Template talk:Wip: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Eabrace mNo edit summary |
imported>Sekoia No edit summary |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
:Oooo! I like it! --[[User:Eabrace|Eabrace]] [[File:Healthbar notify phone.png|20px|link=User talk:Eabrace]] 15:58, 21 August 2011 (UTC) | :Oooo! I like it! --[[User:Eabrace|Eabrace]] [[File:Healthbar notify phone.png|20px|link=User talk:Eabrace]] 15:58, 21 August 2011 (UTC) | ||
: There are two main advantages to providing date=: it tells you how long the page has been marked work-in-progress and it automatically updates the table at [[:Category:Work in Progress]] with that date information as well. The table (theoretically) makes it easy to go through and check articles that have been marked as WIP for a long time to see if they still need to be WIP. The last-edit trick, while useful in its own right, addresses neither of these two items and wouldn't make an appropriate replacement for date=. It would be providing a completely different piece of info on the article pages, and it would require us to completely remove the table from the category page because all entries would render in the table as either <nowiki>{{REVISIONMONTH}}/{{REVISIONDAY2}}/{{REVISIONYEAR}}</nowiki> or as the last edit date of the category page itself (I'm not sure which, I didn't test, but I know it won't render with the referent article's date). That isn't to say we shouldn't change; as discussed [http://www.cohtitan.com/forum/index.php?topic=3717.0 on the forums], date= isn't being used. But we should be clear that changing to this wouldn't fix the unused date= issue; it would be be removing an unused feature and adding something completely different and in many ways unrelated (except for the fact both are dates). -- [[User:Sekoia|Sekoia]] 18:06, 21 August 2011 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 18:06, 21 August 2011
Look at what interesting goodies I found while I was looking for settings details for my personal wiki:
- Last edit: 08/21/2011 by [[User talk:imported>Sekoia|imported>Sekoia]].
The above edit line will always be up-to-date with the most recent edit to the page, with a link to the talk page of the author of that edit. This could totally solve the issue with almost no one using date= on the current WIP template. At least we will have a "last edited" flag. The only downside is it will update on ANY edit, including bot edits and minor edits. I haven't found any way to ignore bots. Minor edits are debatable whether to be ignored or not (a lot of people on a lot of wikis misuse the minor edit flag, and post substantial edits/additions/removals under the minor flag). ~ User:Aggelakis/Sig1 11:23, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
- Oooo! I like it! --Eabrace
15:58, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
- There are two main advantages to providing date=: it tells you how long the page has been marked work-in-progress and it automatically updates the table at Category:Work in Progress with that date information as well. The table (theoretically) makes it easy to go through and check articles that have been marked as WIP for a long time to see if they still need to be WIP. The last-edit trick, while useful in its own right, addresses neither of these two items and wouldn't make an appropriate replacement for date=. It would be providing a completely different piece of info on the article pages, and it would require us to completely remove the table from the category page because all entries would render in the table as either {{REVISIONMONTH}}/{{REVISIONDAY2}}/{{REVISIONYEAR}} or as the last edit date of the category page itself (I'm not sure which, I didn't test, but I know it won't render with the referent article's date). That isn't to say we shouldn't change; as discussed on the forums, date= isn't being used. But we should be clear that changing to this wouldn't fix the unused date= issue; it would be be removing an unused feature and adding something completely different and in many ways unrelated (except for the fact both are dates). -- Sekoia 18:06, 21 August 2011 (UTC)