" on the talk pages of imbox and catbox. It will help when I/we announce this.

Ah good, the Commons stuff is very much not my area. Good that you take care of that.

MoS page? If you are going to do that then use the Wikipedia:Article message boxes as a starting point. And that gets us into the all important naming: Should we call it "Image message boxes" or the longer "Image space message boxes"? So will your guideline page be Wikipedia:Image message boxes or something else?

I think "catbox" should be "Category message boxes". So I could have named it "cambox" but I think "catbox" is clearer and funnier.

--David Göthberg (talk) 19:33, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

I think Wikipedia:Image message boxes and Wikipedia:Category message boxes is the way to go...and, yes, 'catbox' is funnier than 'cambox'. :) Kelly ^hi! 19:40, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Some template help

Hello, a user wanted to make an edit to an editprotected template, and added the request. But many admins seem wary of editing these scary things and it has not been fulfilled yet. I wondered if you can help, make the edit and sanity check that its is OK. Details here Template talk:Geobox image GameKeeper (talk) 21:47, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

I am currently a bit stressed since we are doing a major template deployment tonight. (344,000 pages involved.) I will take a look in some day. Sorry.

--David Göthberg (talk) 22:12, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] My RfA

Hi David, thanks for your co-nom and support during my RfA, which just passed. Good luck on your upcoming ambox 2.0 rollout, and let me know if you need any help or testing done. I'll be in touch with information regarding the upcoming navbox 2.0 upgrade. Thanks again, --CapitalR (talk) 01:05, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Congrats! I just noticed. And as expected you sailed through your RfA with more support votes than I got during my RfA! So now you are the second ever "template specialist admin", or as we call it jokingly "templatius administratorius". :))

And the new ambox was deployed an hour ago, without any hiccups from the servers at all, as far as I can see. So all is well.

--David Göthberg (talk) 01:24, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re-adding link in word wrap

When an anonymous user blanks something without explanation, it's usually considered vandalism. You also blanked the same content, but you're not anonymous, so if you had done it not as a reversion I would have just let it go. As a reversion of my own (admittedly COI) edit, I'd appreciate a little more thought: it's not enough to say that it's COI and therefore bad. I want to see an actual explanation for why you think the article is better not having that link. I'm sure it can be justified but you haven't even attempted to do so, and neither did the anon. —David Eppstein (talk) 15:33, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, from what I see you go around adding your name and links to your websites to lots of articles. I suggest you stop doing that. It doesn't matter that you happen to be an active Wikipedian and even an admin. Actually, that just means you should know better and that makes it worse. If you think a link to your sites and your name belong in an article you should suggest so on the talk page of the article and let others decide.

Personally the one time someone added a link from the English Wikipedia to my own research site with a somewhat misspelled version of my name, instead of correcting my name I removed that link and explained on the talk page.

--David Göthberg (talk) 15:44, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

1. Someone else added that link, here. I was merely undoing an anonymous editor's unexplained blanking of content.
2. We're not here to be doling out punishments for imagined crimes, we're here to build an encyclopedia. I asked for, and still haven't received, some evidence that when editing mainspace content you have in mind how your edit helps towards that goal. If you don't have that in mind, you shouldn't be editing here. So, please: come up with an explanation for why removing that particular link is an improvement. Better, come up with a story about how you had that explanation in mind the whole time and that preventing conflicts of interest was only secondary in your mind. —David Eppstein (talk) 15:58, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Imbox

I started pulling together imagespace templates at User:Kelly/Image maintenance templates so you can see the hodgepodge we have now. (The job is just beginning, there are more out there.) Also pulling together license templates at User:Kelly/Image license templates, but that's for a future project...they will not be suitable for {{imbox}} and I think standardization with Commons will probably be the best thing for them. Kelly ^hi! 02:59, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Ouch! That is a staggering amount of templates and a zoo of different designs. As it was with the ambox, it will be hard to decide on which "urgency level" (which colour) to use for many of those templates. Thanks for making those lists, they will help a lot during the standardisation discussions. I think you should add a link to User:Kelly/Image maintenance templates under a new separate section in Template talk:Imbox.

--David Göthberg (talk) 05:28, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Question concerning ambox

Though I've been following this somewhat for quite awhile, I'm not sure if I know all the opposition.

Hoping that maybe you know : )

What are/were the concerns about using ambox in category space? - jc37 14:57, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, the main reason was that people wanted to have distinct styles for different name spaces. So that it would be clear what kind of page one is viewing.

The distinct styles on the message boxes also serve as a signal to the editors about on what kind of pages a certain template should be used.

This of course creates problems for the message boxes who actually are meant to or happen to fit to be used in several namespaces.

--David Göthberg (talk) 15:09, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Nothing besides that? - jc37 15:12, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, now I remember one more: The ambox styles of course would clash with the already existing de facto styles for the other name spaces. Well, that was what I remembered of the top of my head. There probably were more reasons. It was last summer so I am starting to forget. You have to look in the archives over at Wikipedia talk:Article message boxes.

--David Göthberg (talk) 15:35, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

(smile) - I'm feeling the same way. Just was hoping you could recall more.

The main reasons, as I recall, all stemmed in one way or other from colour/shading concerns.

In addition, there are no technical concerns? - jc37 15:46, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Technically we can serve up any colours and patterns a computer monitor can handle. Want a pattern with Norma Jeane Mortenson in the border? No problem! (Well, apart from copyright.) And yes, I just read that article. :))

--David Göthberg (talk) 15:54, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

(de-dent) - Ok. SO it seems to me that the only differences between the templates will be border and shading.

I'd like to start a discussion "somewhere" to see if we can standardise these to all namespaces. Or (at worst) allow for an exception for imagespace (image pages are notably rife with templates).

Would be willing to help with the creation of such an mbox? (While knowing that there is a chance it may not gain consensus.) - jc37 16:25, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

There already are standards and CSS classes for message boxes in all the non-article name spaces. Just that people lately have been ignoring those standards for image and category space so much that we now have new de facto standards for them. See this discussion: Wikipedia talk:Article message boxes#Ambox limited to article space?

--David Göthberg (talk) 16:35, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Nod, was following that discussion.

In my opinion, ambox/messagebox/and all the rest could be merged. Especially if the only difference between them all will be the border and background.

Surely there should be a way to do that (besides using if|namespace). To use a sort of pseudocode:

(on "namespace" do x where x = whatever the border/background standard is for that namespace)

Though to be honest, I think we have mainly 2 (3?) options:

default (white?) background or colour scheme

default (black? grey?) full border or colour scheme

And if colour scheme, either left side only (current ambox convention), or fully enclosing (proposed imbox convention).

And for all deletion boxes, a pink background, with encircling red border for speedy.

So this could be easily implemented as a simple switch in the single template. - jc37 17:01, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, it might sound easy, but it isn't. I have worked with namespace detection since last summer for exactly the reasons you state above. I ended up creating {{main talk other}} and its sister templates. Also take a look at the CSS magic in the last section of its talkpage!

One of the problems is that for many of the templates we don't want them to automatically change appearance since they are only intended to be used in for instance articles. And if we make one such meta-template it would be very complex and not many editors would stand a chance of editing it correctly. Many admins who have edited {{ambox}} have broken it instead of improving it so they were reverted.

So after working with it for many months I decided it was easier to first standardise each style and code up each box by itself. Then to make things easy for templates that are going to be used in several namespaces we can make a "multibox" that detects namespace and calls the appropriate meta-template for that namespace. And that is the master plan I am working by now. (And now that you know my evil scheme I have to eliminate you if you don't promise to work with me. :// )

--David Göthberg (talk) 17:34, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

(Rofl)

I understand your reasoning. Having several boxes just seems too redundant to me.

Maybe the way to go would be to just have ambox coincide with mbox. ambox for mainspace, mbox for elsewhere. Then the (optional) switch could be whether the colour scheme would be indicated in the shading or the border.

For that matter, instead: Colour scheme=border or background or article

I would presume it would be a simple optional addition?

(This seems too simple, I feel like I must be missing something.) - jc37 17:43, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, I see what you mean. You and I think it is enough with one style for message boxes in article space and another style for all other spaces. Problem is that other people don't think so. Now we have the following styles:

• Article style (ambox).
• All talk pages style (brown).
• Image space style (de facto, some kind of coloured border).
• Category space style (de facto, some kind of coloured background).
• Other spaces style (old grey Wikipedia standard).

See? That is five main styles already. Each having a bunch of colours for different urgency and move and protection and so on. Getting all that into one meta-template will cause very nasty code. I promise, I have tried.

Ambox, imbox and cambox don't only handle the styles, they also have lots of code to handle proper flowing and margins etc. too. That adds to their complexity. I have been playing with different ideas like making a meta-template that only supplies the border and background, and letting another template handle the flowing, size and image parameters and so on. But that didn't work since the flowing, size and colours have to be specified in the same line of code, that is in the class="" and/or style="" in the table header.

The only approach that came close to solving it is the CSS only namespace detection method that I explain at the talkpage of {{main talk other}}. However that approach has two closely related problems: There is no way to have a demo mode for it, so we can not on a template /doc page test or show how a template is going to look in other namespaces. And we can not lock the looks of a template to a specific namespace since the CSS automatically will make it change appearance.

If you have a simpler approach, by all means code it up and test it and show it to me and every one else. If you make something better I will support it. But don't ask me to do it, I have already tried and failed since last summer.

--David Göthberg (talk) 18:51, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I dunno about better. Personally, from what I've seen you and the others seem to be great coders.

I really just think this is a case where we need to make it first, and then present it to the community for dissection : )

If I start a sub-page somewhere, would you be willing to help? - jc37 04:23, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, as I said, if you have an idea of how to do it, by all means code it up somewhere and test it. And sure, when you have something I'll be willing to take a look. Personally I have asked my subconsciousness to work with the problem, since I could not crack it yet. (That's how I often do in my day job as a researcher, and my subconsciousness is ridiculously good at cracking tough problems. Seems it is slower but way smarter than my conscious part of the brain.)

--David Göthberg (talk) 09:52, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Navbox upgrade soon

Hi David, I'm about to do my {{Navbox}} upgrade within an hour. There will be a few known side effects to some templates, but I plan on going through and fixing them all as soon as possible within the next few hours. After that, let me know if you see any that look funny so I can fix them, and look for others with similar problems. --CapitalR (talk) 01:45, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. I'll try to stay awake for an hour more then. I really want to see what happens when you update that one.

--David Göthberg (talk) 01:49, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Agreed.

Agreed. - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 02:23, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Monobook CSS

I have undone your last edit to Wikipedia:Catalogue of CSS classes because it was demonstratably accurate before, simply by viewing any page source in monobook (note that I've removed <script> and <meta> tags in this snippit):

<title>Wikipedia:Catalogue of CSS classes - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia</title>
<style type="text/css" media="screen, projection">/*<![CDATA[*/
      @import "/skins-1.5/common/shared.css?141";
      @import "/skins-1.5/monobook/main.css?141";
/*]]>*/</style>
<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="print" href="/skins-1.5/common/commonPrint.css?141" />
<!--[if lt IE 5.5000]>
<style type="text/css">@import "/skins-1.5/monobook/IE50Fixes.css?141";</style><![endif]-->
<!--[if IE 5.5000]>
<style type="text/css">@import "/skins-1.5/monobook/IE55Fixes.css?141";</style><![endif]-->
<!--[if IE 6]>
<style type="text/css">@import "/skins-1.5/monobook/IE60Fixes.css?141";</style><![endif]-->
<!--[if IE 7]>
<style type="text/css">@import "/skins-1.5/monobook/IE70Fixes.css?141";</style><![endif]-->
<![endif]-->
<style type="text/css">/*<![CDATA[*/
@import "/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Common.css&usemsgcache=yes&action=raw&ctype=text/css&smaxage=2678400";
@import "/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Monobook.css&usemsgcache=yes&action=raw&ctype=text/css&smaxage=2678400";
@import "/w/index.php?title=-&action=raw&gen=css&maxage=2678400&smaxage=0&ts=20080501205637";
@import "/w/index.php?title=User:Splarka/monobook.css&action=raw&ctype=text/css";
/*]]>*/</style>

I have also removed diff.css because that is a page-conditional css (only shows on diff pages). There are many other page-specific CSS and JS, such as on any page with a <source> tag, blocking pages, etc. The list had none present before, but if one is to be included, then most likely all should be included. --Splarka (rant) 07:20, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, upon reflection, that last paragraph may have seemed a bit rude. I simply meant that your addition of diff.css threw a lot more confusion into the list than necessary. In order to list diff.css there next to the monobook skin, we should be adding it to all the skins' lists (which involves testing which skins include it, and where). However, if we do that, we should include all conditional css and js files, which include most of the ones listed here (which is over 20) as well as the GeSHi syntax styles, and accurately position them for every skin they appear in, as well as annotate which pages they show up on. It would probably make much more sense to simply list them once in a separate section on Wikipedia:Catalogue of CSS classes like conditional styles and scripts, and indicate which page-types they appeared in. Thoughts? --Splarka (rant) 08:09, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, I received questions from editors where the .diff classes were declared so that's why I looked up and added .diff.css. I didn't know there were any other conditional CSS files. And sure, since they are many it would be a good solution to put them in a separate table in the Wikipedia:Catalogue of CSS classes.

Oh! I was wondering about the slight discrepancy between the source code and the tool I have in Firefox that shows what CSS files and .js files are active. I thought I misunderstood something in the code. Now that you have pointed it out I looked again. Silly me, the darn tool in Firefox lists the files in alphabetical order. Ouch! I had not noticed since that order happens to look right, for instance my user/monobook.css comes after the global mononook.css and so on. So seems you are right. Thankfully, with many eyeballs all bugs are shallow. Thanks.

--David Göthberg (talk) 09:37, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I've started adding the conditionals at [1]. --Splarka (rant) 22:38, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Understatement of the Year Award

Hello David:

I left this page on my watch list to try to further my education.

After watching for a few days, I'm nominating you for the "Understatement of the Year Award" for this sentence:

Expect this to take some months of study.

--David Göthberg, 28 April 2008

Cheers, Wanderer57 (talk) 16:10, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I didn't want to scare you too much. And besides I don't know what your web knowledge is now. Here's a more true estimate, based on doing it as a hobby say 10-20 hours a week:

1: Learning to code HTML fairly well: 1 year.

2: Learning to handle images for web pages: 1 year.

3: Learning to code templates for Wikipedia: 6 months - 2 years depending on if you have programmed in other computer languages before or not.

4: Learning to code CSS for Wikipedia: 1 year.

Of course, the time it takes to learn each step varies a lot from person to person. But I can tell that I had fun along the way so it can be worth it even if you have to start from scratch. Besides, much of this knowledge is reusable for all kinds of publishing on the Internet. So it gives you the full freedom of expression that the Internet has.

--David Göthberg (talk) 18:24, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Imbox question

Hello, David! I'm just wondering why we're using a different background shade for the license tags. Is this to match the license tags used at the Commons? If so, I think that it might be better for us to match the other imbox variants instead. —David Levy 02:21, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, both Wikipedia and Commons have used and still use different variants of boxes with grey background for licenses. Currently here at Wikipedia a bunch of coloured ones are used too. The grey nuances that you see in the imbox license type is one of the license styles that are currently in use here at Wikipedia and at Commons. This variant was suggested by Kelly and I and it seems several others instantly recognised it as a license template and it fitted well with the other imbox types so we choose it. Without a grey background it didn't feel like a license template and on image pages the license template is very important, so we allowed it to be special and have a shaded background.

By the way, I have noticed you have worked your background magic on the cmbox icons. Thanks a bundle! I checked them in my old IE 5.5 and they look fine. Except for the Image:Cmbox_protection.png that has a very light blue background, instead of the dark yellow-grey background that the protection type cmboxes have.

--David Göthberg (talk) 02:50, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation! Also, thanks for pointing out my error with the cmbox protection icon (which I just corrected). —David Levy 03:05, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] And it was all yellowwwwww

ViperSnake151 13:21, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Ah, perfect, thank you! Now we can make the docs for {{imbox}} complete.

--David Göthberg (talk) 13:27, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Watchlist notice

Seems that those who want to get involved have. Any objections to removing the watchlist notice? --MZMcBride (talk) 23:14, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, might to be time to remove it. Although we were planning to announce that we now are deploying the new standard. But guess that doesn't need to be done via a watchlist notice.

--David Göthberg (talk) 23:28, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Disabled. By the way, I also disabled the Wikimania sitenotice for anons today. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 23:40, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] CAT:SHORTFIX

Hey. Is it time to remove CAT:SHORTFIX from Template:Shortcut? --- RockMFR 22:06, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, we haven't received any old pages in CAT:SHORTFIX for some days now. (Just pages with fresh mistakes.) So in case you don't know already: I have updated {{shortcut}} and its sister templates with the new anchor functionality and removed the old detection that made it so one could feed the first parameter in two ways. If anyone now tries to feed the first parameter in the old ways it looks very ugly since it breaks the anchor code which causes a visible error. (That's why we first had to run CAT:SHORTFIX before we could add the anchor functionality.)

But I left the CAT:SHORTFIX detection in it just in case. Partly so we can help out, partly so the users get some kind of explanation when their box breaks, and partly since I have heard that pages are only re-rendered when visited and that might mean that some rarely visited pages might still be out there with old shortcut errors in them. I would like to leave the CAT:SHORTFIX detection for some weeks.

--David Göthberg (talk) 22:22, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] You reverted my addition to the See Also section of Template:Imbox/doc

It's an entirely new template, using code from imbox. I added the original feature to imbox, but it was reverted. Then I made a new template, that is almost identical to imbox minus 95% of the style templates. Can you please elaborate further on why it is not relevant? I don't understand. Thanks. CompuHacker (talk) 02:35, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Have you read the rest of the discussion at Template talk:Imbox#I added the "seetalk" param? Since you did not comment on the further discussion there it seems you did not.

Your template doesn't seem to be a meta-template to be used to build many different message boxes, instead it seems to be a single message box. There are literally thousands of such templates. We can not possibly list them all in the "See also" sections of ambox, {{imbox}} and cmbox.

Such message boxes are instead listed in other places, like in a subpage of Wikipedia:Template messages. But before you list your template there I strongly recommend that you advertise it on some talk pages, like for instance in the discussion I linked to above. That means other people can come and have a look and help you iron out the bugs. Because if you list an unfinished template on such official template lists then you will be reverted there too. Then when your template is finished, tested and documented you can list it in the proper subpage of Wikipedia:Template messages, which in your case would be Wikipedia:Template messages/Image namespace.

--David Göthberg (talk) 03:02, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] <br> or <br />?

This was written by David on Remember the dot's talkpage. Remember the dot then copied it here.

I noticed your edit to Template:Imbox/doc with the edit comment "XHTML compliance". I think an explanation is needed:

Which should we use? <br> or <br />?

Let's examine this step by step:

1: Writing the XHTML code <br/> without a blank is even against the recommendations of the World Wide Web Consortium, instead it should be written as <br /> since then HTML parsers can understand it too. HTML parsers will simply regard <br /> as a "br" with an unknown parameter "/", while they will regard "br/" as an unknown tag name. So we should definitely not teach people to write <br/>, but possibly <br />.

2: The "HTML" codes we use here at Wikipedia are not XHTML markup nor are they HTML markup, instead they are "HTML wikimarkup", since MediaWiki processes them just like wikimarkup.

3: Wikipedia mainly uses wikimarkup. The reasons for that is simple: Most people that edit Wikipedia are people who never have made a web page, so they know nothing about HTML, XHTML or CSS. So for them (and even for us old webmaster geeks) it is easier to use wikimarkup.

4: As far as I have seen the documentation for MediaWiki talks about "HTML in wikitext" and never mentions "XHTML in wikitext". Also up until recently all documentation listed <br> as the code for forced line breaks. But some months ago some XHTML enthusiasts went around and edited a lot of the help pages to show the <br /> or even the <br/>.

So which should we use? <br> or <br />?

Well, let's first ask another question: Which markup should we use for bold text?

• '''Bold'''
• <b>Bold</b>
• <span style="font-weight:bold;">Bold</span>

I think we all know that the wikimarkup '''Bold''' is the recommended one. Mainly because it is simpler to use, especially for the majority of editors that don't know HTML and CSS.

The same goes for <br> vs <br />. The HTML wikimarkup <br> is easier for the majority of editors to use, and it is shorter.

Sure, we have a "teaching opportunity" to teach people to use the <br />, but there is a very high risk that they instead will use the <br/> and that would be a bad thing. And believe it or not, many beginners have problems telling "/" and "\" apart. So they might even try to use the <br\>...

So again, the <br> is easier for the majority of editors to use, and it is shorter.

--David Göthberg (talk) 04:16, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

<br>, <br/>, </br>, and <br\> are all automatically converted to <br /> on the way out, so there's no danger of bad markup showing up to the outside world. I actually find <br/> more understandable than <br> because it clarifies that there should not be an ending </br> tag. It also helps teach good web design practices, namely XHTML, by example. —Remember the dot ^(talk) 04:25, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

So you seriously mean that Wikipedia editors should start using <span style="font-weight:bold;">Bold</span> since that is what W3C recommends, instead of '''Bold''' ?

--David Göthberg (talk) 04:30, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Of course not. That's no more consistent than '''Bold''' and much more complicated. The whole point of the / in <br/> is clarity and consistency. Using <span>s instead of wikimarkup is neither more clear nor more consistent. —Remember the dot ^(talk) 04:37, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] All your hard work

		The Template Barnstar
		You deserve a lot of credit for working on {{ambox}}, {{cmbox}}, and {{imbox}} then you give yourself. I hope you realize what a great contribution you are to this project, although you probably will never admit it. Thanks again, and remember, standardization! -- penubag  (talk) 04:26, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for all your hard work!

Oh, thanks Penubag. I am just doing it for fun you know. Well, at least most of the time it is fun. But yeah, now that "my" templates are used on at least 1.2 million pages I am getting a slight feeling of megalomania. Or perhaps that is not megalomania? After all, that is 1.2 million pages on one of the worlds most visited websites. A decent chunk of the human race is every now and then seeing "my" boxes and your icons! :))

--David Göthberg (talk) 01:53, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I know how you feel exactly! Makes me put the extra effort in those icons! :D -- penubag  (talk) 02:25, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] A little help (again) please (linewrapping in templates)

Hi again. Sorry for any déjà vu, but I'd appreciate your counsel here. (It's just to indicate whether I've misunderstood when and where the {{nowrap begin}}...{{·w}}...{{nowrap end}} makes a difference.) Sardanaphalus (talk) 00:18, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, déjà vu indeed. I have responded there. I hope that will clarify things.

--David Göthberg (talk) 01:55, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, David. Malyctenar's comments suddenly prompted me to think I'd been using {{nowrap begin}} etc unnecessarily, so I'm glad to be reassured otherwise. Ironically, I just passed by an example of the problem, so have added it to the thread on Malyctenar's talkpage. I've also made a permanent link to the thread in case I query my understanding again. Sardanaphalus (talk) 03:32, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] I'm back! Gimme more work!

Hi. I've come back to Wikipedia, and just thought that I'd let you know to feel free to pass some monotonous background stuff onto me, as you did with CAT:SHORTFIX, {{nowrap begin}} and {{documentation}}.

I thought I'd let you know about something I noticed before I went away, and that is that the list at User:Davidgothberg/Nowrap problems isn't complete. I now take a look at the templates on any page I visit and check it's okay, but there are so many that need updating! Can a hidden category be made such as the one at CAT:SHORTFIX so that it becomes easier to find templates in need of fixing?

So yeah, anything else that doesn't need an admin to do let me know, or if there is one, point me in the direction of the relevant Project or whatever otherwise I might just keep bugging you! -- Matthewedwards (talk · contribs · count · email) 00:47, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh, hi Matthewedwards! I am happy to see that you have found a new place to live! I hope your new "dwelling" is to your satisfaction?

Right, User:Davidgothberg/Nowrap problems is in no way complete. That is just a list of cases which I could easily detect through correlating the "what links here" for the different nowrap templates. Those cases are likely to be the worst cases. But as you noted the nowrap templates are used in MANY navboxes and other kinds of templates, and the number of templates using them has increased a lot since I made that list. So I am not surprised that you see a lot of other templates that use them in the wrong way.

Unfortunately such cases can not be detected from within the nowrap templates themselves, so we can not do as we did with CAT:SHORTFIX. To make a more complete list we must ask for someone to run a robot or database search to find the cases. And if they anyway run a robot they might be able to configure the robot to also fix the cases. Although nowrap usage is a little tricky so I am not sure they will be able to do it properly with the bots. I haven't got around to discuss this with people running robots over at Wikipedia:Bot requests.

So I don't have any fresh lists for you to work with. But since you are a native English speaker and I am not, and you are not me and thus might see things I have missed: I would like some help to check and correct the text of some templates and their documentation that I have created lately. And if anything in their explanations is unclear ask me and I'll explain and thus I will know what might need a better explanation.

• {{high-use}} – I think this one should be pretty straightforward to understand, so mostly a language/wording check.

• Please take a look at User:Matthewedwards/Sandbox/Template:High-use. I re-worded the template slightly, and will take a stab at the documentation later tonight. -- Matthewedwards (talk · contribs · count · email) 23:24, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

• {{main other}}, {{talk other}}, {{image other}} and {{category other}} and perhaps even {{main talk other}} and {{namespace detect}}. Some of these ones have pretty complex explanations and might only be really comprehensible for those that need to use them and thus have a feel for the usage situations. But would be interesting to hear how easy or hard they are too understand. Actually, once one have understood how they work they should be very easy to use since in a way what they do is pretty simple. So the tricky part seems to be to explain what they do.

• You're right these are a little complicated. {{main other}} seems to be transcluded on a lot of image pages, but a look at those pages doesn't reveal anything useful. I think it may be used on {{to commons}}, but I'm not sure. If you could explain in more detail how they are used, I may be able to help in some way. -- Matthewedwards (talk · contribs · count · email) 23:36, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Looking forward for your comments on this!

--David Göthberg (talk) 02:36, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

I like your rewording of {{high-use}}. I think we should use your rewording pretty much as is, except two details: I think we should keep "server load" instead of "server bandwidth" since it is not about connection bandwidth but about CPU load. That is, every time you change a template all pages that use it has to be re-rendered. And perhaps (but just perhaps) we should say "please discuss any changes" instead of "please discuss any major changes" since for the really high-use templates I think even tiny changes should first be discussed. Put perhaps people will think it is too much to ask that? Or something like this is perhaps in between: "please discuss your changes". Or would that sound weird?

I wasn't sure if "Bandwidth" was correct, but I wonder if the majority of users will understand "server load" and what it means regarding every page being re-rendered? Personally, I don't like second-person usage, so instead of "your", how about "please discuss any changes"? -- Matthewedwards (talk · contribs · count · email) 06:34, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Okay, as I thought. The documentation for {{main other}} and its sister templates are too bare bones. I was hoping that the "Basic usage" examples should do the job of telling what the template does, but now I remember that most editors don't know what things like "namespaces" mean, so more explanation is needed. And you are right that {{main other}} is used in {{to commons}}, or rather the template that that name redirects too: {{Copy to Wikimedia Commons}}. And that template is in turn used on a lot of image pages.

Have you looked at {{main talk other}} ? That is the first one I made and it has more extensive documentation, but probably too messy and confusing documentation.

I have taken a look at that, and it does give a usage example, which helps, but for me there needs to be more explanation about why these templates should be used. -- Matthewedwards (talk · contribs · count · email) 06:34, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

I think I will try to extend the documentation for one of them and then you can have a look at it. Instead of trying to explain it here. Or well, I need to get to bed so I'll get back to you on this.

Thanks for taking a look and for the improved {{high-use}} text!

--David Göthberg (talk) 04:18, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

I have copied the {{high-use}} part of this discussion to Template talk:High-use#Wording and continued there, since I think our conclusions here will be relevant for future discussions about that template.

--David Göthberg (talk) 18:54, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Infoboxes

There are several infoboxes which do essentialy the exact same thing, and have nearly the exact some entries. They typically only differ in the addition of 1-3 "extra" optional entries, and in colours.

In thinking about the mbox family of templates, and how they work, I'm wondering if something similar could be done for a certain type of Infobox.

To see some of what I'm talking about, check out: Category:Fictional character infobox templates.

Any thoughts/suggestions would be welcome : ) - jc37 19:02, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Ah, for once you ask something that has a simple and short answer. Check out the new standardised {{infobox}} meta-template and its talk page.

I don't do any work with infoboxes for several reasons, among other things since I never really used them and other things are keeping me way too busy.

--David Göthberg (talk) 01:27, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. I hadn't realised there was a "new" version of the template.

That said, even if that is used as the "base" template", I think it could be useful to have an intermediary infobox for ease of useability.

All infoboxes look like "x". All character infoboxes then would "call" Template:Infobox, and in addition, would have at least a certain set of specific fields, with the possible individual usage additions of up to (let's say) 3-5 more.

Is such a thing doable? (And yet still be somewhat user friendly : ) - jc37 00:49, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, very doable. Check out {{Navbox Musical artist}} which is exactly such an intermediary box, but in this case a navbox based on {{navbox}} instead of an infobox based on {{infobox}}. The same people seem to have made {{Infobox Musical artist}} which at the moment do not use {{infobox}} but perhaps will be changed to that if someone suggests that to them. But as I said, infoboxes are not my cup of tea, so talk with the people over at those templates.

--David Göthberg (talk) 01:10, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps not, but you would seem to be a great link/reference resource : )

And if I haven't said it yet, Thanks much : ) - jc37 01:15, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia talk:Article series#Merge proposals

Could you take a look at Wikipedia talk:Article series#Merge proposals? --Kubanczyk (talk) 10:17, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I will take a look. Might take a day or so since I have been a bit busy lately.

--David Göthberg (talk) 13:58, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Near-native English?

Oh, I just noticed your edit to my userboxes! Thanks for "nominating" me to the "near-native" English userbox! I am very honoured.

But I have to admit, I am cheating since I use a spell checking plug-in in Firefox and occasionally a dictionary. If you heard me speak you would notice my accent, my grammatical errors and my problems to find the words I need. Come to think of it, if you are curious you can watch my p2p talk at the Berlin Congress. There I pronounced "98%" so badly that most of the audience heard "90%" which caused a lot of confusion and weird questions afterwards. I really have to work on my pronunciation.

But again, thanks!

--David Göthberg (talk) 09:19, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Hey, it's not how good you are in meatspace, it's what level you can contribute at ;-)

And don't worry about having to use Firefox spell check – I have to too. I did look at your Berlin Congress talk and your accent is understandable, though if you went to the United States you would of course want to learn a slightly different-sounding one. Anyway, you're welcome for the well-deserved userbox promotion! —Remember the dot ^(talk) 04:20, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Ah yes, so I changed to a hard coded en-4 box with better wording. That is: "able to contribute with a" instead of "speaks at a". Just like the other English user boxes. And yeah, when non-native speakers like me travel we tend to adapt to the local dialect after some days. You should have heard me the last day when I had spent two weeks in a family in England. It was weird to hear oneself speak upper middle class British English. :))

--David Göthberg (talk) 13:55, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Quinzhee

Your talk contribution to Quinzhee was great. Why did you put it all on the Talk Page? May I move some of it to the article (e.g. the idea of piling the snow over something removable)? HLHJ (talk) 04:07, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh thanks. Well, I did add similar text to the Igloo article long ago before the Quinzhee / Snow house article was made. But the text was removed since some editors think that giving out advice is unencyclopaedic, even if the advice might save lives... So on the Quinzhee article I added the text to the talkpage since there it doesn't get deleted, partly in the hope that people would add it to the article (and re-add it if it gets deleted). So yes, feel very free to add it to the article! :))

--David Göthberg (talk) 04:25, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Unsigned

Thanks for signing my comment for me. There should be a script or bot or something to do that *joke*. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 04:30, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, there used to be a bot doing that. But I haven't seen that bot around lately. And feel free to change the "unsigned" note on your comment to a real signature, since it looks a bit silly. I always feel somewhat silly when I forget to sign so I usually fix it afterwards. No one has complained about that I fix my edits later like that, even if I fix them a long time later.

--David Göthberg (talk) 04:37, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Bot request

David, I have requested a bot to create template documentation talk redirects where required - would you like to offer an opinion? Kelly ^hi! 15:36, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh, nice idea. I have commented there.

--David Göthberg (talk) 16:29, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] "Disruption" warning you left

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, we remind you not to template the regulars, as you did on User talk:MZMcBride. Making a personal, specific comment will probably make for a friendlier and more productive atmosphere than using a template that treats the editor as a clueless newbie. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Rjd0060 (talk) 14:26, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

You gotta be kidding, right? For several months now he has been told many times by many editors (including me) in manually written friendly messages to stop his disruptive template talk page deletions. That has had no effect at all on him. So now I left a standardised warning template on his talk page since that is according to procedure AND I left a written explanation of the details several times longer than the warning template. Not using the warning template would be wrong according to the banning procedures as far as I know. So don't complain when I follow procedure.

And by the way, do you even understand the issue at hand? You only have a total of 17 edits to template talk pages in your user contributions.

--David Göthberg (talk) 14:34, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Are you implying that I must be clueless about Templates, Portals, and MediaWiki since I have low edit counts in each of those namespaces. - Rjd0060 (talk) 16:40, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Asistance with formating

Hello, I would like to ask you for some help. Is there a way to evenly spread the text in two columns, across their height? See here. I'm trying to reproduce the bottom of this document for Wikisource. Also, I can't understand why the signature images on the right place themselves under the text line, and not next to it. Please help me if you can. Thanks in advance! diego_pmc (talk) 06:48, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

I am a bit busy right now so it might take some day before I get the time to help you with this. But I want to help you. Feel free to ask some other editors for help meanwhile.

--David Göthberg (talk) 09:22, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Warning 2

Are you kidding? Someone creates an intentionally broken redirect and it is my job to (magically) know that and create the target for them? Is that some sort of joke? As Carcharoth pointed out, had I not been the one to take time out of my day to do the CSD#R1s, the bot would have deleted the pages just the same. And you leave me a warning? I used to have an enormous amount of respect for you and the work that you do with this project... --MZMcBride (talk) 14:47, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

In the vast wall of text I awoke to this morning, I didn't notice you'd also accused me of running deletion scripts again. I have no idea where that suggestion came from, but it's entirely untrue. I've had a one-click deletion tab for months. And, believe it or not, while I've done thousands of deletions, more than half were probably through batch tab opening.

You have access to deleted contributions. You can see that I not only eventually stopped deleting pages, I started tagging them for deletion. And instead of doing history merges, I asked Keegan to do them for me. A little assumption of good faith might be nice. --MZMcBride (talk) 14:56, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Warning warning

I have asked you to seek dispute resolution and you do not seem to have done so. Should you act on your warnings to block MZMcBride, you will find yourself in front of ArbCom. As you seem to like warnings, I thought I would give you this one. Physchim62 (talk) 15:32, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Non-standard image templates

David, I have found several image messages that were missed when we standardized to Imbox, where can I list them to have them standardized? MBisanz ^talk 20:29, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I've just been listing them at WT:IMBOX. Kelly ^hi! 20:29, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Ahh, ok, will do. MBisanz ^talk 20:29, 5 June 2008 (UTC)