Template talk:WPSchools

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This high-risk template is indefinitely protected from editing to prevent vandalism.

 This high-risk template has been protected from editing to prevent vandalism.
See the protection policy and protection log for more details. Please discuss any changes on the talk page; you may use the {{editprotected}} template to ask an administrator to make the edit if it is supported by consensus. You may also request that this page be unprotected.
WikiProject Schools This article is related to WikiProject Schools, an attempt to write quality articles about schools around the world. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.
Template This page is not an article and has, therefore, not been given a rating on the quality scale.
Schools Portal
NA This article has been rated as NA-Importance within Schools.

Contents

[edit] School districts

Does this template apply to school districts as well? --Geopgeop 08:16, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Categories

I have been putting this onto schools articles as and when I see them, but I noticed it uses two categories that dont exist:

Should these be created?

--Regan123 02:56, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, sorry about that. They shouldn't be red links anymore. Jh12 07:55, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:School.svg

The image Image:School.svg looks like it could do with a bit of work. The perspective is wrong and looks a bit messy, shall I work on a tidy up or replace with an image like Image:Apple-book1.svg? Richard Thompson (Talk! | Contribs) 11:43, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

I'd rather it remain a school house (Or something else denoting a school rather than education) and preferably not one that looks like a college but the current image could definitely use some reworking. That specific image (Apple-book1.svg) is the "logo" for the education wikiproject so using it would be a little confusing. This should probably be discussed on the Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject Schools page as that's where the most recent major changes were discussed. Adam McCormick 16:15, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Strange assesment banner formatting

Can't you have that assesment comment as a drop-down or something like most project assesment banners do? The current formatting is really ungainly, and at times ruins the talk page flow. Aditya Kabir 20:24, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

I would if I knew how. Can you point me to the pages on which this has caused a problem? Adam McCormick 23:05, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
Ok, I've revamped it and it's much more stable all-around (it doesn't tranclude the main template) Adam McCormick 21:13, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Move

You can now use the move parameter to specify a move, may need to change namespace at some point Adam McCormick 06:53, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Why wouldn't you just go ahead and move it? I don't see the point of this parameter. --kingboyk (talk) 19:06, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
I'd like to, but there is an obscene amount of debate that goes into what some of these schools should be called and how they are disambiguated. This is kind of a "Hey I think this needs to be moved, but dedicated contributors can decide" way of doing things. We tried it your way and caught a whole lot of flak from alumni and "friends" of specific pages. Adam McCormick (talk) 05:00, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
It seems to be broken right now (For example, see Talk:Denbigh High School, Luton) -- Ratarsed (talk) 19:47, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
It seems to be broken, I'll be looking into it in an hour or so if noone gets there first. Adam McCormick (talk) 23:07, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
Took longer than intended, but I've got a working version. Now just waiting on admin. Adam McCormick (talk) 06:13, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Should be fixed, let me know if more needs to be done. Adam McCormick (talk) 18:19, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] {{WPSchoolsAssessment}}

I have been building this template in parallel and I think its extra features are now sufficiently hidden. I will be merging it back into this template unless there are any objections raised. There should be no visually appreciable difference. Adam McCormick 17:46, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Needs infobox

Articles that were rated before this feature was added are now marked as needing an infobox because it's the default setting. Could someone please change this (or I'll see if I can do it when I have more time)? WODUP 19:26, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Done. WODUP 05:38, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
There are a significant number of assessments which operate on the assumption that the default is yes as well. I'm reverting it unless there's a better reason. Adam McCormick 18:26, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
I am in the process of writing a bot which will make this problem moot. See Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/BoxCrawler for my request. Adam McCormick 18:21, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
Bot has been approved-ish and will run through all 8000+ articles tinight and into tomorrow. I'll let everyone know in the morning when it's finished. Adam McCormick 15:00, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Concerning Size of Template

There has been concern from one editor concerning the amount of space this template takes up. I personally don't see it as an issue because the banner can be nested which will shrink it to a single line, but I'd prefer discussion to a revert war. Please let's discuss the "bloated" nature of this template before we slash it beyond usefulness. Adam McCormick (talk) 23:57, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Whilst i dont think the template is that big, it could be made smaller by removing the collaboration bits, i dont know of any other project that does that in their WP template. Your point about nesting them is a good one, and thats what should be done. Twenty Years 00:42, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WPSchools template examples

Examples of how the {{WPSchools}} template will appear under various circumstances can be seen here. There is too much space assigned to the left column pictures, which is casing the template to expand downward and take up more room than required. The template indicates that the "article has been marked as needing an infobox" even though the |needs-infobox= has not been specified or even listed. Some funky text appears below the template with all parameters are listed with no parameters active. The template does not work well when the small parameter is active. GregManninLB (talk) 00:20, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

The "article needs infobox" bit is not really an issue because we have a bot to correctly label any page using the template. Maybe the default needs to be changed, but the average newly placed banner is on a page that does in fact need an infobox. I agree that the current collaboration bit may be unnecessary. I've never actually seen the small tag used and I agree that it looks horrendous, but I'm not sure what to do about it. I don't think that the left column is an issue. The banner is not bad off and I'd like more input before we just change it. Adam McCormick (talk) 02:51, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
I have put together a "Bare Bones" version in the hopes that it will appear a bit cleaner and alleviate the concern. The smaller version is User:Alanbly/WPSchools. It may have removed too much but i would be glad for any comments. Adam McCormick (talk) 03:35, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
I've also fixed the move and category issues, so they should be merged in regardless. Adam McCormick (talk) 04:23, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
I've taken a crack at the "small" version and it (and the rest of the exemplars) can be found here. Adam McCormick (talk) 05:07, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
Looks better. However, there still seems to be too much space on the left and right side of Image:New School.svg in the template. That is causing the introductory text to fall over four lines. I think the code <table style="background: transparent"><tr><td width="150" align="center"> might be causing the problem and might be extraneous. Compare the upper left corner image spacing of Template:WPSchools with the upper left corner image spacing Football template and California template and you'll see what I mean. GregManninLB (talk) 14:39, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
  • I modified User:Alanbly/WPSchools to give a more stream line appearance. I also added Class options that should cover all situations. This is similar to the changes I made at Template:WikiProject California. The examples at test seem to be OK. The "small" version works. Some of the categories are listed as "articles" when they are not articles. We should revise the following category names:

I would be happy to take care of the category renaming. -- GregManninLB (talk) 14:54, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

The images looks better with space on the sides and even the large version of our template looks better than the football banner. The space makes it easier for the eye to parse, and while it my help to make is smaller removing it would be a mistake. But we need more input than you and I to make such a change since we disagree. Adam McCormick (talk) 03:47, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
I've put back the space and made the class and importance case insensitive. I added needs-infobox and move parameters to the small version. the new diff is here. I don't think the one line makes much of a difference, but the extra space does. I assure you, I rewrote the Banner from scratch and, except for the style stuff which I took from the older version, nothing in the structure is extraneous. Adam McCormick (talk) 04:06, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
The space looks horrible, and I'm all for reducing it. -- Ned Scott 04:09, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
The reduced version does or the one above? Maybe it's just my experience with web pages, publishing, or user interface design but it looks good to me. Pardon my sarcasm, but I think we need more input. Adam McCormick (talk) 04:16, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi Adam. I am fine with whatever you decide. GregManninLB (talk) 18:28, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
I don't feel strongly about it, so if you want to keep it that way, that's fine, I guess. I just.. I'm not a big fan of the extra space. -- Ned Scott 01:15, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Talk page templates provides a link to the "coffeeroll style" template discussion. WikiProject Council/Guide/Technical notes provides some code as well. Since Alanbly is the one maintaining the WPSchools template, again I'm fine with whatever Adam decides. GregManninLB (talk) 15:06, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
I've brought it up to compliance and reorganized a bit I'm going to ask that it be moved over. Thanks for the input! Adam McCormick (talk) 21:16, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Needs-infobox

Is it worth ignoring the "needs-infobox" parameter and treating it as a no, if the class parameter is set to "cat" (or "template")? In addition, is it worth allowing it to have some kind of splits, possibly in line with the stub classes (so for an article that would need an 'Infobox UK school', set to 'UK') -- I imagine this would be relatively easy for a bot to calculate too (So, in the above example, any page that is in, or has as a ancestor category, 'Schools in the United Kingdom'; I only suggest, as the category has over 12,000 pages in it now... -- Ratarsed (talk) 11:19, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Could you make a more specific proposal? Nothing you're saying sounds hard but I'm a little confused as to what you think needs doing. Adam McCormick (talk) 00:45, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
The bot already places a "no" if the page has a non-article rating. Adam McCormick (talk) 21:10, 27 April 2008 (UTC)