Template talk:Wiki/Archive 1

NOTE: this 'Template talk:Wiki/Archive 1' page is an archive of older discussions. Please place new comments on the currently active talk page of this archive, thanks!

Parameters[edit]

How about an ontolgy of this metadata - expressed in RDF it could be harvested from the wikis so people don't always have to update the pages at WikiIndex?

wiki_logo: URL of an image
wiki_URL: URL
wiki_recentchanges_URL: URL
wiki_wikinode_URL: URL
wiki_status: tag (Category:Wiki status) - selected set
wiki_language: tag/ISO-code (Category:Wiki language) - selected set
wiki_editmode: tag (Category:Wiki Edit Mode) - selected set
wiki_engine: tag (Category:Wiki engine) - relatively open set
wiki_maintopic: tag (Category:Wiki Topic) - open
wiki_name: tag (Category:Wiki) - open (this is an optional parameter. If not set the article name is used as wiki name.)

In MediaWiki it could be expored this way but also RDFa is possible. -- Nichtich 09:31, 22 August 2006 (EDT)

link to about instead of RC?[edit]

...wouldn't a link to an about page and an author page be WAY more handier than a recent changes? --Smiddle 18:41, 26 August 2006 (EDT)

actually no, a link to RecentChanges shows someone immediately what is happening at the wiki. MarkDilley

If anything, the "about" link should replace the wikinode. The wikinode idea doesn't seem to have widely caught on, but most wikis have some sort of about page. Really, a wikinode seems like just one kind of about page. If you took any other about page and added a list of seven similar wikis, you would have a wikinode, amirite? Leucosticte (talk) 08:49, 20 November 2012 (PST)

I agree that not every wiki site has a WikiNode, but it must also be said that I've also seen many wiki sites which have an empty 'about' link. Also bear in mind that not all wiki engines support the about url, whereas all wiki engines can potentially support a WikiNode.

Maybe we ought to have both . . . both the WikiNode and the About in the template . . . Sean, aka Hoof Hearted • _Admin • talk2HH 09:59, 20 November 2012 (PST)

Indeed. It's sort of like how mw:Template:Extension has both a "username" and an "author" field. The documentation for username says, "The author's username on MediaWiki.org (if they have one). May be omitted, but if present it will be used to link to the author's user & user_talk page. It should be provided without namespace and without [[]]s." The documentation for author says, "The extension author's name, if different from their MediaWiki.org username. Free text. If omitted then the 'username' field will be used (if present)." So there's an overlap between them, but sometimes you just need to provide one and it will take care of the rest. The fact that you include both parameters in the template doesn't mean that the rendered template has to show them as two separate items.

Also, it's possible for a bot to check MediaWiki:Aboutpage for the link (if the page is nonexistent, then it defaults to Project:About) and then see if there is any content there using mw:API:Query, e.g., http://en.wikipedia.org/w/api.php?action=query&prop=revisions&rvprop=content&titles=Project:About . Then the data about the existence and location of the about page can be pushed by the bot into the appropriate wiki pages on Wikiindex. Leucosticte (talk) 21:24, 20 November 2012 (PST)

boilerplate[edit]

Hi Smiddle. Great idea to have the boilerplate info closer at hand when looking at this template. I linked to our actual boilerplate as an alternative to what you did so that way things will always be up to date (no duplication that can become unsynchronized). TedErnst | talk 18:08, 28 August 2006 (EDT)

Seems I manged to figure out how to include the boilerplate here afterall. TedErnst | talk 11:24, 2 October 2006 (EDT)

if template[edit]

I notice since the if template was added, there are extra blank lines between the link to the site, the link to RC and the link to the WikiNode. Can we take those blanklines out? TedErnst | talk 11:24, 2 October 2006 (EDT)

Also, now that I think about this more, the entry for "No RecentChanges" or "No WikiNode" can serve as an encouragement for readers of this site to become editors, or editors at those other wikis to create wikinodes. I think that's important. Maybe if a site actually doesn't have a recentchanges page or has choosen to opt-out of the WikiNodes network explicitly (could be explained in comments on their page here), then eliminating those entries in their structured data here makes sense. Otherwise, I think it's still good to show "No WikiNode" and "No RecentChanges." TedErnst | talk 11:30, 2 October 2006 (EDT)

I edited it so that it says "No WikiNode/RecentChanges" instead of just blank. – Smiddle / T·C·S·A 11:34, 2 October 2006 (EDT)

Great - thanks! TedErnst | talk 11:49, 2 October 2006 (EDT)

Now it says [No WikiNode], with squared parentheses, which looks weird. That's kinda why I created the template, to make it with round parentheses. Just an opinion. – Smiddle / T·C·S·A 09:46, 3 October 2006 (EDT)

Author and about pages?[edit]

I know not all wikis have namespaces, but I'm sure most would have articles about the wiki and their author. Agree? – Smiddle / T·C·S·A 14:58, 16 October 2006 (EDT)

I agree, it could be the same kind of thing as RecentChanges and WikiNode, where it is optional Minun 15:13, 16 October 2006 (EDT)

Hope the admins agree, too. – Smiddle / T·C·S·A 15:40, 16 October 2006 (EDT)

Here's one person's opinion (not meant to lay down the law): adding a field to the structured data is a real pain in the rear. Wikis without that field end up with a broken entry and then there's a whole lot of data entry to fix everything up. See the Size issue for one way around the problem, making a new template that itself is optional. If you know something I don't about how templates work and can add the fields without breaking all of the entries that don't have those fields, then I'd say go for it. Otherwise, maybe just put links to that info in the body text for the wikis you most care about and see if it catches on as a concept. TedErnst | talk 17:58, 16 October 2006 (EDT)

I don't agree with adding the founder/author keys to the general template wiki. Each wiki has a founder/outhor but would you browse after it or make a desicion depending on authors? There may be Wikis that are more than only wiki, maybe like a wiki-based online game, in such cases authors will be interesting, but for normal wikis I cannot believe. So let's have an extra About template --Peu | talk 09:20, 30 October 2006 (EST)

The more I think about this, the more I agree with Wolf that author or founder should not go in the structured data. Of course you're free to put that information in the body of the description, but that's simply not information that makes sense as a category or way to search, nor is there even anything to link to, other than that person's name page on the wiki in question, but why would that be useful, in general? Every wiki has it's own structure, and to highlight one particular structure with a GodKing at the head doesn't make a lot of sense to me, as a rule. TedErnst | talk 12:23, 30 October 2006 (EST)

I think this sort of information may be more relevant on standalone wikis, where someone may be hunting for the person who can ban spammers. On Wikia, problems with the wiki can be sorted out by Wikia staff. They can even make a new person into the 'owner' of an abandoned wiki. Maybe a link to a page that lists all of the wiki's admin staff might be more useful (if that is available).

On Wikia, the applications for wikis get put onto the Central Wikia namespace, so you could theoretically find out more about their wikis there (including the original 'mission statement'). I'm not sure the information would be relivant to everyone.

Rather than changing the stats, I think it might be more useful to add a few headings to the boilerplate of the page. Headings like: 'Description', 'History', 'Administrators', 'Size' and the like, could encourage people to make standardised entries for wikis. More importantly, if you add headings (rather than have a long page with no headings) people can make direct links to a wikis size (or whatever). David Shepheard 06:28, 10 May 2009 (EDT)

wiki_name[edit]

Smiddle, can you tell me what this edit does? Thanks! TedErnst | talk 17:56, 16 October 2006 (EDT)

If you don't want the link to show as the page name. Example: The page's name is "A", but you want to show the link as "B". then, you enter "|wiki_name=B". 85.30.155.6 09:53, 17 October 2006 (EDT)

Sorry, forgot to login. – Smiddle / T·C·S·A 09:54, 17 October 2006 (EDT)

Ah, very cool! Thanks. TedErnst | talk 16:10, 17 October 2006 (EDT)

wiki_size[edit]

If we add a new named (optinal) parameter to the wiki template, we can display a readable default text and can easyly detect size-uncategorized wikis. See my Wiki/suggestion --Peu 18:43, 18 October 2006 (EDT)

Sure wish we'd known this trick about a year ago! I say go for it and make the /suggestion version live. I updated it to include all the fields as optional, the way you have Size. Very good! TedErnst | talk 19:11, 18 October 2006 (EDT)

By the way, what about the link to that wiki's statistics. What are you going to do with that? TedErnst | talk 19:12, 18 October 2006 (EDT)

I think with the other criteria, it will be the same trick, maybe the old pages than need to be purged (sidename?action=purge), that depends on the MediaWiki version and could be done using Wikipedia:Wget . have a good day. --Peu 01:05, 19 October 2006 (EDT)

Sorry, not sure what you're saying here. What I'm saying is that the Size template has not only the link to the size category, but also a link to the place on that wiki where the statistics can be found. If we get rid of the size template, where will we put the link to the statistics? Also, please remember that the whole world isn't running MediaWiki. There are lots and lots and lots of other engines, and we want to make sure they get fair treatment here at WikiIndex. TedErnst | talk 14:10, 19 October 2006 (EDT)

...oh, yes I'm working on it, my first reaction was too quick. Now I'm studying on MediaWiki-Templates on a localhost XAMMP installation, templates are so hard to understand
{{{ {{{ {{ |know |what ||I |mean }} }}} }}} - but I think it could be done in a generic way. The problem is now that given weblink-parameters do not concern to categories, right? --Peu 14:57, 19 October 2006 (EDT)

Sorry, I'm still not understanding. TedErnst | talk 15:47, 19 October 2006 (EDT)

(maybe my english is too poor:)

it seems the MediaWiki-Software changed its templating behavior from version to version (I have 2 mediawiki installations for testing: one is version 1.8.1 and one is version 1.5.6). I think i have to install mediawiki 1.6.5. The documentation of templates with default parameters is difficult to understand to me. Smiddle experimanted with templates too. He had added Template:If. I remember my own exercises before 1.8.1...

...My goal was to make a wiki-template that can be used to track (also future) Unknowns automatically, but the technical side is "verflixt zickig"_de --Peu 16:22, 19 October 2006 (EDT)

I don't think I'm asking a technical question. Maybe that's our confusion. The current size template has two fields of interest.

The link to the statistics page of that particular wiki. This link depends very much on the wiki engine of that wiki.
The size category.

My understanding of what you're attempting to do is to add #2 to the wiki template, but I'm asking about #1. What will happen with this link? TedErnst | talk 16:50, 19 October 2006 (EDT)

Oh, that I did not mention it: I targeted the Wiki-Template itself, because I think wiki size is important for wikiindex visitors. I would not be here if it wasn't so...The main criteria for each wiki should contain size and the corresponding weblink statistics. I think the layout of Template:Wiki should change therefor. But I have the tech. problems to contribute a working new template. (As I begun to add the Template:Size wiki by wiki, I felt to become confused about the question is a given wiki page size-categorized or not. That's why I stopped adding size tags and began work on a improved wiki template) --Peu 17:23, 19 October 2006 (EDT)

Let's do it!

|pages= <!-- type number of pages here, if unknown leave void -->
|statistics URL= No
|wikiFactor= <!-- optional. plain wiki factor value -->
|wikiFactor URL= <!-- optional. external link to data base for wiki factor calc. -->

I looked at it and am confused on how to move on this. Help?

Why not one of the extensions?[edit]

Why not one of the extensions. Parser Functions has the If, Ifeq, and Switch functions which could be used to allow the Wiki template to be edited so that things show up under only certain circumstances. The Ifs would show up in neater code, and the size, and statistics could be added to the template in a way that they only act when about wikis with certain WikiEngines. Dantman 18:01, 26 October 2006 (EDT)

Seems good, I use the parser functions already in my 1.8.1 MediaWiki in a few cases (#ifexist for subpages). For this 1.6.x version MediaWiki we have to make little changes to the extension. I'm not so experienced with templates and extensions as to decide wich technique would be better. --Peu | talk 09:38, 27 October 2006 (EDT)

I use 1.7.x at The Gaiapedia on wikia, and I plan to expand that to our own server sometime. But the parserfunctions have allowed me to create templates that I could never create otherwise. Ifexist could be used to make the specified logo only display when it is there. Actually, the Google Analytics extension would be nice to see so that possibly wikis who use it could track the productivity of them listing on WikiIndex, Or externally embeding a logo so that it stays up to date or it's viewage on the page could be tracked to understand how much the page is viewed.

Templates call a function that calls another page, and parserfunctions call a function that handles the content. So efficiency wise parserfunctions are better than a if template. Also the Switch function can be used to create content on the template that would only appear for certain circumstances, such as special sections for different WikiEngines. Also parserfunctions code is a lot less messier than code using the if template. Dantman 01:08, 28 October 2006 (EDT)

I would like the ParserFunctions too, We should make a suggestion to John Stanton who manages the backend for this wiki. --Peu | talk 03:53, 29 October 2006 (EST) (see also posting on gaiapedia) --Peu | talk 04:46, 29 October 2006 (EST)

I was looking at the ParserFunctions extension the other day for our new wiki, PortlandWiki.us and it really seems to provide a great capability for our templates. I'll load it up on WikiIndex sometime today and you all can check it out. I had not heard of the Google Analytics extension but that would be great for us also (we use Google Analytics to monitor WikiIndex and ICANNWiki). If either of these extensions fail under our current version I'll hold off until we upgrade. John 11:54, 29 October 2006 (EST)

The ParserFunctions Extension is installed with the suggested changes to make it work on 1.6. As usual with open source software the suggested changes were out of sync with the current version so you may see some problems, especially with the #Time notation. I haven't checked anything out (except that it didn't cause WikiIndex to fail :-) so you all can be the alpha/beta testers on this one! Have fun and let me know the results! John 13:16, 29 October 2006 (EST)

I installed the Analytics Extension but it does not seem to work (the demo on the extension page does not work either) so I suspect bad code or that Google has changed the api. Testing Analytics = <analytics uacct="UA-435152-3" ></analytics> Sorry! John 13:52, 29 October 2006 (EST)

Thanks, John, for your quick reply. --Peu | talk 15:00, 29 October 2006 (EST)

Yes, if seems to work fine for: Iftest and in Sandbox --Peu | talk 15:24, 29 October 2006 (EST)

Wiki/2, Wiki/3, Wiki/4[edit]

I think it would be useful if we could describe in words exactly what changes are being worked on with each alternative version of this template, and the status of each change. Could we fill this in? If you're just experimenting with something, please let us know that as well.

Wiki/2[edit]

Editor(s): Wolf Peuker, Smiddle

Intention

We should make the wiki size visible (as a main criterion for usability), with statistics links we can the size class keep on track. Wikis can be compared by size with the size classes.
The Unknown required parameters should be looked up easily for WikiIndex maintainers, thats why we should include the important unknowns into categories.
The layout should keep familiar to the old one.

Proposed changes

add parameter size (semantics from Template:Size) - Complete
add parameter statistics URL (semantics from Template:Size) - Complete
make the required parameters appear in the appropriate Unknown-category - some Complete
clicking the WikiLogo leads to the wiki URL - Open, must be done by hand or by User:Sean Fennels Bot.
correct the layout - some Complete

(3.+4. by use of the extension ParserFunctions introduced by dantmans suggestion)

Discussion

Wiki/3[edit]

Editor(s): Dantman

Proposed changes

Use if ParserFunctions instead of If templates - Complete
Adding wiki_size to the Template - Complete
Allowing the WikiStatistics URL to be included into the template for MediaWiki and other engines that support a statistics page - Complete
The ability to goto a wiki by clicking on it's logo - Waiting for the installation of the Custom Full/Local Image Extension

Discussion

Have you seen the discussion about the Founder field above? TedErnst | talk 17:39, 30 October 2006 (EST)

I didn't read that discussion on the author, All I realy did with this template was find every template that looked like it was something that was taken out of the Wiki template because of the former lack of complex functions and re-introduce it in a manor that couldn't have been done before. Note that By using No the founder row not only is blank and doesn't categorize anything, but the space it takes also disappears completely. Dantman 20:41, 30 October 2006 (EST)

Okay, I've removed "founder" from the template and boilerplate as they are not WikiIndex categories. Any entry at WikiIndex that wants to list their founder or any other people can do so in the description text. TedErnst | talk 12:41, 31 October 2006 (EST)

I think, if we ship Wiki/3 then we meet the Wiki/2 intentions fully: wiki size is included, the layout is acceptable, from my POV we should also check if the important unknowns are listed. I think, the "please upload logo" logo should be displayed instead of the text. BTW: the names of the nologo images are misleading. File:NoLogo.png means we have "no logo yet"; File:No Logo Uploaded Yet.png (previously File:NoLogoYet.png) means this wiki has "no logo". Could we change that sometimes. --Peu | talk 15:27, 31 October 2006 (EST)

Wiki/4[edit]

Status: launched on December 5, 2007
Editor(s): Koveras

Proposed changes

Add and optional parameter "wide_logo" which, if specified, makes the logo appear on top of the infobox and the external links to the main page, recent edits, and wikinode, directly below it (for the cases when the logo is not square and messes up the layout) - Complete
Apply <div style="white-space:nowrap;"></div> to external links - Complete
Remove redundant linebreaks within includeonly section that make an empty paragraph appear on top of every page where the template is used - Complete

Discussion

Well, I've noticed that some wikis out there (like TV Tropes and TYPE-MOON Wiki) use rectangular logos instead of conventional square ones. If you visit their articles, you'll see that it really messes up the the infobox. I tried tweaking the parameters and find some smart trick to compensate for it but to no avail, so I was thinking about adding a boolean parameter "wide_logo" which, if set, places the logo at the top of the infobox, and the external links directly below it:

LOGO
Wiki Name • RecentChanges • WikiNode
Status	Active

I wasn't sure if something that small is worth starting Wiki/4, so tell me what you think. :) --Koveras 06:36, 28 November 2007 (EST)

Would you, please, integrate it as an optional parameter into the original Template:Wiki, after having tested it as well-working with square logos too (maybe under Template:Wiki/4). Regards --Wolf | talk 06:56, 28 November 2007 (EST)

Done it. It's a quick and dirty solution, of course, and it needs some trimming but you'll get the idea. I've applied it to the TYPE-MOON Wiki article, please, tell me what you think. Also, I seem to have created that page in a wrong namespace: if you happen to know a friendly admin, please, ask them to delete it. ^^; --Koveras 12:28, 28 November 2007 (EST)

I've added the auto-categorization stuff, do you think it's ok now? --Wolf | talk 15:28, 28 November 2007 (EST)

Yes, looking good. :) --Koveras 05:29, 29 November 2007 (EST)

Also, I have removed some line breaks from the includeonly part, because they created an empty paragraph right on top of every wiki page, which is a waste of space IMO. :) --Koveras 05:37, 29 November 2007 (EST)

Yes, that's it! Your comment there "compressing a bit" was a little misleading. --Wolf | talk 06:13, 29 November 2007 (EST)

Oh, sorry about that. Well, I went ahead a trimmed the empty lines and comments to the minimum. I also applied nowraps to the links in the standard form of the template, and since I'm using block-level formatting, I've removed linebreaks to save some space. I think it's possible to launch it as it is now. Should I document the changes in the Wiki/4 section above? --Koveras 13:32, 29 November 2007 (EST)

Hm, a dumb question: what do we do now with the new template? --Koveras 11:43, 4 December 2007 (EST)

I think you should replace now the good old wiki contents with the new wiki/4 one, I've merged the old stuff already (I hope so). Do you have so much courage? --Wolf | talk 15:40, 4 December 2007 (EST)

What's there to fear? I'm confident in my coding. :) Should we perhaps put an extensive parameter list somewhere around here? Nichtich's one appears to have a somewhat different purpose... --Koveras 10:21, 5 December 2007 (EST)

Wiki/5[edit]

Editor(s):

Proposed changes

Change 1 - status 1
Change 2 - status 2
etc

Discussion

Hotlinking images[edit]

Aftet thge upgrade to MediaWiki 1.9.something, images can not be hotlinked. Either, we’ll make up a solution, or we must re-setup the hotlinking. – Smiddle/T C 11:48, 26 February 2007 (PST)

Probably just turned off inadvertently during the setup. — User:Sean Fennel @ 19:43, 26 February 2007 (PST)

Should be working now, check it out. John 19:35, 27 February 2007 (PST)

Currently, it doesn't seem to work. Given that the instructions seem to favor uploading the image, I have in several instances uploaded a logo which had formerly been hotlinked. --MarvelZuvembie 16:20, 14 October 2008 (EDT)

More protection?[edit]

You should really protect this template more. All a potential vandal need do is register, edit this, and BAM! The entire wiki is affected. That could seriously hurt.—Supuhstar* 01:04, 3 June 2008 (EDT)

Wiki license parameter[edit]

I reverted the addition of this parameter. This is not because I disagree with its inclusion. Rather, it appeared not to work right in certain cases. Specifically, it caused problems with Hitchwiki and Marvel Universe. I could not ascertain why the template failed in those instances, but not in others. Oddly, even now that I've reverted the template, these articles are still messed up. I'm not sure if my browser is failing to refresh the page, even though I'm forcing it to do so. Or, perhaps changes to the template take a while to broadcast, as nonsensical as that sounds. In any event, I thought it would be better to revert the changes until the kinks are worked out. --MarvelZuvembie 16:26, 14 October 2008 (EDT)

OK, now the aforementioned examples are working properly. I have not restarted my browser, although my session at WikiIndex did time out and I had to re-login. --MarvelZuvembie 18:36, 14 October 2008 (EDT)

But - what should I do now? At least to see what is happening I have to reintroduce the change...--Speckmade 18:47, 14 October 2008 (EDT)

Naturally. I expected you would change it back in order to see the error. But, I figured until you logged in next (which was quicker than I expected), I would revert it back to a stable version. It sounds like making it an optional parameter is the way to go. Thanks, MarvelZuvembie 19:03, 14 October 2008 (EDT)

Does it work now in a way you're comfortable with? hope so; should do...--Speckmade 19:12, 14 October 2008 (EDT)

Add WikiStats ID[edit]

suggest add to the template one space for "wikistats ID number"

whitespace 'nowrap'[edit]

Is there any reason why whitespace is set to 'nowrap' for the URLs? On articles with long names, it makes the infobox very wide, and can be quite overpowering on smaller screens. Here is an example - Srpskohrvatski Wikipedija / Српскохрватски Википедија. Discuss please :) Hoof Hearted 16:07, 21 June 2011 (PDT)

It makes autoformatting much easier in the vast majority of cases. In cases where the title is excessively long, the boolean parameter "wide_logo" should be used to force the URLs to appear under the logo. If that's still not enough, the title should be artificially broken into two lines with a tag in the "name" parameter. Like this. --Koveras 03:11, 23 June 2011 (PDT)

Koveras – thanks for your reply :). I agree that the name parameter can be used, and with a forced line break – I'm just struggling to understand why there is an aversion to not allow breaks in URLs :/ Anyway, I'll try to remember the name parameter in future! Rgds, Hoof Hearted 05:06, 23 June 2011 (PDT)

The aversion is there because a wiki title, as a single mnemonic unit, should normally not be broken, even if it stretches the infobox out a little. Also, "one link = one line" formatting is easy to digest, which is why the template normally strives to preserve it. If it obviously doesn't work, then it should be corrected manually, but such cases are rare... --Koveras 14:26, 23 June 2011 (PDT)

DEFAULTSORT[edit]

The problem with embedding a DEFAULTSORT within this template is that it means that you cannot then override it elsewhere in the wiki's entry. Consequently, we have several wikis sorted by the unhelpful word "The". --MarvelZuvembie 19:18, 12 July 2011 (PDT)

I've tried renaming a few articles listed on here - like The Ferry Wiki to Ferry Wiki, The, but keep the name line as 'The Ferry Wiki' — but this still sorts it in categories under the letter T. Maybe the {{wiki}} template needs looking at again, because it doesn't look very good sorted like this :/ rgds, --Hoof Hearted • talk2HH 05:21, 17 January 2012 (PST)

It seems that the name field of the template is the variable for the category sorting. Is that correct? Best, MarkDilley

It looks like it – but maybe the name field should be removed from the defaultsort command. The way I see it, the name field should be used to display the 'logical' or 'plain english' way of titling the wiki. IMVHO, the word the should not be used in the title of the article here on WikiIndex (unless there is a very strong and established preference for an individual site to use it - I can't think of any wikis at the mo, but as an off-track example The Times should stay, but not The Ferry Wiki). This is why I've renamed a few articles beginning with The, and then hoped that the name field would fix the 'grammar' issue. MarkDs' latest edit on Ferry Wiki, The didn't really fix the issue – OK, yes, it did fix the category display sorting, but then it messed up the grammar. We need a template wizard who can fix the Wiki template. Rgds --Hoof Hearted • talk2HH 01:45, 18 January 2012 (PST)

I've removed the DEFAULTSORT from the template . . . IMVHO, it would seem to be a very bad idea to permanently embed this in a template . . . the DEFAULTSORT magic word should be used only as an optional tool. The PAGENAME should be used as the default way of sorting pages in categories, not a template field. The 'name' template field should merely be used for 'prettyfying' any article page names which - say - begin with 'The'. Anyway, it was a BOLD edit to the template, and could potentially have disastrous results . . . so keep checking for any undesirable consequences from its removal, and revert my edit if needs be. Sean, aka Hoof Hearted • _Admin • talk2HH 10:39, 20 November 2012 (PST)

Name[edit]

Why is "name" a required field when the name of the wiki is pretty much always the page title? It seems quite redundant. Elassint, 08 15 2011

Probably for when two wikis have the same name or else to properly refer to wikis which have "The" in the title. --MarvelZuvembie 14:30, 15 August 2011 (PDT)

wiki_language1, wiki_language2, etc.[edit]

It would probably be better to support putting multiple languages, much as MediaWiki.org allows multiple hooks to be specified in its mw:Template:Extension/doc#Usage. Leucosticte (talk) 03:28, 13 September 2012 (PDT)

Is that a specific MW extension that needs to be installed? According to this, I can't find anything similar in the list. I'm not sure I'd support this . . . identical wikis of different languages (ie, en.wikipedia.org, it.wikipedia.org, ru.wikipedia.org) will all have their own separate article listing here on WikiIndex, with their 'mother' category or article using the {{Multilingual main}} template (rather than the default {{Wiki}}). For those genuinely single wikis which are multilingual (such as this WikiIndex), I think the current infobox lead language of 'Multilingual', followed by individual languages listed by tagging in prose or separate 'categories' at the bottom of the edit box will suffice. However, I remain open to this, and wait others opinions too. Hoof Hearted • talk2HH 04:40, 20 September 2012 (PDT)

Other useful parameters[edit]

For populating the interwiki table, it would also be useful to have parameters for iw_prefix, iw_url, and iw_api. iw_url can probably be inferred in many cases from the recentchanges URL, or maybe there is some other way that an automated script can figure it out. iw_api can be retrieved via Really Simple Discovery.

There is quite a lot of data that can be harvested from wikis using mw:API:Meta, and which could be pushed into this template or into another template. That extra data need not even be visible when the template is rendered; in other words, those parameters don't need to actually be used by that template. It could just be there for the benefit of those who use bots to obtain data about wikis. An alternative is that I could just store it in the interwiki whitelist. Perhaps it's better if WikiIndex mostly just have data that requires human intervention to gather, leaving the bot-gathered stuff for other wikis.

I'm thinking that stuff like extensions and namespaces, if they're to be included, should be stored in serialized form. Or there could be an extensions template with extension1, extension2, etc. as parameters, and this could put wikis in categories such as Category:Wikis that use the ViewFiles extension. Likewise, there could be a namespaces template that could put pages in categories such as Category:Wikis that have a Debate namespace.

It all depends on how you want to store data, and whether you want users to be able to edit it. My guess is that you probably don't want users to edit data that is retrieved by bots, because they'll likely degrade its accuracy rather than improve it. Also, having all those templates with so many parameters could fatigue users. Leucosticte (talk) 22:45, 21 November 2012 (PST)

About parameter problem[edit]

The about URL parameter isn't working properly for those pages that don't provide it; see Ardapedia (German). Leucosticte (talk) 07:11, 30 November 2012 (PST)

That's relatively easy to fix with a bot action. It simply reqires the blank |about URL = to be added to existing articles. A more serious problem is when the wide logo switch is used, it makes the infobox the full width of the screen!! - eg: Wikia Community Central (en) . . . as Bob would ask - "can you fix it" (search 'Bob the Builder' on YouTube) ?? Sean, aka Hoof Hearted • _Admin • talk2HH 12:31, 30 November 2012 (PST)

That would be great if we had a bot. Failing that, why don't we make it an optional parameter? --MarvelZuvembie (talk) 16:49, 8 January 2013 (PST)

MarvelZuvembie - do you have any experience with bots and/or the intricate template code required to make it optional? Sadly, they are both beyond my capabilities :( Best, Sean, aka Hoof Hearted • _Admin • talk2HH 13:18, 29 January 2013 (PST)

Please change

[{{{wikinode URL}}} WikiNode]

[{{{about URL}}} About]

into

[{{{wikinode URL|no}}} WikiNode]

[{{{about URL|no}}} About]

or something like that, because lots of pages do not define "wikinode URL" and "about URL". Thank you! --89.15.96.59 06:17, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

✓ Done I thought of this before, but one thing is that not entering doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. --YiFei | talk 08:59, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

I wrote "or something like that" ... ;-)

You can also do:

{{#if :{{{wikinode URL|}}}|[{{{wikinode URL}}} WikiNode]}}

{{#if :{{{about URL|}}}|[{{{about URL}}} About]}}

Right? --89.15.112.107 01:21, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure I should decide myself without discussing with the other admins. --YiFei | talk 10:33, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

It seems the template has already been fixed. On existing entries, if the About and WikiNode fields are missing, it already displays 'No WikiNode' and/or 'No About'. If they have a blank field, they still display OK. Can't see what the issue is now with this???? Sean, aka Hoof Hearted • _{Admin / 'Crat} • talk2HH 10:28, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

[{{{wikinode URL}}} WikiNode] means not to display any [No WikiNode] without wikinode URL being entered. --YiFei | talk 10:34, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

WikiApiary parameter[edit]

Should we have a parameter for the WikiApiary link for the wiki? Of course there's a bit of a chicken-and-egg problem in that often wikis aren't added to WikiApiary until they're added to WikiIndex. Leucosticte (talk) 17:07, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

~~{{support}} --YiFei | talk 03:36, 24 November 2013 (UTC)~~

Support, I like the idea. ~~ MarkDilley

Then the next question would be, where should the link go? (Above/below what)? Leucosticte (talk) 18:25, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Oppose — the wiki infobox (which is what this wiki template generates) should only have links in it which relate directly to the said wiki in question. I fully support co-operation between wikis, but I think if we want to indicate a wiki which we have catalogued here also has an article on WikiApiary, then we should create a separate template - similar say to the WikiTourBus template. Sean, aka Hoof Hearted • _{Admin / 'Crat} • talk2HH 16:28, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Mobile configured site[edit]

I think we ought to show in the infobox if a wiki has an additional configuration for mobile displays. For example, the English Wikipedia main site url is https://en.wikipedia.org, but its mobile configured site is https://en.m.wikipedia.org. I would suggest this parameter be placed alongside the logo, under the About URL - eg:

|mobile URL = https://en.m.wikipedia.org

Virtually all Wikimedia Foundation wikis have this facility enabled, as to all Wikia wikis – which means that all MediaWiki wikis can support a mobile config – but I'm not sure how many actually do. This would be a good addition to show those independent wikis which have made that extra effort to include mobile devices.

Discuss please :)) Sean, aka Hoof Hearted • _{Admin / 'Crat} • talk2HH 09:53, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Ofc, I like the idea. But not sure if that's a good place. --YiFei | talk 11:33, 13 December 2013 (UTC)