Template talk:WikiProject Palaeontology

This template is within the scope of WikiProject Palaeontology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of palaeontology-related topics and create a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PalaeontologyWikipedia:WikiProject PalaeontologyTemplate:WikiProject PalaeontologyPalaeontology articles

Removal of the Cambrian Explosion taskforce option

I have removed the "Cambrian Explosion taskforce" as an option for this template since the taskforce is included under WikiProject Geology, and could cause potential confusion if listed under both. Additionally, the option was not functioning properly before I removed it. Hza a 9 (talk) 21:51, 7 February 2015 (UTC)Hza a 9 (talk) 21:51, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia requested images of palaeontology: Template-protected edit request on 14 September 2018

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

Would like the following code added to accept image requests and populate the existing Category:Wikipedia requested images of palaeontology.

|note 1 = {{{needs-image|{{{needs-photo|}}}}}}
 |NOTE_1_TEXT          = It is requested that a '''picture''' or '''pictures''' be [[Wikipedia:Uploading images|included]] in this article to [[Wikipedia:Guide to improving articles|improve its quality]].
 |NOTE_1_IMAGE         = Image-request.svg
 |NOTE_1_CAT           = Wikipedia requested images of palaeontology

Nessie (talk) 16:01, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done Enterprisey (talk!) 06:25, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge from Template:WikiProject Pterosaurs to Template:WikiProject Palaeontology

Please join the discussion on the proposed merge from Template:WikiProject Pterosaurs to Template:WikiProject Palaeontology. --Nessie (talk) 13:50, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Repairs from merge

@PC78, FunkMonk, and Trialpears: you volunteered to clean up after the merge of {{WikiProject Pterosaurs}}. Seems atleast 45 pages got removed from Category:Wikipedia requested images of pterosaurs ( 51 ) by [[User:[PrimeBOT‎|[PrimeBOT‎]]. Examples include Talk:Graphical timeline of pterosaurs and Talk:Mythunga. I can't figure out how to get them back in the category using {{WikiProject Palaeontology}}. --Nessie (talk) 17:02, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, volunteered? All I said was "'m sure a bot could do it." FunkMonk (talk) 17:04, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@FunkMonk: Well, a bot didn't do it properly. How sure are you now? --Nessie (talk) 17:56, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Someone has to ask a bot operator to do it. FunkMonk (talk) 17:57, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@NessieVL: Have a look at Template:WikiProject Palaeontology/sandbox. Not properly tested but it should do the job. PC78 (talk) 17:42, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@PC78:I used "Preview page with this template" with Talk:Mythunga and it didn't seem to add the image category. --Nessie (talk) 17:56, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@NessieVL: Never used "Preview page with this template" so I can't comment on that, but it is working. See the example I've posted at User talk:NessieVL/List of organisms with the shortest names. PC78 (talk) 18:20, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@PC78: Thanks, that seems to be working. Can you walk me through the changes? the diff is not very helpful in this case. Was it mainly using {{WPBannerMeta/hooks/taskforces}}? --Nessie (talk) 18:48, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Basically, yes, by using {{WPBannerMeta/hooks/taskforces}} for the three task forces and using |TF_3_HOOK = with {{WPBannerMeta/hooks/cats}} inside that subtemplate for the extra Pterosaur categories. If you need any more help with it just ping me again. PC78 (talk) 19:01, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@PC78: see {{WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles}} where I tried to do it there as well. --Nessie (talk) 20:16, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to be working ok? PC78 (talk) 16:51, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The "Preview page with this template" feature only works when you are editing the live template, and have unsaved changes that you want to see the effects of. You can use the feature when editing the sandbox, but only if there is a page out there which has {{WikiProject Palaeontology/sandbox}}, which is itself probably a mistake. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:14, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Redrose64: Gotcha. Thanks. --Nessie (talk) 20:16, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Primefac is the one to talk to since they are the operator of PrimeBOT. To add it using the WikiProject Palaeontology banner use {{WikiProject Palaeontology|pterosaurs=yes|pterosaurs-importance=high}}. ‑‑Trialpears (talk) 18:11, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The issue wasn't with the transition, it was the fact that |needs-image= in {{WikiProject Palaeontology}} wasn't populating the Pterosaurs category, an oversight which appears to have been corrected based on the discussion above and edits to the template. Primefac (talk) 14:52, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

NA-importance Book-Class Palaeontology articles

Whilst working on the Special:WantedCategories backlog, I've come across Category:NA-importance Book-Class Palaeontology articles. Looking at the three books within it, I suspect that the red-linked category (in breach of WP:REDNOT has been introduced by changes to this template, that books previously didn't have an importance set but now NA is being set by default. Is this the intended behaviour? I'm not too fussed either way, I just want the category either created or the template to not to display the red link category... Le Deluge (talk) 16:52, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Book-Class pages, like Category-Class, Template-Class (etc.) are always NA-importance by default. It's rare (virtually unknown) to set books to Top/High/Mid/Low/Bottom-Importance.

Anyway, until these edits were made, the banner didn't recognise Book-Class at all, and books would default to NA-Class. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:23, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]