Template talk:Archive top/Archive 1

Editproc
editprotected

Please add documentation to the bottom. Tnx. Nasa-verve (talk) 17:31, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done - Rjd0060 (talk) 21:35, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

feature expansion request
I'm suggesting a revision of the template to allow a built-in quote box to display discussion resolutions. I've been doing this in mediation and it seems to work well, so I though it might be a useful addition to the template. see the version of this template I created at Archive top/rev, and the example page I made at Template:Archive_top/test. -- Ludwigs 2 02:11, 1 March 2010 (UTC)


 * No commentary, so let's edit it in.


 * Please replace the transcluded contents of this template with the code in Template:Archive top/rev. This adds an optional quote box which can be used to display summary information about the archived discussion.  it should not affect the the template in any way unless the 'resolved' parameter is set.  I'll update the docs when the edit is completed.  see example at Template:Archive_top/test.  -- Ludwigs 2  18:21, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
 * About 10 days ago I did this (but admittedly didn't update the documentation. This is consistent with discussion top... No comment as to whether the proposed edit is better or worse than the functionality I added. – xeno talk  18:23, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
 * ah, I didn't see that, sorry. and please do comment - I happen to like the boxed off results section on clarity grounds, but... .  the only reason I went for the editprotected was that I hadn't gotten any comments on it and I hadn't realized there was any activity on the page at all.  -- Ludwigs 2  18:37, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Warming up to it, but I think "result" is a better choice of parameter than "resolved". – xeno talk  18:39, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
 * lol - high-school debate training, sorry ("it is RESOLVED that..."). 'result' works fine.    -- Ludwigs 2  19:13, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

No further comments, so ✅. Xeno I left your parameter in as well, although you might want to remove that at some stage? &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:33, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
 * You could probably integrate it - change the two occurrences of to  .  Might want to change  to  as well.  That being said, I don't think you needed to bring down all of wikipedia just to make this change; seems a bit excessive... -- Ludwigs 2  19:36, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

I discussed this change with Xeno on his talk page - he's amenable.

Please delete the line   near the bottom of the template (along with the carriage return in front of it), and replace the 2 occurences of    with

This will change things so that the first position parameter uses the quote box rather than adding a separate line to the 'Archive top' header.-- Ludwigs 2 17:25, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅ &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:55, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Request for attribution
Can this template please be amended to include a link to the edit that "closed" discussion as well as identifying whomever adde dthe template? As it is, the template is in the passive voice. brenneman 07:53, 2 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Sounds good....anyone not think this is a good idea? Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:40, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Not playing nice with TOC
The archive box has swallowed up the entire table of contents here and I'm not sure why. Could someone more savvy in the way of the template explain how to talk soothingly to it? Thank you! --Danger (talk) 07:46, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

RFC variant
I would like to see a parameter that would indicate the discussion that was closed was a Request for Comment. The RFC bot removes the RFC template after 30 days, and the information that the discussion was an RFC is lost. It might even be useful to indicate which categories the RFC was advertised in. Jc3s5h (talk) 17:25, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

ANI variant
When used on ANI, this template (and its brother template, archive bottom) will now omit "Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page". m.o.p 05:33, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Darker title
Could someone please edit this to change the background of the resolved/declined/whatever title to a darker shade of gray? It's hard for some people to read such a low-contrast color choice. (What would really be cool would be for editors to be able to choose the background color at will, but I'd be glad for this, at least.) Red  Slash  03:03, 29 July 2013 (UTC) 
 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


 * Yes check.svg Done. I've used the higher-contrast grey in the template. Feel free to add the relevant code to the sandbox if you want to enable free choice of colours. Or perhaps best would be a new html class, so that users can set their own custom css in Special:MyPage/common.css? — Mr. Stradivarius  ♪ talk ♪ 09:20, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 6 September 2013
Make these changes. This stops archived discussions from turning invisible when mobile view is activated.

Jackmcbarn (talk) 22:10, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Pictogram voting question.svg Question: Is it definitely the  class that should be kept? A few days ago at VPT there was a related problem that was resolved by removing   (or at least, by adding code to Template:Side box that made the   class optional). -- Red rose64 (talk) 22:53, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I made my change in the sandbox version and tested it here. Metadata shows up; boilerplate doesn't. Jackmcbarn (talk) 23:17, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I think the metadata class got removed from the list of classes to hide, because your old diff that didn't work in mobile view before works fine in mobile now. Jackmcbarn (talk) 23:22, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
 * So it does (they also seem to have resolved the problem that in mobile view, a permalink was actually showing a diff). Right, Yes check.svg Done -- Red rose64 (talk) 11:13, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 3 October 2013
Make these changes. They broke it again, now metadata needs removed and boilerplate needs re-added. Jackmcbarn (talk) 16:27, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Jackmcbarn (talk) 16:27, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done. I see that my old diff (prev section) is broken again... -- Red rose64 (talk) 17:14, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Problem if no param included when using
If the param "result" is not specified, the code returns the input for the "1=" param instead. I believe it may be due to this edit by. Not sure how to fix it but if you look at my contribs you should see what I mean. Rgrds. (Dynamic IP, will change when I log off.) --64.85.214.115 (talk) 12:22, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks, IP: I noticed the same thing a bit later than you did and posted to AGK's page, but as he's out for the weekend, I went ahead and reverted it. Should be fixed now. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 22:30, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Minor issue
I closed a discussion at Talk:Super-spreader earlier today using archivetop and archivebottom. However, an editor has noticed that this doesn't appear correctly. It would appear that the existence of reflist in the middle of the discussion is causing the colouring to stop halfway through the debate. Any ideas on how to rectify this? Cheers, Number   5  7  19:39, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
 * ✅ ///Euro Car  GT  20:02, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't think that the two were necessary - all that was needed was to ensure that the  was on a new line. -- Red rose64 (talk) 20:25, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

archive broken
I've noticed that this template is broken by use of other templates within the discussion. See this discussion here - archive_top is truncuated by the quote template. Is there a way to fix this? This could lead to some people thinking the discussion is still active. —Мандичка YO 😜 14:42, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
 * The problem is not with - the  template breaks if it is indented. The solution is to add a newline, . -- Red rose64 (talk) 15:07, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Oh, thank you! And thanks for fixing. —Мандичка YO 😜 15:26, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Fixes to 4 templates: "[afd/archive] [top/bottom]" for light-on-dark users.
Please see Template_talk:Afd_bottom

It says there:

''I just fixed the test cases page (Template:Afd bottom/testcases) so that it works and shows that the sandbox changes I just made (to top and bottom) look OK. But this template is widely used, so I figure another pair of eyes could be good. Most users will see no difference. light-on-dark users should see a difference - a big improvement. Any objections before I make the changes live? I've made similar changes to other templates before like Template:Double underline/sandbox (made live).'' --Elvey(t•c) 03:43, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

PAGE''' ]]) 05:44, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Oh, and I just made analogous changes to Template:Archive top and bottom and they are not editable by normal users like me. So please take a look at those too - they actually need an admin (or template-editor's) eyes! --Elvey(t•c) 04:34, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Just noticed that the sandbox versions are out of sync (example) and that this is probably not getting attention from an admin because "The edit may be made by any auto confirmed user." Will tag Template:Archive top. --Elvey(t•c) 23:16, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. I'm not convinced that this won't break other things, and you should try to get consensus first. Any archived content that uses light text on a dark background will be made unreadable. Perhaps a better solutions would be to add a CSS class to this template that could be targeted by whatever CSS tricks you are using to get light-on-dark. Ahecht ([[User_talk:Ahecht|'''TALK


 * Ahecht, it's clearly an improvement: [[File:Template_Archive_top-testcases_shows_improvement.png]] so I made the edit request, which otherwise would have probably languished for eons. Better isn't the enemy of perfect.  I've no idea how to do what you're suggesting would be even better. Light-on-dark is achieved with the preferences gadget "Use a black background with green text on the Monobook skin".  I don't think that any archived content that uses light text on a dark background will be made unreadable, but I'm not sure how to improve the testcase.  Can you please fix the testcase to test on content that uses light text on a dark background? --Elvey(t•c) 23:37, 27 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Archive top has got a black background for me in Chrome and Firefox, so this change would actually break it for people with modern browsers. I'm also not too keen on mucking about with the style to accommodate a decade-old gadget for a skin hardly anybody uses anymore. Alakzi (talk) 23:52, 27 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Something changed; now the change seems unnecessary. Testcase doesn't look like File:Template_Archive_top-testcases_shows_improvement.png anymore. Withdrawn. --Elvey(t•c) 05:30, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Substituted?
Substitution states that this template should always be substituted but there is no mention of this on the documentation page. Is this correct? D O N D E groovily  Talk to me  12:39, 28 March 2012 (UTC) — Preceding comment signed as by Dondegroovily (talk· contribs)  actually added by Ego White Tray (talk·contribs)
 * (...nearly 5 years later) Yes, that does appear to be erroneous (or, at the very least, out of line with both the documentation and how this template is being used). I've removed the statement from Substitution. Mz7 (talk) 21:47, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Trouble with long sections
At Talk:COVID-19_pandemic - allegedly an exceptionally long one - the coloured background stops about halfway through. Can the cause of this bug be checked? Thanks, 107.190.33.254 (talk) 20:24, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
 * This is the same issue as on this page, except that here the template was  not  . -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 22:36, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Hidden on mobile app
Atop and abot cause the section to be hidden on the mobile app, which is annoying as I use the app to browse WP:ITNC without the current events content spamming the page.  Nixinova   T   C   23:52, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Archive top purple
Template:Archive top purple, a color variant of this template, has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. —  The Only Zac  (talk) 01:07, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Collapsible
There are some pages where there are really long discussions that get wrapped by this template, and then it just sits there with no changes until a bot or someone comes around and archives it. Would there be any objection to making this template collapsible so that as I'm reading a page when I get to one of these sections I've already read I can just collapse it to skip to the next section? Second, would there be any objection have them collapsed by default? I was thinking if it is collapsed by default, the result section should still always be shown. I will mock up a set of examples using the sandbox and testcases page SOON™. Since I expect there might be some objection someplace to the latter, I would be happy with just being able to collapse it and having it collapsed would be a bonus. Thanks. —  12:29, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
 * First draft of both versions are on the testcases page. —  03:46, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I just came here with the same idea and was pleasantly surprised that Technical 13 not only already posted it, but even implemented it and demonstrated its functioning. I will therefore see if I can carry that functionality over to the live template. ◅ Sebastian 09:26, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
 * As can be seen in the history of this and the Archive bottom template, I implemented Technical 13's changes, but sadly that doesn't display the content of the result field anymore, so I reverted it. The two sandbox templates, reflecting the current status of the live templates, are Template:Archive bottom/sandbox2020 and Template:Archive bottom/sandbox2020. I created another sandbox in which I copied the current content of ANI with just the names of these two templates replaced, but never saved it. ◅ Sebastian 11:26, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Edit request to complete TfD nomination
Template:Archive top has been listed at Templates for discussion (nomination), but was protected so could not be tagged. Please add:

to the top of the page to complete the nomination. Thank you. JsfasdF252 (talk) 00:00, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅ * Pppery * it has begun... 00:12, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Aliases
I'd like to add "header" and "heading" as aliases for status to supplement the existing "head". If there are no concerns I'll action in a bit. &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 00:19, 23 July 2021 (UTC)


 * ✅ &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 21:39, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Wrap the header into a tag with a class
Currently there is no proper way to identify the header message and tell it apart from the comment that follows. This is why my Convenient Discussions script includes the header in the comment.

I suggest to wrap the header into, see the sandbox version, and to do the same with the Discussion top template, see the request. Jack who built the house (talk) 01:34, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅ * Pppery * it has begun... 15:06, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 14 November 2021
Add 2 as an alias for status. &#8211; MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 17:24, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅ Elli (talk &#124; contribs) 18:23, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

Fixing an issue with DiscussionTools
Any objections to implementing this change, to help fix a bug involving DiscussionTools? Maybe get a 2nd set of eyes to test it and confirm it works, then I'll put in a template edit request. – Novem Linguae (talk) 11:24, 20 January 2022 (UTC)


 * @Novem Linguae Thanks. I made some more style tweaks, I think the latest version at Template:Archive top/sandbox is good to go.
 * For context, the issue is that the template uses Quote box for the closing comment, which uses  internally, and that causes DiscussionTools to ignore the comment (since it believes it to be a quote, like with tqb). The fix is to use Side box instead (with some custom styles to match the way it looked previously). Matma Rex talk 21:10, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅.  P.I. Ellsworth &numsp;- ed.  put'r there 10:18, 23 January 2022 (UTC)