Template talk:NPP backlog

Initial NPP backlog template

To start, I suggest

>= 10,000 = high
5000-9999 = medium
<5000 = moderate

Unlike pending changes, the numbers don't change rapidly and crossing levels won't happen often. I just want to be able to display the current backlog in more places.

Let's not use the number-reviewed yet, since that includes redirect while the backlog does not. (I have opened a Phab ticket on that). MB 21:47, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thresholds

Per NPP discussion, template should use colors/thresholds like {{Pending changes backlog}} with the following values:

very low <2001
low 2001-4000
moderate 4001-6000
high 6001-8000
very high >8000

Jonesey95, I'm looking for someone to add the functionality to this template to behave like the pending changes one. I created this template from a copy of {{Pending changes backlog}}, and stripped out that code. It shouldn't be too difficult to restore it and tweak it for NPP. Would you be able to do that for us? Thanks. MB 06:13, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hike395, I just noticed Jonesey is on a month-long wikibreak. Would you be willing to do this for us? MB 06:52, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand how this works, so I don't think I can help. — hike395 (talk) 07:18, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

hike395, well, Noyster hasn't been around in a few years so I have to find someone to figure this out. The rest of the code I hacked up for the current bare-bones version is at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/NPP backlog. I don't understand why that bit isn't just within the template itself. MB 07:36, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Enterprisey: could you help out? DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 10:22, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@MB: I didn't want to hardcode the levels so it would be easy to change. I added a switch case in the template which should implement the levels. You should now be able to create templates with the level parameter similarly to how PCbacklog works. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 11:02, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
DatGuy, Thanks for getting the levels working. Did you change the bot frequency from 15 minutes to 2 hours? The documentation says 2 hours and that appears to be what I am seeing. Originally it was 15 minutes just like Pending change, what happened? MB 00:35, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I did. Take a look at https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User:DatBot/newpagesbacklog&dir=prev&action=history, it was editing in a very high volume with not much changing, unlike PCB. Even now, I could probably decrease the frequency further and it wouldn't be noticable, but I think 2 hours is okay. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 18:17, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree. I would like to see the backlog in realtime; 15 minutes was a technical compromise. People commented at the NPP talk page that they like the see an up-to-date count. The "volume" was just an edit every 15 minutes, by WP standards that is insignificant. MB 19:31, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I firmly believe that editing every 15 minutes to show the swings of ~5 pages rather than every 2 hours for ~20 pages is heavy overkill. However, if you start a discussion at WT:NPP or such that following three days or so of discussion reaches the consensus that 15 minute edits are indeed necessary, I will revert it back to 15 minutes per update. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 20:30, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The vandalism template updates every 15 minutes but only when the "alarm level" changes. Perhaps something like that could work. @DatGuy is there anything else you wanted help with? Enterprisey (talk!) 06:52, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No thanks, I figured it out. The level has been at the highest for last few weeks, so that wouldn't change the frequency. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 18:44, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

[ reply ] link shouldn't be displayed when this template is used on talk pages

Hi @Matma Rex. If you have a minute, was wondering if you have any suggestions on how to get this template to stop displaying [ reply ] on talk pages. I imagine the timestamp at the end is what is triggering this. Any suggestions for a workaround? Thanks. –Novem Linguae (talk) 03:05, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Novem Linguae, have you seen today's updates here? Maybe you can get that to work. MB 14:35, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think that won't help, that discussion is about the "empty state" on pages with no comments, while here we need to suppress the reply links on something that looks like a comment to the software. Matma Rex talk 20:31, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Currently we don't have any way to do this. There is discussion about it in T249293 and T295553, and I'm hoping that we'll convince everyone that it would be a good idea to add these features. It might help if you support it in those tasks as well.

If you need to fix this urgently, then you could do something hacky with TemplateStyles hiding the ext-discussiontools-init-replylink-buttons class. Matma Rex talk 20:30, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

More variations

Enterprisey, the {{pending changes backlog}} template (on which this was based) has a short version ({{Pending Changes backlog-short}}. There has also been a request for a way to switch off the colored text. If you want, you could implement both of those options (may be better to have option parameters instead of having separate templates). There is also {{Pending Changes backlog-defcon}}, but no one has asked for an NPP version of that yet. MB 18:56, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a little short on time and long on things to do, so noting here I may not get to this any time soon. Anyone who wants to work on it is free to. Enterprisey (talk!) 08:18, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I created a quick and dirty version in the sandbox. Use short=yes as a param. Please test it out before copying the code to the main template. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 11:14, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ignore this. the param has been changed to type=short and the discussion is continuing in another section. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 02:18, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Appearance ideas

I originally posted this at Wikipedia:Requested templates#NPP backlog visual improvements. But here are some ideas to improve the appearance of this template if anyone is interested. If I get time, I may take a stab at these myself.

replace monospaced font with regular font, probably by eliminating a <code> tag somewhere
eliminate > character at beginning
add a little bit more HTML/CSS padding (space between the text and the border, on all sides)
add a border so that we don't have to wrap this box in another box like we're currently doing at Special:Diff/1102444197.
change from display=inline to display=block behavior. that is, narrow your screen until the text wraps. Make sure it still looks good when wrapping.

Hope that helps. –Novem Linguae (talk) 08:09, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Novem Linguae: I'm no design expert, but I took a crack at it on Template:NPP backlog/sandbox. The block display mode can be tested with the |block=yes parameter; I didn't want that as the default since it would probably break the format on some existing transclusions. All of the styles (i.e. not just the current 'very high' one) can be viewed at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/NPP backlog/sandbox. (Side note: It seems like I broke the margin with the 'template sandbox page' header on the template sandbox page–not sure how or if it would only be isolated to that page, but I'll need to look into that.) Hope it looks good to you. PlanetJuice (talk • contribs) 21:18, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@PlanetJuice. Thanks for your time and effort! I think it looks pretty good. I think we could do width=90% or width=100% too, so that it's as wide as the page. @MB, thoughts on these two sandboxes? Are these sandboxes good enough to make the main template, or do you prefer the current? –Novem Linguae (talk) 21:44, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Novem Linguae, Am I doing something wrong. I tried to make a side-by-side comparison, but I get different results depending on location: User:MB/NPP_backlog and User:MB/sandbox#NPP_backlog_test. MB 22:35, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, not sure. Maybe PlanetJuice can figure it out? I like User:MB/sandbox#NPP_backlog_test #4 the best, although I recommend we reduce or eliminate the padding-top and padding-bottom. And also I recommend a border, probably 1px or 2px black. –Novem Linguae (talk) 22:42, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I don't think it should take up any more vertical space than necessary. I would also like it be centered when used above the NPP page tabs - but that can be done outside the template if necessary. The border would probably look good also. MB 22:50, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've made changes so that type=short works with the sandbox. Don't use short=yes anymore. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 02:16, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've also fixed the issue that MB had with the side-by-side comparison. Since most of the template isn't actually coming from the template page, I used a magic word trick to regulate when the code should be pulled from the sandbox and when not. Seems like that had some unintended side effects.

Everything else should be there. FYI, the border also exists (in a different color) on the other levels, and the template should be full width when in block mode. The padding was also reduced. I would maybe recommend changing the 'very high' colors to something more accessible, or at least the link text. PlanetJuice (talk • contribs) 02:23, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

PlanetJuice, the side-by-side comparison issue was my fault. (I had used a different style template, Wikipedia:New pages patrol/NPP backlog short. I've now changed it to use the same sandbox template that you've been using. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 02:28, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks everyone. We're getting close! Black on orange on white might not be the best color palette. Can we try text color black? Or feel free to try other tweaks you think that would improve the color palette. –Novem Linguae (talk) 02:30, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I updated the orange color palette, as well as the moderate text color. The very high one seems quite a bit better from where it was, but I'm not sure if it's great as is either. PlanetJuice (talk • contribs) 02:45, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also added a nocolor=yes / nocolour=yes option per the previous section on this talk page. PlanetJuice (talk • contribs) 02:59, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal to implement

Old:

Very high unreviewed pages backlog: 15487 articles, as of 04:00, 27 December 2024 (UTC), according to DatBot

New:

Very high unreviewed pages backlog: pages according to DatBot as of 04:00, 27 December 2024 (UTC) Awesome, that looks great. I'd be in favor of copying the sandbox over to the main template, and of implementing {{NPP backlog/sandbox|block=yes}} in Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Page tabs, and deleting the tan box around the NPP tabs. Pausing for comments from MB and others. –Novem Linguae (talk) 03:05, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. One more tweak. There appears to be a bunch of margin-top. Are we able to reduce or eliminate that? –Novem Linguae (talk) 03:11, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. There was a weird line break because of a comment at the top of the page. PlanetJuice (talk • contribs) 03:25, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good. The only thing we still need would be documentation page updates. MB 03:40, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Some basic parameter docs are now up at Template:NPP backlog/doc/sandbox. I also made a slight change to the optional parameters (block, nocolor/nocolour) so that they only actually trigger if the value is exactly yes, to prevent confusion. PlanetJuice (talk • contribs) 13:27, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome. Thanks PlanetJuice. I think we can go ahead and move all the sandbox stuff to the main pages if you want. MB is the main stakeholder and his comment above seems to support. –Novem Linguae (talk) 20:15, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. If we want to keep tweaking this template, for background colors, I wouldn't mind adding some yellow and lime green to the lower number ranges. –Novem Linguae (talk) 20:17, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to help out! It's implemented now, although the [ reply ] link still exists on WP:New pages patrol/Page tabs. I tried several different things to remove it, and it looks like the only way to get rid of it is with TemplateStyles, if that's how you and MB want to move forward. I'll take a look at the colors at a later time, unless someone else wants to. PlanetJuice (talk • contribs) 02:30, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If tried to fix it with [1]. Didn't help.-MPGuy2824 (talk) 02:47, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I copied the sandbox version of the doc page also, and added some examples to it to show the different options. The short version is missing fro the table though, could someone add that. At WP:VPT there was a discussion that a Phab ticket would address the reply link on TPs. I don't think this is so urgent that we have to hack something up temporarily. MB 02:49, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yeah, guess I forgot the doc page. Thanks. I'll add the parameter as well, since I forgot that too. PlanetJuice (talk • contribs) 02:53, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to revert this for now since it readds the line break which causes a large top margin. I'm also going to remove the __NONEWSECTIONLINK__ magic word, since that's suppressing the Add topic button for the rest of the talk page, which I don't think it should. It only fixes the link for talk pages, and it should be fine if that comes back for the time being since as MB said it isn't urgent. PlanetJuice (talk • contribs) 02:53, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, the [ reply ] button in the template isn't easily fixable due to a DiscussionTools bug. A DiscussionTools software engineer confirmed this in an above talk section. Agreed that removing NONEWSECTIONLINK is a good idea. –Novem Linguae (talk) 02:55, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Defcon

New pages patrol backlog

Very high unreviewed pages backlog

04:00, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

I created a defcon version, copying the colors (and code) from the PendingChanges backlog template. Use type=defcon, if you want to test it out on the sandbox -MPGuy2824 (talk) 05:11, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This was copied to the main template too. Add param type=defcon to display this. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 05:58, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Background colors

Novem Linguae, I just noticed you "snuck in" some background colors on all the levels. I thought we were going to follow Template:Pending changes backlog which uses orange on the highest level, and just colored text with no background on the other levels. Pending changes has red text for HIGH, and then the orange background for VERY HIGH. The backlog is going down again and was hoping it would get below 8,000 and out of the off-the-charts danger zone with orange background and into the normal zone with a white background. But with the current scheme, dropping below 8K will still have the in-your-face orange background and the only difference is High instead of Very high in the text. MB 01:27, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

snuck in. Dang. You caught me. Ninja fail!

Just kidding. No objections if you want to change it. –Novem Linguae (talk) 01:43, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@PlanetJuice, do you want to do this? I removed the background colors in the sandbox version, but it still needs colored text. MB 02:37, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've copied the font colors from the Pending changes template to the sandbox. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 05:54, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Looks fine to me. I think it can be moved to the live template if there are no objections. PlanetJuice (talk • contribs) 13:05, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Miscalculating

Hey @DatBot. Thanks for your recent edit, but it appears to have changed the logic calculation. The template is now incorrectly stating that the backlog is "low" instead of "very low". When you get a chance, can you please double check the logic and apply a fix? Thanks in advance. –Novem Linguae (talk) 11:52, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You're correct, fixed. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 11:55, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done in record time. Thank you. –Novem Linguae (talk) 11:56, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]