FANDOM

2,054,148 Pages

Archive

Album Auto-Template

I was wondering if we could change MediaWiki:Lwtemp-album-template to include the correct album art parameter. What I mean is:

|Cover   = 

should be changed to 

|Cover   = {{ARTIST}} - {{ALBUM}}.jpg

Because the updated album template does not try to display art that isn't uploaded (even if it is specified in the parameter), this will not affect the page if the art isn't uploaded. Also, this helps prevents images from showing up in Special:UnusedImages if they are uploaded (they DO show up if the image was uploaded recently and the page does not specify the filename in the cover parameter, even if it displays on the album page). This should also, maybe, encourage people to upload under the correct filename. The only (slight) problem I see is that we're pigeonholing all the preferred images in jpg format, but it does not prevent other formats to be uploaded. It will require an edit to the parameter, but this problem already comes up if the image has a colon in it, requiring a specification of cover parameter again. Can anyone forsee any other problems that this could create? Or will this be fine to implement?

Also, does anyone know if we can get an auto-template working for image uploads? Something that puts the {{Albumcover}} template in the summary box (and possibly fill in the parameters), so as to encourage users to use it. It really helps when trying to sort out the unused files. --WillMak050389 21:18, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Second question first – I already asked Sean about that. Maybe you could give him a nudge…
As to your other suggestion, I really don't see a reason not to. Adding the parameter explicitly is preferable anyway, since it's easier on the servers than letting the template find it. — 6x9 (Talk) 21:26, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
I see you've changed it already and told me to be bold. I thank you for doing so, I only brought it up here because I didn't want some problem to arise from it, then I get chastised later for being too bold, but as I listed above there shouldn't be too many problems. As for the auto template, I guess I'll meander over to Sean's page for a good-old fashioned nudgin'. --WillMak050389 21:46, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
"Be bold" was mostly directed at myself, because I changed it without waiting for any further comments :-) Unfortunately it doesn't seem to work (yet), might have something to do with the job queue being stuck at 19… — 6x9 (Talk) 21:56, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
A-Ha!, so now you're the one we can blame when something goes horribly wrong. just kidding! Yeah, it isn't working yet, but probably just a cache needing refreshed or something. It would be nice if we could have a special page that lists the pages affecting the job queue (not necessarily the pages themselves that are in the queue, but stuff like "{{Album}} was updated leading to 20,000 pages in job queue") --WillMak050389 22:27, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Things are good: job queue is now down to 4 and it seems our little edit to the auto-template is working like a charms. Thanks 6×9 for the boldness, I'm going to go over there in the corner of the room and pat myself on the back for bringing it up (I'm the most humble person ever, because I'm so great). --WillMak050389 20:09, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

{{Policy in a nutshell}}

The use of this template puts the page into Category:Policy. This template has been put on several Page Ranking pages. This would not seem appropriate when you look at the definition of "Policy" here. So can I suggest that this template gets moved to Template:In a nutshell and the categorisation linking to policy removed?  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 03:18, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Might I suggest that rather than changing this template, the page ranking pages use {{Banner|image=Walnut.png|text=whatever floats your boat}} instead? — 6x9 (Talk) 15:27, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
But if we were to do that all the work Humbug put into making this template will be wasted because it won't be used. My way (i.e. renaming the template to make it more general) means it would be able to be used more. Maybe even to explain some of my lengthy posts ;)  ♫Яєdxx Actions Words 15:43, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
Best put this up for wider discussion on the admin portal, then. — 6x9 (Talk) 15:50, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
Well that certainly got everyone's interest ;)  Яєdxx Actions Words 22:40, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
I suspect only the four of us (Will, RD, U & I) have this page on their watchlists… — 6×9 (Talk) 22:45, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
(Kiefer looks on here too when he's not so busy.)
RD? I hope he comes back soon. I often wonder what happened to team a. Knowing he was into the gangsta scene don't exactly help. I do hope you are careful in what you do and that you're mindful of the baddies when you're out and about because I really don't want to have to miss you ;)
Yes, mum. (Considering that team a stole back in for a couple more edits after he disappeared, I doubt it's anything to do with that. There are other horrible possibilities of course, but I prefer to think he's just too busy.) — 6×9 (Talk) 04:56, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
Anyway, I'm still very much of the opinion that this template should be amended for wider use. Then it will be used more, because it could put in a nutshell (condense) any long and complicated information *cough*. If you weren't being so objectionable (goodness knows why) I'd have amended it by now :P  Яєdxx Actions Words 18:10, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
If you feel that it would be more useful (in other words, you would use it more) with a more general implementation, than I don't have any objections. Wikipedia uses it for policy pages so that those being directed to the policy page can read the Super-Condensed version without having to wade through the specifics and reasoning listed below it, but if you think that it would be useful in other ways...I'm okay with a change.    Kiefer    talk    contribs    admin   19:04, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
Thank you Kiefer. With regards to Wikipedia'a use of the template, they have far more policies than we do of course, so it’s worth the template being reserved just for that.  Яєdxx Actions Words 22:27, September 6, 2009 (UTC)
So what we'd want is something like {{Nutshell|type|condensed version}} with automatic categorising in case of type=policy? — 6×9 (Talk) 04:56, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
{{Nutshell}} — 6×9 (Talk) 08:37, September 6, 2009 (UTC)
Thanks 6!  Яєdxx Actions Words 22:27, September 6, 2009 (UTC)

SongFooter

Is there any reason NOT to make sorting in [[Cat:Songs fLetter]] case-insensitive? It's rather counter-intuitive to have "Title Of Song" appear before "Title of Other Song"… — 6×9 (Talk) 15:22, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

I would think it would be wise to make it case-insensitive. A lot of folks don't pay attention to caps. --    RainbowDragon    talk    contribs   19:08, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
And on the same topic… Should I change the akuma parameter from needing the complete URL to using only the ID? If so, is a bot available that can update all 0 pages? — 6×9 (Talk) 18:54, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
My preference would be to have the parameter only need the ID. --    RainbowDragon    talk    contribs   19:08, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
Whatever you think is best 6. And sorry but SandBot hasn't graduated so she can't assist in big projects.  Яєdxx Actions Words 19:38, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

localurl

…now prefixes the result with "/lyrics", meaning most (or all) of our Wikipedia links don't work. anchorencode might work instead (though I don't know how it'll behave with non-ascii characters), if not we'll need to use #titleparts (or one of the new parser functions). — 6×9 (Talk) 04:58, September 2, 2009 (UTC)

Community content is available under Copyright unless otherwise noted.