Site-local configuration source for sisters importing from here On English Wikisource
we have a couple of extra namespaces (Page: and Index:, provided by Extension:ProofreadPage
), and so have created a new "pmbox" message box. And on re-sync'ing changes from enwp recently we ended up overwriting the configuration for this message box. (we also caused other issues that we're still trying to track down, but that's to be expected for this type of deployment strategy)
In order to avoid that particular problem in future it would be nice if this module supported a Module:Message box/siteconfig
configuration module that, when it exists, is loaded and merged with the data from Module:Message box/configuration
. Bonus feature: letting site config override the standard (upstream) config in case there's a need to override
something rather than just add
to it. That way we can both maintain the "upstream" configuration through periodic imports from enwp, and have additional configuration that is enWS-specific, without having to re-merge our local changes on each import.
One of the reasons we import from enWP is that we (like many of the smaller projects) have very limited technical resources, so remembering and understanding the need to do this integration on each import, much less doing it correctly, is a relatively tall order. Having explicit support for site-local configuration in the upstream module would make this a lot easier for us.
PS. I'd offer to mock this up in the sandbox for your consideration, but this module is being a bit too clever (with the overridden __index method and dynamically generated function lookup table) for my limited Lua-fu. My assessment is that the proposed functionality shouldn't introduce excessive complexity or an unreasonable maintenance burden or performance hit here, but, again, the code is a little over the level of my Lua skills so I may be missing gaping pitfalls.
PPS. TemplateStyles, as requested above, would also be of help for this, for similar reasons.
PPPS. Come to think of it, it may be that support for site-local configuration could be beneficially added to mw.loadData()
to make supporting this kind of thing "free" for simple cases (probably not this one, since I don't think you can generalise the merging for arbitrarily complex datastructures, but possibly some common cases with simpler configuration needs). If anybody has ideas about this I would appreciate thoughts before I (at some unspecified point in the future) try to write that up for Phabricator. --Xover
) 09:46, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
As you can see here
, the sentence "Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page." is by default placed between the "issue" and "fix" parameters. Is that something new? Doesn't it make more sense to put it after the "fix" parameter? Debresser
) 00:47, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
Since there have not been any reactions here, I have posted about this at Template_talk:Ambox#Talk_location
as well, which may be the better place to discuss this. So I propose that future reactions should go there. Debresser
) 12:57, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
The "Submit an edit request" button links to Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors
instead of creating an edit request, so my apologies for any errant formatting here.
Please update the module with the two changes of "small" to "span" shown in this diff
. Note that the sandbox should not be copied in its entirety, since it has two other differences that I did not insert.
) 18:51, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
Fully-protected edit request on 27 June 2021
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
Having weighed the arguments I am not convinced that the case to perform the edit has been made.It is a case of want vs need. If need had been demonstrated then I would be having a different set of consideratiions. Where need is not demonstrated there is no argument to make the change. This is a discussion between two main protagonists. There can be no consensus demonstrated by such a closed discussion. My conclusion is No consensus, status quo obtains, edit request declined
. If arguments of need can be put forward in the future a new discussion should be held. FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me
18:50, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
smallParam = 'left',smallClass = 'mbox-small-left',
This is to make it possible to have a small left-aligned ombox template. Regards, DesertPipeline
) 02:24, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
I should probably test this first actually. Commenting out the edit request template for now. DesertPipeline
) 02:46, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
: My use case is as demonstrated on that talk page – being able to have a small left-aligned message box without having to resort to ambox outside of article-space. Is that insufficient? Please advise. Regards, DesertPipeline
) 08:48, 27 June 2021 (UTC)User:Redrose64
: Pinging again as I capitalised your username wrong the first time. DesertPipeline
) 08:49, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
Addendum: I'll try to expand on my rationale. It would be nice to have small left-aligned boxes for use outside of mainspace, because they're less clutter on a page, and sometimes you don't need a big centred box. Since the other boxes only do small right-aligned, they don't really work for a situation where you need something that should be noticed before text below the box. It's a more noticeable 'hatnote' for something. DesertPipeline
) 09:26, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
OK, but that's still a general "this would be nice to have" suggestion. What is the specific case
that you would use this for? That is, which page is the box needed on, and why would existing methods be unsuitable for that particular page? I'm sorry, but it is a fundamental principle of software development that you don't make a change without being able to justify it. First, establish the need for the change; demonstrate that the change would be beneficial and will not harm existing uses. As it is often stated: if it ain't broke, don't fix it. --Redrose64
) 19:59, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
: As long as whatever's preventing the right-aligned box from working with this gets fixed, it won't harm existing users. In my case, I would use it to request being pinged at the top of sections I start; I'm sure there are other uses. As I said, sometimes you don't need a big centred box for a message, but you still want it inside a message box. That would be what a left-aligned box would be for, as in article-space. Otherwise anyone who wants one has to use an article-space box for it.
Also, unless someone explicitly adds "small=left", it's not going to affect them (as the box would appear as it normally does without). "small=yes" would have to remain as it is (appearing right-aligned).
I don't really think this is a controversial change though. If you think it's a controversial change, please can you explain why? Thanks, DesertPipeline
) 03:48, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
have not stated where you need to use this. If you persist on being evasive, I shall shut down both discussions. --Redrose64
) 19:38, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
: I don't understand. I can't tell you where I need to use this, other than any non-article page where I might want to leave a message box smaller than a regular one, left-aligned and possibly width-variable. Again, maybe my most common usage will be on talk pages where I put a request to ping me at the top of a section I started. If you need more specific information than that, I can't provide it, because this is a request that I think would be generally helpful. In your opinion, is this change large enough that it needs a more specific rationale than that? I thought it was quite a small change myself. DesertPipeline
) 04:06, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
Essentially then, you're saying "I want this to be done because I want to have it", and not "I think that this should be done because it would be of great use at Talk:Foobar
, on which the existing tmbox template is unable to (fill in deficiency here)". -Redrose64
) 12:26, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
: The deficiency is that the other message boxes can't do what ambox can do. I requested it because I have a use for a left-aligned message box on pages which aren't articles, and I believe that it's an uncontroversial change, because it's making the other message boxes capable of displaying in a way that currently only ambox can.
Small, left-aligned boxes are useful because you don't always need a big centred message box for something, and a right-aligned message box is less noticeable, so more useful for cases where the information isn't that important (for instance, the "this edit request has been answered" box). The regular message box is good for important information, and a left-aligned box is good for slightly less important information, or for when you want to take up less page space with a notice. DesertPipeline
) 13:45, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
Nope. Still reads like a "nice to have", with no specifics. --Redrose64
) 20:55, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
Yes. It's a change with no demonstrable benefit. --Redrose64
) 19:15, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
: The benefit is that the other message box templates can then do what ambox can do; then there are more options when it comes to using message box templates. If this were not necessary, why does ambox have such a feature? Also, please consider that this change is not harmful, as long as the change is tested first to ensure it introduces no bugs. You may be against it, but do you consider it to be a bad change, or simply an unnecessary one? DesertPipeline
) 02:38, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
Both. It's bad because it will put thousands of pages into the job queue for no apparent benefit, and its unnecessary because you have not shown any necessity for it.
I've said it before, and shall say it again: Before making any change that will affect more than one page, you should demonstrate that there is a need for that change.
) 08:03, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
I'm sorry to have to say this, but "I want" is not the same as "I need". You have not yet shown any need. I am now going to request independent closure. --Redrose64
) 08:45, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
: I obviously don't "need" it; I'm not going to die if this change isn't made. However, I believe it to be a useful change. You say that it puts thousands of pages in the job queue after changing it – but isn't that worrying about performance
) 11:17, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
I would like to see a consensus on a particular template talk page that the small style is desirable for that template, before we think about adding it here. Consistency of message boxes is very important and we should not be adding new styles unless there is a demonstrated need. — Martin (MSGJ
) 12:06, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
: Would you say it counts as a new style even though it's a style that ambox already has, though? DesertPipeline
) 12:17, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
I still don't know what decides whether a left-aligned or right-aligned message box is used though. I've looked through this module's code and also the configuration module, and "mbox-small-left" doesn't even seem to be defined. DesertPipeline
) 14:10, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
If you don't know what it does, don't ask for it to be added. --Redrose64
) 16:48, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Return to "Message box" page.
Last edited on 13 July 2021, at 19:00
Content is available under CC BY-SA 3.0
unless otherwise noted.