Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Wikipedia essays/Archives/2013/June

Template:Wikipedia essays

This template ({{Wikipedia essays}}) combines the content of the 4 separate templates ({{Essays on building Wikipedia}}, {{Civility}}, {{Essays on notability}}, {{Humorous essays}}), into one location, for easier watchlisting / updating / organizing / non-duplication / discovery.

It was initially suggested and developed [above] at #Navbox separation or cohesion.

Continuing from the thread at the top (#2013 Update)... I'm making one last hesitant replacement run, before initiating full mass-replacement of the 4 individual templates (which will require a bot run), to make sure there are no last-minute objections/concerns. Today, I'm going to replace all instances (current count = 31 transclusions) of {{Humorous essays}} with {{Wikipedia essays|humour}} - please let us know here, if there are problems, or edit the template if it needs doing so. (And everyone should watchlist Template:Wikipedia essays :) –Quiddity (talk) 01:22, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Done going through {{Essays on notability}}. Now I shall pause for lunch, and allow any last minute complaints, before continuing on. –Quiddity (talk) 21:05, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

There is a problem, this diff changed {{Essays on building Wikipedia}} to {{Wikipedia essays|notability}}.  Unscintillating (talk) 21:13, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

@Unscintillating: If you check {{Essays on building Wikipedia}}, you'll see the essay Wikipedia:Inaccuracy wasn't linked within it! There were a large number of essays that had the wrong navbox linked. That's just one of the problems that this template merge is intended to fix. :) –Quiddity (talk) 21:19, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Where does it say I have to link within it?  This diff shows that the template was working.  Now, the essay template lists the essay as a notability essay, which is an error.  Unscintillating (talk) 21:50, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

@Unscintillating: It was listed in the "Notability" section of {{Essays on building Wikipedia}} from October 2011 until August 2012, at which point all the notability essays were merged from there into {{Essays on notability}}.

Re: Links within: WP:NAVBOX says "Every article that transcludes a given navbox should normally also be included as a link in the navbox so that the navigation is bidirectional." and that is standard practice for all namespaces.

If you believe that it belongs in a different section of the template, then we can of course change that, quite easily. Just say where, or be bold and fix it! :) –Quiddity (talk) 22:35, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Done going through {{Civility}}. Now a pause for RL, and to allow for any more last minute concerns, before I tackle the behemoth. –Quiddity (talk) 00:49, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Regardless of the edit in 2011, it doesn't make sense that an edit today says in the edit comment

(replace {{|Essays on notability}} (or other when relevant) with {{Wikipedia essays|notability}} - see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Essays#Template:Wikipedia essays for explanation & queries)

when what was changed was {{Essays on building Wikipedia}}.  Unscintillating (talk) 01:33, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

That's what I meant by "(or other when relevant)" - sorry that wasn't clearer. It's all correct now though, yes? (Given that I can't edit my old edit summary..) –Quiddity (talk) 01:39, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Another clue is that the categories for the essay are:

1. Wikipedia essays identifying problems and/or solutions
2. Wikipedia essays on building the encyclopedia
3. Wikipedia essays about verification

Yes, it is ok, except I've not seen the collapse work, even when I turn on Javascript.  Unscintillating (talk) 02:22, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Do other navbox-with-collapsible-groups templates work for you? eg the first section at Arithmetic mean#External links should be uncollapsed. –Quiddity (talk) 03:21, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

I looked around and I don't have any collapsed boxes anywhere.  I've seen them before, so maybe I set a preference.  Just be aware that some users have boxes that don't collapse.  Thanks for your follow-up.  Unscintillating (talk) 05:22, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Question...as this is were I was directed. This edit seems a bit odd the page is about the Philosophy of Wikipedia . Thr original template dealt with the philosophy of Wikipedia..... with the new template the info (links) are still there but now we have hundreds of links to completely unrelated topics. Are we sure making the template more complicated in this case will help our readers or simply cause them to have to weed through hundreds of links before obtain serviceable information. Can someone explain how humorous essays, essays on notability etc.. has anything to do with the page in-question? Need to make sure our actions are to help readers not simply spam links. Dame just realized this is being spammed all over ...I got a problem with this type of indiscriminate template spam!!!Moxy (talk) 04:37, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

@Moxy: I'm now done with updating the templates, per the discussion above at #Navbox separation or cohesion. I thought you were in complete agreement, though now that I re-read, I guess you only specifically wanted the pages that were merged in this edit, to get updated... Possibly re-reading that thread, and my comments below, will help for further feedback.. –Quiddity (talk) 04:59, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Now that all the pages that are listed in the template are transcluding the merged template by itself, it will hopefully help the Essays WikiProject to figure out how they wish to deal with the remainder. There are still dozens of essays that transclude various templates, but that are not included within them. (WP:NAVBOX suggests that all pages which use a navbox, ought to be included within it, and vice-versa). That, and to prevent duplication, and to highlight their interrelation, were part of the point of the merge. Sorry if you feel this was a problem, in certain instances or many instances, but I did advertise the proposal, and seek feedback in many places over a long time period. I'm totally open to suggestions for next-action. I don't have any further plans, at all, myself. –Quiddity (talk) 04:59, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Please think of our readers ability to derive serviceable information from a template - having hundreds of unrelated links is not helpfully in anyway on information pages or how to page. As for WP:NAVBOX - we must use commons sense when reading pages like this - just cause someone made a template with hundreds of links does not mean it should be placed on ever page dispite what the guide says. Adding a template that is 3 times the size of a page is not a good idea. Moxy (talk) 05:16, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

@Moxy: Is the auto-collapse not working for you? Everything except a single section should be collapsed, meaning that {{Wikipedia essays|building}} is barely any bigger than {{Essays on building Wikipedia}}. (And if it isn't autocollapsing, please check Arithmetic mean#External links and tell me if the first section only is expanded there?)

I'm trying to help make an imperfect resource (the collective essays of Wikipedians) a little bit better, and more coherent. I do grok the information-overload problem, but I also suggest that it is more than beneficial if the Civility Essays are always close beside the Building essays.

Suggestions welcome. Reverts are fine. –Quiddity (talk) 05:24, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

I understand what your doing.. but there are very different kinds of essays out there and they are (were) separated in templates for this reason - to separate there intent. On a serious page about how Wikipedia policy works or a page describing how to do something we have no need to link to essays about jokes or civility. As for auto-collapse - many of us have them set to open automatically as does most software for those with disabilities.Moxy (talk) 05:33, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Arg. Now I'm glowing red with embarrassment. Would you suggest a rapid mass-revert (I'll find a bot or something), or small selective-revert (as you've been doing), or leave it as is and wait for further feedback? –Quiddity (talk) 05:45, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

No need for mass removal I think - just need to remove them from policy related pages. Would also like to point out that {{Wikipedia essays}} is made up of other templates like of {{Essays on building Wikipedia}} so technically as per WP:NAVBOX the boxes is there...just a portion but it is there.Moxy (talk) 05:58, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Guidance essay

I've come across the term "guidance essay", and a search (WP:guidance....) does produce some results. But I do not see anything that really describes or defines what a guidance essay is. Can anyone assist? Perhaps a redirect towards an appropriate essay, as opposed to guideline, would help. Thanks.--S. Rich (talk) 14:03, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

I have also wondered what that means. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:42, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

I asked a few months ago at Category talk:Wikipedia guidance essays, and the response did not enlighten me. WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:02, 12 June 2013 (UTC)