![]() | To help centralise discussions and keep related topics together, please discuss this template at Wikipedia talk:Template messages/User talk namespace instead of here. |
Maybe modify questions sentence:
? Joja lozzo 17:35, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
Noticed Moonriddengirl's recent note on the icon for this template. I agree, it's a little off-putting and non-specific. Out of commons:Copyright, commons:File:Control_copyright_icon.svg seems appropriate. Any problems with changing the template to use this? I'm also tempted to reformat somewhat, as it is rather a wall of text and will cause tl;dr issues for many newcomers. Cheers, Basie ( talk)
Please see Wikipedia talk:Template index/User talk namespace#Uw-copyright-new. Thank you CapnZapp ( talk) 10:23, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
A version in the sandbox is undergoing development to add an optional bolding feature for bullet items. (Inspired by this discussion.) An initial version appears to work on very basic tests, but this is *not* thoroughly tested, and may break 100 different ways. Functionally, this will be a non-breaking change with no impact on existing wrappers, APIs, etc. that transclude the template (and since it's substed, it should matter even less). Usage might be like this:
{{subst:uw-copyright-new|bold=3}}
– bold bullet three of the body textRevision 1114540972 appears to be working, but still requires unsubsting code to be added for parser conditionals, and a test cases page to be created (forthcoming). The next step is to provide bolding for specific text strings shorter than an entire bullet item. This could look like this:
{{subst:uw-copyright-new|boldtext=[[Fair use]] images must meet all ten}}
– bold the given string in the body text (1st occurrence)Please consult the sandbox doc here → Template:Uw-copyright-new/sandbox/doc for a description and examples.
This latter function (boldtext param) requires use of a subtemplate to prevent recursion, and appears to work for one test in revision
1114574084, but is still in testing. Also, I believe there will be an exclusion for pipe character and curlies in the |boldtext=
param, but haven't tried that yet.
I wasn't planning to mention this upgrade proposal so soon, but an eager editor moved an early version to live before it was quite ready, and I had to undo it, but it should be ready fairly soon. (If it's really *that* urgent, we could just forget about |boldtext=
for now, roll back to rev. 1114540972, add the unsubsting code, doc, and testcases, and just release the version with only the |bold=
param.)
The other thing is that before releasing anything, I wanted to discuss the functionality and especially the parameter naming, with a broader group. It would be worth spending the time to get buy-in from more editors and get this right, because if this gets released and starts to be adopted, it might become a de facto standard for other templates if editors wanted similar functionality upgrades to other templates. Once that happens, the genie is out of the bottle, and it will be hard to change the parameter names and functionality after that point, so before that happens, let's air this a bit. (The first thing that occurs to me is that 'bold' is limiting, and 'style' is more general; but perhaps too much so? Maybe just bolding is enough; too many possibilities or options might make it less useful if it's less clear. I feel unsure about this, and would love to hear from actual users of single-use templates how they might want to use such a feature.)
User:Whpq, as you were the original inspiration for this idea, you should have dibs on first response. Meanwhile, I'll poke around and see where I might link this from. Cheers, Mathglot ( talk) 08:01, 7 October 2022 (UTC) added clarifying text, by Mathglot ( talk) 01:52, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
It's a great feature to add. I understand the need to carefully consider the parameter name. Perhaps something like "emph=" as the reason for this is to emphasize one specific element or portion of a message. Would it be possible to integrate this with Twinkle? Perhaps post a notice about this discussion at the Twinkle talk page. -- Whpq ( talk) 11:59, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
|bold1=
, |bold2=
, etc, so that something like |bold3=yes
would bold that particular bullet point. It would save on some of the recursion, avoid the need for a subtemplate, and make updating a little easier.|b1=
, |b2=
etc, but rejected it initially for two reasons:
|bold3=yes
would not save on recursion or subtemplating; that's readily doable with simple #if statements. The subtemplate is only necessary for the |boldtext=
param (or at least, I see no easy way to do it without it). If we decide not to implement 'boldtext', then we can dispense with the subtemplate.|only=3
seem good, or can you propose something?
Mathglot (
talk) 01:19, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
Hoping to stimulate some feedback from users of {{
Uw-copyright-new}}, I compiled a list of users who have placed several of them: @
Diannaa,
DanCherek,
Doug Weller,
Justlettersandnumbers,
Deepfriedokra,
Moneytrees,
Sennecaster,
Meters,
Moonriddengirl, and
Darkness Shines: (roughly in frequency order). Your thoughts on the proposal above to add two new params (|bold=
and |boldtext=
) would be appreciated. To see some sandbox examples of how it will look in action, please go to
Template:Uw-copyright-new/sandbox#Examples. Thanks,
Mathglot (
talk) 06:42, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
Notice: Avoiding copyright problems on [[page name]].
That being said, I really like the idea of bolding the relevant point(s), and if this were implemented now I would certainly give it a go (but might ultimately default to Twinkle's efficiency). I also think "bold" is sufficient, not "boldtext".
DanCherek (
talk) 12:30, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
Just noting that some of the complications regarding pattern matching of |boldtext=
may relate to how
Template:Str rep (which is transcluded by this template) does pattern matching of patterns with trailing blanks; this is discussed at
Template talk:Str rep#Pattern match irregularities. Thanks,
Mathglot (
talk) 09:32, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
{{str rep| Dogs chase cats. | cats | mice }}
⟶ Dogs chase cats.{{str rep|Dogs chase cats.|cats|mice}}
⟶ Dogs chase mice.␠cats␠
not cats
, which fails to match because in the search string, 'cats' has a period after it, but in the pattern, there is a significant blank after it.
Mathglot (
talk) 19:13, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
This seems to have rough consensus, or at least, the discussion quiesced and no objections were raised, so I've released this. (There is also a new testcases page.) These are non-breaking changes, but I've left courtesy advice notices at Twinkle and Ultraviolet (Red Warn) just to let them know anyway.
By the way, I agree with User:Meters's comment above about how long and overwhelming the message is, especially for the newbies for whom it is ostensibly designed, and would welcome initiation of a discussion on how to improve it. Bullet four would be a good place to start. Mathglot ( talk) 23:58, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
![]() | To help centralise discussions and keep related topics together, please discuss this template at Wikipedia talk:Template messages/User talk namespace instead of here. |
Maybe modify questions sentence:
? Joja lozzo 17:35, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
Noticed Moonriddengirl's recent note on the icon for this template. I agree, it's a little off-putting and non-specific. Out of commons:Copyright, commons:File:Control_copyright_icon.svg seems appropriate. Any problems with changing the template to use this? I'm also tempted to reformat somewhat, as it is rather a wall of text and will cause tl;dr issues for many newcomers. Cheers, Basie ( talk)
Please see Wikipedia talk:Template index/User talk namespace#Uw-copyright-new. Thank you CapnZapp ( talk) 10:23, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
A version in the sandbox is undergoing development to add an optional bolding feature for bullet items. (Inspired by this discussion.) An initial version appears to work on very basic tests, but this is *not* thoroughly tested, and may break 100 different ways. Functionally, this will be a non-breaking change with no impact on existing wrappers, APIs, etc. that transclude the template (and since it's substed, it should matter even less). Usage might be like this:
{{subst:uw-copyright-new|bold=3}}
– bold bullet three of the body textRevision 1114540972 appears to be working, but still requires unsubsting code to be added for parser conditionals, and a test cases page to be created (forthcoming). The next step is to provide bolding for specific text strings shorter than an entire bullet item. This could look like this:
{{subst:uw-copyright-new|boldtext=[[Fair use]] images must meet all ten}}
– bold the given string in the body text (1st occurrence)Please consult the sandbox doc here → Template:Uw-copyright-new/sandbox/doc for a description and examples.
This latter function (boldtext param) requires use of a subtemplate to prevent recursion, and appears to work for one test in revision
1114574084, but is still in testing. Also, I believe there will be an exclusion for pipe character and curlies in the |boldtext=
param, but haven't tried that yet.
I wasn't planning to mention this upgrade proposal so soon, but an eager editor moved an early version to live before it was quite ready, and I had to undo it, but it should be ready fairly soon. (If it's really *that* urgent, we could just forget about |boldtext=
for now, roll back to rev. 1114540972, add the unsubsting code, doc, and testcases, and just release the version with only the |bold=
param.)
The other thing is that before releasing anything, I wanted to discuss the functionality and especially the parameter naming, with a broader group. It would be worth spending the time to get buy-in from more editors and get this right, because if this gets released and starts to be adopted, it might become a de facto standard for other templates if editors wanted similar functionality upgrades to other templates. Once that happens, the genie is out of the bottle, and it will be hard to change the parameter names and functionality after that point, so before that happens, let's air this a bit. (The first thing that occurs to me is that 'bold' is limiting, and 'style' is more general; but perhaps too much so? Maybe just bolding is enough; too many possibilities or options might make it less useful if it's less clear. I feel unsure about this, and would love to hear from actual users of single-use templates how they might want to use such a feature.)
User:Whpq, as you were the original inspiration for this idea, you should have dibs on first response. Meanwhile, I'll poke around and see where I might link this from. Cheers, Mathglot ( talk) 08:01, 7 October 2022 (UTC) added clarifying text, by Mathglot ( talk) 01:52, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
It's a great feature to add. I understand the need to carefully consider the parameter name. Perhaps something like "emph=" as the reason for this is to emphasize one specific element or portion of a message. Would it be possible to integrate this with Twinkle? Perhaps post a notice about this discussion at the Twinkle talk page. -- Whpq ( talk) 11:59, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
|bold1=
, |bold2=
, etc, so that something like |bold3=yes
would bold that particular bullet point. It would save on some of the recursion, avoid the need for a subtemplate, and make updating a little easier.|b1=
, |b2=
etc, but rejected it initially for two reasons:
|bold3=yes
would not save on recursion or subtemplating; that's readily doable with simple #if statements. The subtemplate is only necessary for the |boldtext=
param (or at least, I see no easy way to do it without it). If we decide not to implement 'boldtext', then we can dispense with the subtemplate.|only=3
seem good, or can you propose something?
Mathglot (
talk) 01:19, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
Hoping to stimulate some feedback from users of {{
Uw-copyright-new}}, I compiled a list of users who have placed several of them: @
Diannaa,
DanCherek,
Doug Weller,
Justlettersandnumbers,
Deepfriedokra,
Moneytrees,
Sennecaster,
Meters,
Moonriddengirl, and
Darkness Shines: (roughly in frequency order). Your thoughts on the proposal above to add two new params (|bold=
and |boldtext=
) would be appreciated. To see some sandbox examples of how it will look in action, please go to
Template:Uw-copyright-new/sandbox#Examples. Thanks,
Mathglot (
talk) 06:42, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
Notice: Avoiding copyright problems on [[page name]].
That being said, I really like the idea of bolding the relevant point(s), and if this were implemented now I would certainly give it a go (but might ultimately default to Twinkle's efficiency). I also think "bold" is sufficient, not "boldtext".
DanCherek (
talk) 12:30, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
Just noting that some of the complications regarding pattern matching of |boldtext=
may relate to how
Template:Str rep (which is transcluded by this template) does pattern matching of patterns with trailing blanks; this is discussed at
Template talk:Str rep#Pattern match irregularities. Thanks,
Mathglot (
talk) 09:32, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
{{str rep| Dogs chase cats. | cats | mice }}
⟶ Dogs chase cats.{{str rep|Dogs chase cats.|cats|mice}}
⟶ Dogs chase mice.␠cats␠
not cats
, which fails to match because in the search string, 'cats' has a period after it, but in the pattern, there is a significant blank after it.
Mathglot (
talk) 19:13, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
This seems to have rough consensus, or at least, the discussion quiesced and no objections were raised, so I've released this. (There is also a new testcases page.) These are non-breaking changes, but I've left courtesy advice notices at Twinkle and Ultraviolet (Red Warn) just to let them know anyway.
By the way, I agree with User:Meters's comment above about how long and overwhelming the message is, especially for the newbies for whom it is ostensibly designed, and would welcome initiation of a discussion on how to improve it. Bullet four would be a good place to start. Mathglot ( talk) 23:58, 8 November 2022 (UTC)