Template talk:Admin dashboard

This administrative dashboard was designed to assist admins in focusing their efforts whilst wielding their mop and bucket. It can be displayed in your userspace by typing  to transclude it. You could also change the order or eliminate sections by transcluding the subpages separately. New features can be requested below or simply edited in yourself. An alternate version of this template can be found at dashboard.

Features

 * When there are any attack pages or users looking for help, or when the candidates for speedy deletion category exceed 50 (i.e. backlogged), those rows will turn red
 * When there are empty or user requested candidates for speedy deletion, those rows turn green (because you can usually "GO" ahead and delete them ;>)
 * When transcluded, the page will automatically have SoxBot create your adminstats pages if it has not already been created
 * It transcludes Cyde's articles that have been proposed for deletion for at least five days, but keep in mind they might not be eligible for deletion *just yet*
 * The purge button will ensure you get the most up-to-date information (add this link to your quick links toolbar for great justice)
 * When there are current outstanding requests for rollback or account creator, a new section will appear in the table of contents called "WP:RFPERM (rollback)" or "WP:RFPERM (account creator)".
 * Non-admin users are free to utilize the dashboard, and may use the parameter admin=no to suppress the adminstats portion as the bot will not calculate admin stats for non-admins

Comments
I just added the following to my monobook.js so I'd have quick access to my local copy of the dash. Should be easily modifiable if you want to jump right to the template instead.

--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 16:44, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Cool! On the subject of admin monobook enhancements, i've got User:Xenocidic/twinklewarn.js (blocking level of warning selected by default) (now handled by  in Twinkle config), and also the below script will move the toolbox and search menus above interaction and navigation.

// this moves the toolbox and search box to the top of the left sidebar function menu_move_to_top(menu_name) { menu = document.getElementById(menu_name); if (menu) { p = menu.parentNode; p.removeChild(menu); p.insertBefore( menu, p.firstChild ); } } addOnloadHook(function {   menu_names = [       "p-tb", // toolbox       "p-search", // search box       "p-interaction", // interaction       "p-navigation", // navigation       ];    while ( menu_name = menu_names.pop ) {       menu_move_to_top(menu_name);    } }); // end

– xeno  ( talk ) 16:54, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

(UTC)
 * Its a minor nuisance that prods appear an hour or two before the five days is up (numerous: e.g. My Zmanim expires at 15:59 today).
 * High percentages of prods and speedys seem to relate to sport and modern music. I enjoy these in real life but for some reason find them uninteresting issues on-wiki. It would grand if there was some simple way of categorising them so that I could focus on those I feel motivated to engage with (pop-ups are sometimes v. slow in this neck of the woods). Ben   Mac  Dui  13:28, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * This might be a suggestion you could raise to User:Cyde, who runs the bot which makes the proddable page list. – xeno  ( talk ) 03:03, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Could we put some common links right at the top, like WP:ANI?--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 21:18, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * There are links to the noticeboards in the footer, you could move this up if you desired. but feel free to tweak the header and if i don't like it i can make it into an option with a paramater... –  xeno  ( talk ) 21:20, 23 February 2009

March 2009

 * Pages listed in Category:Administrative_backlog should be prominently announced at the top of the page to try to bring down the backlogs sooner. --64.85.221.68 (talk) 08:03, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Not sure if it's possible to transclude a category... – xeno  ( talk ) 03:03, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
 * ✅ using . Feel free to put it on a separate subpage.&mdash; Train2104 (talk • contribs • count) 00:59, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
 * The AIV section doesn't list the actual reports, it just lists the symbols key; the AIV reports should be added. --64.85.221.68 (talk) 08:10, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
 * This is fixed, someone had removed the closing noinclude tag - thank you. – xeno  ( talk ) 12:47, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Slap a semi on this thing so crazy IPs don't screw it up! --64.85.216.254 (talk) 16:53, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
 * That was actually the main WP:AIV page and it's only semi'd when it gets vandalized. Thanks for catching it though. I'll look into the other suggestions when I get a moment. – xeno  ( talk ) 16:55, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The link for admin stats in the RFA section is red; should be removed or the template created. --64.85.221.68 (talk) 08:10, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The link turns blue when transcluded onto an admin's user page when their stats page exists. – xeno  ( talk ) 12:48, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Add 3RR noticeboard. --64.85.221.68 (talk) 08:10, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
 * WP:AN/3 gets awful big, but if there are admins who are interested in having it included I could make it an optional parameter. – xeno  ( talk ) 03:03, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Possible addition
In the news/Next update/Time, perhaps? And the DYK timer as well?  Spencer T♦ Nominate! 00:16, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Feel free to tuck these in somewhere... –  xeno  ( talk ) 02:32, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Reviewer RFPerm
Added in the Review request for permissions since it seems we are getting a fair amount of these requests. Diff here - feel free to undo if this causes issues. 7 08:55, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Looks great. Thanks, – xeno talk 23:01, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Great page
I happen to think this a great resource and I find it very useful. I've actually been adding on to it, in a dashboard of my own which basically includes everything, every piece of information, pages to watch, things to read, processes to follow, every area an admin may want to work in. It may seem pretty lengthy, I tried to cram in as much as I could ;), but it's basically just a collection of transcluded pages so the editable page itself is pretty small. It's at User:OlEnglish/Dashboard if anyone wants to use it or copy it. -- &oelig; &trade; 04:37, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Suggestion re PROD list
I don't think it makes sense to list the prods whose expiration will come up sometime during the day, when it would be trivial to list those PRODs eligible for deletion.

I posted a request to Cyde on 12 December, with no response. (I saw somewhere that Cyde may have left the project.)

Does anyone disagree that it would be better to list articles eligible for deletion rather than those who eligibility is upcoming? If so, does anyone have thoughts on how to make it happen?-- SPhilbrick  T  14:02, 1 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I agree, but I am afraid I have no idea how this could be done. Ben   Mac  Dui  09:31, 2 January 2011 (UTC)


 * But in all these cases their eligibility is only hours away. It's trivial NOT to consider them already expired--their 7 days is up. It's unlikely anyone would de-prod them on the last day. Besides, if it's an obvious delete, admins can use their discretion when deciding if and when to delete. -- &oelig; &trade; 16:03, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
 * That is not what WP:PROD says - can you say where the existence of such discretion is indicated? Ben   Mac  Dui  08:45, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * This issue arose because HJ Mitchell pointed out to me here that I was closing too soon, so at least some don't accept that closing early is fine. Nor do I, my early closures occurred because I assumed the list only included eligible ones. I've stopped closing PRODs. While I realize it is not hard to check each and every one, it would be better to fix the problem. Jarry1250 thinks it should be easy. I'd do it myself, but I have no experience with bots, and this doesn't sound like the right place to experiment.
 * I think we need two things:
 * Consensus that the change is desired
 * A volunteer who knows how to change the code.-- SPhilbrick  T  13:40, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Out of curiosity, could someone point me at the relevant code? I'm almost certainly the wrong person to change it, but I'm curious, and who knows.... maybe it really is entirely trivial. --j &#9883; e deckertalk to me 17:50, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually the distinction isn't trivial. With BLP prods some focus on those in their last day.  Note that the BLP prod template sorts them by time left.  It would be a simple exercise to have a Category:Articles proposed for deletion (time expired), then a separate bot (not trivial but not hard) task to listify that every few hours. Rich Farmbrough, 17:19, 24 February 2011 (UTC).


 * Fair point. I can imagine that members of the Article Rescue Squadron might want to see the prods that are due to expire. However, I think it should be easy to use the existing code, generate a list called "Articles proposed for deletion (about to expire)", and post that list at ARC or other useful places. Then increment the parameter by one day, and create the list "Articles proposed for deletion (expired)" for use on the admin template. It is misleading to include a list of prods about to expire on the admin to do list.-- SPhilbrick  T  17:51, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Turns out there already is such a category. Category:Expired proposed deletions. Problem is it was empty until I null-edited the last days worth of prods. So it all gets a little crazy - to null edit them one needs to read them, which means the date is already in our grasp. So keeping a local list of timestamps seems sensible, then checking they are still prodded.  More work than just listifying a cat. Rich Farmbrough, 19:50, 25 February 2011 (UTC).


 * I'd support this, particularly if I can get at a list of "soon-to-expire" items too, even if it's a separate list, I don't care where. In addition to occasional "article saves" I do sometimes peek "ahead" of the expiration dates and double-check for BLPPRODs that folks have added RS to without pulling the tag, no doubt the closing admin will eventually do that anyway, but it seems to appeal to my need for tidiness.
 * One note: trying to make sense of which are and aren't expired in the current list is complicated by the fact that the 7-vs-10 day difference between PRODs and BLPPRODs leaves expired and unexpired items fairly intermingled. Sorting the list based on expiration time, and/or separating PRODs and BLPPRODs into two tables, and/or harmonizing the 7 and 10 day wait times for the two tags, would make things easier too. --j &#9883; e deckertalk to me 17:48, 27 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Actually, using prodsum, its a helpful distinction. The ones that are on the top after >7 days are BLP prods, and since I try to look at every one of them, I can wait till then if I don't have time to look further. Additionally, I am among those who check at the end--I try to go between 12 and 36 hours ahead of the actual deletion, in order to double-check only those that have not been removed by others, since I'm prepared to work on the more difficult problems.    DGG ( talk ) 01:45, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Semiprotection
It might be a good idea to semiprotect these pages given the number of transclusions. Reaper Eternal (talk) 18:15, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Addition proposal
Can we add - to the Admin dashboard/header so that coi requested edits are listed? I could be bold, but I'd like to get some views from other editors first. I'm requesting the same thing at dashboard Ryan Vesey Review me!  18:06, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅ per lack of opposition. Ryan Vesey Review me!  19:19, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

COI proposal
Would anyone object if I set the COI backlog to 95 (currently 99), indicating when it should turn red? I'd like to get it down to 50 or so, but if I do that immediately, it may stay red for some time. I've run into admins who don't even know the concept exists, despite being on the dashboard, and my hope is that the red banner will prompt some action. My plan would be to gradually lower the threshold slowly until it gets to 50.-- S Philbrick (Talk)  21:31, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Not hearing any objection, I set it at 120. Want it lower, but wanted to start with an achievable goal.-- S Philbrick (Talk)  14:17, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

(2015) Is this template intended to be transcluded, or simply linked?
Over 75 users are currently transcluding this template.

As Template:Admin dashboard/testcases demonstrates, this is too big to transclude. All of these transcluding editors land their pages into Category:Pages where template include size is exceeded. I would like to clean out that category, so it's easier to spot articles that land in it.

So, either we cut down the content in a major way, to a reasonable amount for transclusion, or change all of these to links. , I see that you were the last to edit this template, in an attempt to address the problem. (I think that for a while in January even the linked dashboard had hit the transclusion limit – a problem that's likely to reoccur from time to time) Opinions? Wbm1058 (talk) 21:47, 17 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Yesterday Admin dashboard/testcases wouldn't transclude. Today it does: the post-expand include size is 1,719,125 bytes; the maximum allowed by MediaWiki is 2,097,152 bytes. I suppose some backlogs have been reduced? Wbm1058 (talk) 14:10, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Only about four editors' dashboards are still in Category:Pages where template include size is exceeded. These are pages which transclude too many other things besides this Admin dashboard. The size of this dashboard means that little else besides it can be transcluded onto the same page. – Wbm1058 (talk) 14:28, 18 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Yep, this is a known problem with this template. I've beat the crap out of this template (and the sub-templates used to create it) and I'd be hard pressed to find more places to trim back the template size at this point. It's mostly just the fact that we apparently do not have enough active administrators working in these areas to keep the backlogs down to a reasonable size. —   14:40, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

(2016) One year later
Hello. At 2016-02-26, 40 more user pages went above the template_include_size_limit. Quite all of them are transcluding Admin dashboard. This doesn't occur with the pages that were configured by subst:Admin dashboard. It would be great to investigate further. Pldx1 (talk) 12:14, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
 * This lasted some hours, and is changing back now. May be one of the sub-template was modified and back. Pldx1 (talk) 12:26, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
 * This looks bad, since the sub-templates weren't modified recently "Template:Admin dashboard";"MusikAnimal";"2015-07-13T22:42:01Z" "Template:Admin dashboard/ab";"Reaper Eternal";"2013-09-01T03:19:01Z" "Template:Admin dashboard/aiv";"ISO-Convener";"2015-04-19T14:55:13Z" "Template:Admin dashboard/csd";"MelanieN";"2015-01-29T03:55:27Z" "Template:Admin dashboard/footer";"Jdaloner";"2015-01-18T11:31:42Z" "Template:Admin dashboard/header";"Northamerica1000";"2015-12-18T16:51:08Z" "Template:Admin dashboard/rfarfp";"MusikAnimal";"2015-07-13T22:40:35Z" "Template:Admin dashboard/uaarfpp";"John of Reading";"2013-11-24T22:07:41Z" And thus, the culprit is at some sublevel...  Pldx1 (talk) 13:56, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
 * A not too stupid heuristic would be substituting Admin dashboard/rfarfp inside of Admin dashboard.  Any (better) opinion ? Pldx1 (talk) 14:20, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
 * The sub templates are designed to be able to be transccluded separately. –xenotalk 14:23, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Sure. And in a better word, building Admin dashboard by transcluding Admin dashboard/rfarfp (like the others) would be the best solution. And, as of now, this is how Admin dashboard is written. But the result, in our sour world, is that most of the time, the pages that transclude Admin dashboard are on overflow. Using the template Admin dashboard 2 built by substituting Admin dashboard/rfarfp (while transcluding all the other sub-templates) would have the merit to cure the symptom. Obviously, it would be far better to discover the cause of the problem. Any idea ?  Pldx1 (talk) 19:57, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Moving to the Wikipedia namespace

 * Why is this in the template namespace after all? Shouldn't this page be moved to the Wikipedia namespace? By the definition of WP:TEMPLATE, a template is a Wikipedia page created to be included in other page. I don't see how this page is useful to be included in other pages. Of course, users would be able to transclude it even if we move it to the Wikipedia namespace, if they like so. But, such a large page is contrary to the very definition of template.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  21:53, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
 * No idea, my guess is because it was started here, perhaps with something different in mind. It probably needs to have a reasonable amount of discussion before moving it though. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 02:12, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 22 February 2016

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: Not Moved Mike Cline (talk) 15:15, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Template:Admin dashboard → Admin dashboard – As I explained above, this is actually not а template. Per WP:TEMPLATE, a template is a Wikipedia page created to be included in other page. This page is too long to be "included in other page" (that is, of course, possible, but hardly practical). Not just that the page is too large, it also does not have the function of template. There is nothing that makes this page more useful when transcluded then as a separate page (templates are, by definition, pages that are useful for either tranclusion or substitution).

I know that this page is currently transcluded in 78 user pages, but my request would not affect that, it will still be trancluded even if moved to this proposed new title.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  10:06, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * When it waa created, it was intended to be included in other pages. I don't really see the benefit in moving to Wikipedia space. –xenotalk 10:23, 22 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment seems like a good idea, since it's not a template, and it is a project page -- 70.51.46.39 (talk) 04:42, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Support, what it was intended as is not as important as what it is most used for. ansh 666 05:06, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Do you have proof that it is most used for viewing in place, rather than transclusion? It is transcluded in 78 pages, after all. –xenotalk 12:00, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I was clearly mistaken. Oppose per DoRD. ansh 666 13:28, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Oppose move - This was designed to be transcluded, as a whole or in selected pieces, to user pages of admins or other interested editors. As seen here, it is transcluded on a long list of user pages. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 12:08, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Also, it clearly is a template as it has a number of optional parameters. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 12:12, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Finally, the admin statistics template transcluded in this template will not work if the page is viewed directly. Sorry for the continued edits - I started my comment on a small tablet. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 12:34, 23 February 2016 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Page overflow, again
This template transcludes a lot of other templates. This is a successful recipe for turning on overflow. I have written another template at admin dashboard/light, with the same functionality. My opinion is that we should allow the users to choose between a template with so many options that it often goes into overflow, and a simple one, that works (and that can be copied and customized in a user's private page). Any opinion ? Ping to User:Wbm1058 and User:Xeno. Pldx1 (talk) 09:05, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Mobile-friendly and accessible deletion backlog

 * backlognav inner
 * prod backlog inner
 * replaceable fair use backlog inner
 * single cat backlog inner

The four inner templates used by the deletion backlog currently display nothing at all in mobile view, and output data tables causing confusing screen reader output (WP:LTAB). I'm working on edits to these templates to address both problems. The results may not be pixel perfect on margin, padding, and line height, but I think it's important to move forward on these edits, since they will improve mobile view from the current empty box. Matt Fitzpatrick (talk) 01:53, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
 * As this has received no responses, will reimplement the changes, with padding as close as I can get it. Matt Fitzpatrick (talk) 07:41, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Links under "Backlog"
Why does the list contain links to Admin dashboard and similar links? &mdash; Sebastian 20:38, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Is there a bug?
Why is "Candidates for speedy deletion" showing an extremely large number, which does not reflect the sum of speedies? Ron h jones (Talk) 22:55, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
 * See thread on VPT and AN, as well as T195397. ~ Amory  (u • t • c) 00:50, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the pointers, I'd been wondering about this myself. --joe deckertalk 20:30, 7 June 2018 (UTC)