Template talk:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies
Appearance
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies template. |
|
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 2 months |
This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||
|
Edit request, 6 October 2024 - Update categories following move
[edit]This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Following a move of project categories, the following parameters need to be updated to include the Q+:
- PR_CAT = Requests for LGBT studies peer review -->
Requests for LGBTQ+ studies peer review
- PR_OLD_CAT = Old requests for LGBT studies peer review -->
Old requests for LGBTQ+ studies peer review
- TF_1_ASSESSMENT_CAT= WikiProject LGBT studies - person articles -->
WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies - person articles
- TF_1_MAIN_CAT = WikiProject LGBT studies - person articles -->
WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies - person articles
--Trystan (talk) 19:00, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- I posted a request at the Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_LGBTQ+_studies#Wikiproject_template_needs_urgent_update_to_fix_article_assessments to get attention to this as I think this Template talk is not watched a lot. Thanks for making the request itself. Raladic (talk) 19:05, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- Done Ymblanter (talk) 19:19, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- I think there is smth wrong going with the assessment cat though. Ymblanter (talk) 19:24, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- Done Ymblanter (talk) 19:19, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- I posted a request at the Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_LGBTQ+_studies#Wikiproject_template_needs_urgent_update_to_fix_article_assessments to get attention to this as I think this Template talk is not watched a lot. Thanks for making the request itself. Raladic (talk) 19:05, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
Template-protected edit request on 6 October 2024
[edit]This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change
TF_1_ASSESSMENT_CAT= WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies - person articles
should instead be
TF_1_ASSESSMENT_CAT= LGBTQ+ studies - person articles
thanks Raladic (talk) 19:25, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Ymblanter followup from above - yes - the assessment category doesn't have "WikiProject" as a prefix. Raladic (talk) 19:26, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- And apparently I also somehow missed to nominate Category:Old requests for LGBT studies peer review for move to Category:Old requests for LGBTQ+ studies peer review, I'll list it for CFDS now so you can move it in 48 hours and then update the template to LGBTQ+ studies, unless you want to do that move right now? Raladic (talk) 19:28, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- I updated the assessment which apparently caused a bunch of issues (assessment categories not created). For the old requests, they are already updated in the template, I will move the cat in 48h, if something falls into cracks in these 48h it will be back when the category is moved. Ymblanter (talk) 19:32, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- Sounds good, I formally listed the Old requests one at CFDS.
- Oh it looks like they should have WikiProject in the prefix, so I was wrong - refer to Category:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies - person articles and Category:B-Class_WikiProject_LGBTQ+_studies_-_person_articles respectively.
- can you try this:
- TF_1_ASSESSMENT_CAT= WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies - person articles
- TF_1_MAIN_CAT = WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies - person articles
- At least based on how the template was previously before the category moves, that should work I think? Thanks. Raladic (talk) 19:36, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- Ok yes, I got the missing link now, it should be WikiProject for both per my last comment here, but the missing link was a manual Category:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies - person articles by quality which also existed for the old page (see Category:WikiProject LGBT studies - person articles by quality, so I created this missing manual redirect, so now it will work fine if you do:
- TF_1_ASSESSMENT_CAT= WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies - person articles
- TF_1_MAIN_CAT = WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies - person articles
- I tested it in the Template:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies/sandbox.
- Can you please make this one last update @Ymblanter and then we should be good for now until the "Old requests" cat is moved :)
- Thanks so much for your help and apologies for the churn. Raladic (talk) 19:57, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- I think I have done it, pls let me know if something needs to be fixed. Ymblanter (talk) 20:03, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks, looks good now.
- Once the two categories I missed in my nomination are moved in two days (I listed them at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Speedy#Current_requests) we should be all good, but at least the main assessments and tracking ones are good now, so should all be back in working order.
- Thanks for your help. Raladic (talk) 20:07, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- I think I have done it, pls let me know if something needs to be fixed. Ymblanter (talk) 20:03, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- I updated the assessment which apparently caused a bunch of issues (assessment categories not created). For the old requests, they are already updated in the template, I will move the cat in 48h, if something falls into cracks in these 48h it will be back when the category is moved. Ymblanter (talk) 19:32, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- And apparently I also somehow missed to nominate Category:Old requests for LGBT studies peer review for move to Category:Old requests for LGBTQ+ studies peer review, I'll list it for CFDS now so you can move it in 48 hours and then update the template to LGBTQ+ studies, unless you want to do that move right now? Raladic (talk) 19:28, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
peer-review parameter
[edit]It would be helpful to deprecate the peer-review parameter in the documentation, to reflect that WP:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies/Peer review is inactive and peer review requests can instead be made at WP:Peer review. However, we would want to keep the documentation for old-peer-review and title parameters, which are still used for historical peer reviews that were done. The difficulty is that all of the peer review documentation is transcluded from {{WPBannerDoc/peerreview}}.--Trystan (talk) 19:30, 13 October 2024 (UTC)