Module talk:WikiProject banner

Module:WikiProject banner is indefinitely protected from editing as it is a heavily used or highly visible module. Substantial changes should first be proposed and discussed here on this page. If the proposal is uncontroversial or has been discussed and is supported by consensus, editors may use {{edit protected}} to notify an administrator to make the requested edit.

Archives

Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16

This page has archives. Topics inactive for 60 days are automatically archived 1 or more at a time by if there are more than 4.

Category:WikiProject banners with ignored class parameter

This category contains a number of pages in userspace. The bot apparently does not process pages in userspace, so should we filter out these pages or should we change the bot's settings?

It seems that no user pages are looked at except from a few select bots listed below.

I can't remember why these exceptions were coded — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:50, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The configuration page also specifies PIQA_page_filter as /^User talk:(?:WP 1\.0 bot|AlexNewArtBot|InceptionBot|SDZeroBot|TedderBot|UBX)/. @Gonnym: can you give any background to this, why these users were specifically included, and why we cannot process all pages in this namespace? Thank you — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:31, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As Gonnym did not reply, I have removed the PIQA_page_filter so that these pages will be dealt with. If there are unforeseen consequences then please revert — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:41, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Those pages are not user pages but project pages. So having the bot fix those instances is in the interest of the project. Unclear why you removed as it everything was working correctly. Was there any issue posted somewhere regarding this? Gonnym (talk) 14:56, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As I explained, there were user pages being caught by the tracking category but the bot was not dealing with them and I wanted to understand why. By removing the filter, I have not stopped the bot working on any pages but actually extended its use across the user talk namespace. Is there anything wrong with this? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:30, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If it works, then great. But as far as I recall we told the bot to never work in the user namespace, this filter was the exception for userspaces where it still needed to work. I've not been following the changes so I don't have any knowledge of when this changed. Gonnym (talk) 15:05, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Automatic doc

Is the automatic documentation in a state that it can be globally applied? If so, we should change the way it's set. From |DOC=auto needing to be added to being the automatic default state and |DOC=manual (or something) needed when for some reason someone wants to use the /doc sub page. Gonnym (talk) 08:35, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's pretty stable but perhaps there are a few of the more intricate features which are not yet documented. How will you ensure that it will not be displayed if manual documentation is already shown? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:55, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In the module code, before adding the documentation, check if |DOC= is set to manual. If it is, do not add the automatic documentation (just like now when it isn't set to auto. Gonnym (talk) 08:57, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not quite what I meant! How will you know whether <noinclude>{{Documentation}}</noinclude> is on the template or not? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 22:14, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, maybe set for now a check if a /doc exists and if it does don't show the autodoc. Once the switch happens and we delete the docs, that check can be removed from the code. Gonnym (talk) 22:47, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Two questions. My memory is hazy, but I seem to remember reporting that DOC=auto does not work on templates for inactive wikiprojects. See Template:WikiProject Dartmouth College for an example. I think we may need to fix that. Also, is DOC=auto documented anywhere? I don't see it on Module:WikiProject banner. I might be looking in the wrong place, and I'm a little sleep-deprived today, so my apologies if I'm just missing something. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:44, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's also correct. We need to either add the full doc to inactive projects or add something there and not leave it blank. Gonnym (talk) 09:35, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have written a bit at Module:WikiProject banner/doc#Automatic documentation. For the inactive project documentation, I think the last time this was brought up I said that if someone would write the text then I would code it up, and this offer is still open! — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:44, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request 15 December 2025

This edit request to Module:WikiProject_ banner/config has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

To be consistent with other pages using Module:Check for unknown parameters please update the preview message to say "unknown" parameters instead of "unexpected" parameters. This would need to be done in the config file on line 147: Module:WikiProject_ banner/config#L-147.

Diff:

Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 19:33, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have made the change in the /sandbox. – Jonesey95 (talk) 07:03, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support this. Gonnym (talk) 10:34, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:29, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Adding an explanatory note for inclusion optional section

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Hey all, this was originally a request over on the Women in Red template talk page, but Pigsonthewing said it should be done to this central template for all Wikiprojects, rather than just on a one to one basis piecemeal. Basically, to summarize what I wrote over there already, this is to add an explanatory reason for inclusion section to the template to be used for articles that someone else might question why that article falls under the Wikiproject's scope. The change to the LGBTQ+ studies template can be seen here and the section in use can be seen on Talk:Eleanor Roosevelt. Silver seren^C 18:43, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand why that request was declined. We could add it here but it's probably not a feature that will be needed by more than a handful of projects. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:17, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Would you be willing to implement it for Template:WikiProject Women in Red then, MSGJ? Whichever way it gets implemented doesn't matter to me, so long as the capability is available when using the template. Silver seren^C 08:06, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to have a look but not able to do much for a few days — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 22:52, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's the holidays, so that makes sense to me. I may ping you next weekend as a reminder, which hopefully won't be too pushy. Silver seren^C 00:07, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I declined it because adding a feature to multiple subtemplates (even "a handful"), rather than as an optional feature to one parent template, is wasteful and redundant. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:23, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion continuing at Template talk:WikiProject Women in Red#Template edit request for adding an explanatory note section — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:03, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]