Template talk:Film/Archive 2008

Korean task force
If an admin could please implement changes identical to this diff, I would be very grateful. It creates the necessary parameters for the new Korean task force. Thank you, Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 23:45, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Yes check.svg|20px]] Done. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 19:53, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

"Importance" parameter
When the "importance" parameter is used, the specified value is displayed in the WikiProject Films banner, and when it's not used, the banner says "This article has not yet received a rating on the priority scale", but the parameter is not documented on the template page. What's up with that? Looking at this talk page, I gather there's been some discussion on whether or not the "importance" parameter is helpful or not. Has a consensus been reached? I'm not a big fan of the parameter myself, but it might be best to either document its usage on the template page or remove it from the template entirely. — Mudwater 03:22, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Wow - I didn't realize that the parameter wasn't listed in the Usage section! Thanks for pointing it out; I obviously forgot to add it back in (most of the text was copied and repurposed from the Military history banner, which doesn't have the parameter. As for the status of the parameter at present, it is near the top of my list on things to address. However, at the moment I wanted to do some boring housekeeping work - mainly long-overdue task force-tagging - before going through with parameter deletions which may require significant discussion to reach consensus. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 03:31, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. — Mudwater  03:41, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Australian task force
editprotected

As per diff here. Also addresses some minor fixes needed wrt prior task forces. Many thanks, Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 22:35, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅ -- Anonymous Dissident  Talk 23:15, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Activating A-Class review
editprotected

Requesting changes identical to this diff. (The last bit about the pp-template actually is already in the code, IIRC...) This will activate the commented-out A-Class review functions which were built into the template many moons ago. :) Thanks in advance! Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 01:08, 31 January 2008 (UTC)


 * done. &mdash; Carl (CBM · talk) 13:25, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Integrating "needs [x]" tags into banner
Please make edits identical to this diff. This edit integrates several of the "needs" templates (needs cast section, needs film image, needs film synopsis) into the template, much as we already did with "needs film infobox" several months ago. Many thanks in advance! Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 22:44, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Edit looks good to me. Thanks for your work, and sorry about the delay. Cool Hand Luke 04:29, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

New Zealand task force
As per diff here. Many thanks! Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 07:12, 14 February 2008 (UTC)


 * ✅ Done - Nihiltres { t .l } 16:53, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Importance scale broken
Something broke this template. I can't figure out what, but the importance scale rating of Low and NA are not functioning. - LA @ 10:34, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I've noticed the same thing. Something in the template syntax (which I haven't quite tracked down) is breaking lines in the importance text and importance category. It appears to be *any* importance rating, not just Low and NA, but I can't find anything that changed recently in those areas of this template. There was, however, a recent change to Film/Importance... Could that have done it? --Fru1tbat (talk) 19:04, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Fixed. It was Template:Film/Importance that was causing the issue. --MZMcBride (talk) 19:12, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Canadian task force
I'd be grateful if someone could please make changes identical to this diff, in order to set up the support necessary for the Canadian cinema task force. Many thanks in advance! Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 08:42, 28 February 2008 (UTC)


 * ✅. feydey (talk) 14:04, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

B Class checklist
Over on Template_talk:WikiProject Comics I made an editprotected request to exclude GA status articles from needing the checklist to be filled out. That GA articles are being required to complete a B class checklist seems like an error to me. It's also not what the template instructions say should happen.

Any thoughts before I raise another editprotected request? GDallimore (Talk) 15:48, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

editprotected

The following edit has now been made over at Template:WikiProject Comics and seems to work. I think it should be made here, too.

{{#switch:{{Film/Class|{{{class|}}}}}|FA|A|NA|Disambig|Cat|Template=|#default=

should have an extra switch for GA added, so

{{#switch:{{Film/Class|{{{class|}}}}}|FA|GA|A|NA|Disambig|Cat|Template=|#default=

Thanks. GDallimore (Talk) 09:15, 20 March 2008 (UTC)


 * {{done}} Hers fold  {{sup|(t/a/c)}} 17:24, 20 March 2008 (UTC)


 * A bit belated response, but yes, I concur. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 00:17, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

FL class and Core parameter
Here's my latest requested diff. It formalizes the FL class (in conjunction with some other requested edits on template subpages) into the template, and also creates a core parameter for the project's new core articles list. Many thanks in advance! Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 19:14, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅ Can I ask why this template feels the need to position and format the class and importance notes in a different fashion to almost every other banner (which has them in a vertical list, not horizontal, and not in a white box)?? :D Happy‑melon 10:00, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Japanese cinema task force
As per this diff. Many thanks! Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 08:20, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅ There's got to be a better way to do this than having separate code for each country... --CapitalR (talk) 14:36, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Reception
Can a "reception-needs" request tag be added to the "Additional Information:" section? There is already "needs-synopsis" and "needs-cast" request tags. Surely reception is just as important? Thanks. Nreive (talk) 08:37, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Good point - will look into implementing in the near future! Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 08:57, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Warfilm icon
Could someone please replace Image:Warfilm.png with Image:Warfilm.svg? Thanks /Lokal_Profil 00:40, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Also spotted:
 * Image:Francefilm.png --> Image:Francefilm.svg
 * Image:Oscar sign by reiartur.png --> Image:Oscar sign.svg
 * Image:Exquisite-xmms.png --> Image:Exquisite-amorok.png (the first image has been deleted!)
 * Image:Flag of the People's Republic of China.svg --> Image:Chinafilm.png
 * Image:Tricolor.svg --> Image:Indiafilm.png
 * Image:Iranfilm.png --> Image:Iranfilmbig.png
 * Lokal_Profil 00:57, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅ Happy‑melon 11:23, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

- Indiafilm is incorrectly written as an .svg file - it needs to be .png - can someone correct this asap? Thanks, Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 00:56, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅  Alex . Muller  06:13, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

German task force
As per this diff. (Additionally, this also includes a change that will show advice for Start class-assessed articles on how to progress towards B class.) Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 07:16, 27 June 2008 (UTC)


 * ✅ Cheers, PeterSymonds (talk)  14:07, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Unify importance and priority across project templates
Can we change the printed "priority" to "importance" (as it is in the template syntax)? Most people implement the template by just typing and then adding information piecemeal. It helps to have the printed output match the desired input--I see "class" I print class=stub. Thanks. Protonk (talk) 01:06, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm somewhat confused as to what you're referring to - the usage instructions? Those are freely editable without need to request a protected edit. Otherwise, I wouldn't advise making any changes regarding the importance scale - it is due to be taken out entirely from the code as soon as I finish redesigning the template display. WP:FILMCORE will be the only higher-prioritized article list. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 08:54, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Full disclosure, I know little to nothing about template syntax. what I mean is that the template displays the word "priority" where it accepts inputs under "importance".  Were I to tag a page and fill out the two most importance fields (class and importance), I would write:

because the displayed template shows: This article has not yet received a rating on the priority scale.

In order for me to classify this as a naive user, I would need to come here, see the long version and read the usage guide (alternately I could click on the "priority scale" link). Only then would I know that I am supposed to fill in "importance" rather than "priority". It would seem easy to change the displayed output of the template without impacting too much else. Protonk (talk) 16:40, 30 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Okay, fair enough point. I still would not recommend any emendation, however, as the entire parameter is to be deleted shortly. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 18:04, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Template redesign
editprotected

I'd like to implement changes equivalent to this diff. The banner has been somewhat restructed and redesigned to more closely align it with several other large-project banners' formatting. Additionally, the importance, attention, and portal parameters have been dropped. (Importance has been deprecated by consensus in favor of the core parameter, attention has grown too unwieldy and thus been neglected, and the portal parameters were taken from the MilHist template, but subsequently never used.) Most of the other changes are cosmetic. This has been tested in the template sandbox, and been presented to the film coordinators without any major criticisms. It also substantially reduces the code by 25%. Many thanks, Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 17:36, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅ I looked at the diffs and it appeared that your page at User:Girolamo Savonarola/banner had the appropriate version, so I took that and pasted it over.  If this is incorrect, please notify me immediately.  —EncMstr (talk) 18:16, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Minor fix
editprotected Can someone change: }} to this: }} down at the bottom of the template code. Cheers! PC78 (talk) 15:22, 18 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I would suggest this instead:

}}


 * to:

}}


 * Farix (Talk) 15:46, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅ The latter seemed the cleaner version.  —EncMstr (talk) 15:54, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Is this the issue that causes a space beneath the template? I'm still seeing the space, so I wasn't sure if it would take some time to cycle through. — Erik  (talk • contrib) - 17:51, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I think so: the change removed 2 newlines, one of which would appear on transclusions.
 * This is an incredibly heavily used template: I stopped counting at 25,000 uses.  A change affecting that many pages takes considerable time to go into effect on each one (see Job queue), and the job queue has been running quite busy for the last few weeks.  If you make an edit to a particular talk page, you should see the revised effects immediately.  —EncMstr (talk) 18:29, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
 * An actual edit isn't necessary. You can purge the page or make a null edit (saving the page with no changes). Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 17:16, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Small edit needed
Editprotected

There are two instances of the same thing. - LA (T) 00:41, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

{{#if: {{{needs infobox|}}} {{{needs-infobox|}}}


 * That's so the infobox supports two forms of the parameter   or  .  Removing one of them will break existing usage.  You have to confirm that there are no usages of the one which is deleted.  After you do that, request specifically which one to delete.  —EncMstr (talk) 01:44, 29 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, that's correct. If you want to gauge the usage of one versus another form, then it might be advisable to have the old form (without the hyphen) also add an additional hidden category for that purpose. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 06:11, 29 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I altered the template to put the non-hyphenated usages into Category:Film articles using old needs infobox parameter. Grammatically poor without punctuation, but it's buried a bit since it's meant to be a short-term experiment.  There are no other changes.  The category is filling in now.  —EncMstr (talk) 07:26, 29 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Looks like the total is.... 4,291 articles. Maybe a bot request can be made to clean them up?  —EncMstr (talk) 08:09, 29 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I suppose. The better question, though, is...why? The reason why both forms were incorporated is so that we wouldn't have to change all the extant usages of the original parameter (needs infobox) when we adopted the new style parameter formatting (needs-infobox). This was a backwards compatability solution; the current template usage instructions do not mention the old form, so as to discourage its further implementation. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 09:22, 29 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Maybe I'm misunderstanding the original request. It seems to say:  drop support for one of the parameters.  If that is correct, doesn't that mean that a bunch of articles are going to have their requested infobox ignored?  —EncMstr (talk) 13:27, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Oops, didn't see that until now. I'm sorry. - LA (T) 16:37, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
 * It's alright. I suppose the category we've now implemented will be potentially useful if someone is really gung-ho about migrating them all to the hyphenated form. (So long as the category is and remains hidden.) Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 19:00, 29 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Category:Film articles using old needs infobox parameter is now hidden. Besides a bot request, I think this is very easy to fix for someone with WP:AWB.  —EncMstr (talk) 19:08, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

New film icon
editprotected Per discussion here, there is strong consensus to replace Image:Film reel.svg with Image:Video-x-generic.svg. I am requesting for the image to be replaced in this protected template. — Erik (talk • contrib) - 14:44, 5 August 2008 (UTC)


 * ✅. You'll want to doublecheck the syntax of that section, though all of the old image coding (size and whatnot) should work fine with the new image. Looks good. UltraExactZZ Claims~ Evidence 15:30, 5 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Much appreciated! :) — Erik (talk • contrib) - 17:17, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Soviet and post-Soviet task force
As per this diff. Many thanks as always! :) Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 23:09, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done Happy‑melon 11:07, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

listas parameter?
I was wondering if it might be an idea to add a "listas" parameter to the banner—similar to what they have in WPBiography—for the purpose of sorting article titles that begin with "The", "A", "An", etc. Any thoughts? PC78 (talk) 09:10, 14 August 2008 (UTC)


 * It would definitely organize the articles better, but is it going to be truly useful when it comes to assessment? We use DEFAULTSORT to find the articles; is it necessary to put the similar feature on their talk pages? — Erik  (talk • contrib) - 15:37, 14 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Wel, I would regard it as a convenience rather than a necessity. Of course, it would require adding such a parameter to hundreds (thousands?) of articles, which wouldn't be so much fun. Just an idea. PC78 (talk) 19:10, 14 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Girolamo does a lot of tagging on articles' talk pages, so maybe we can find out from him if the "listas" parameter will be useful. I've only done the occasional reassessing. — Erik  (talk • contrib) - 20:16, 14 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm not really bothered either way, but I suppose there's no reason why it can't be added. Perhaps, though, if we're feeling rather clever, we could simply hardcode the template to automatically default sort anything beginning with certain words (rather like iTunes). I don't know if that's feasible or not, but it would obviously be preferable, since it wouldn't require any user input. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 20:32, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Task force icons
A number of the task force icons in this template suffer from the WP:FLAG syndrome, i.e. they are so small it's difficult at first glance to identify or distinguish them. This is most apparent with the Australia/New Zealand and China/Soviet task force groups. I'm not sure if there is an ideal solution, but how about substituting the clapperboard icons with plain flags, which can be displayed larger? PC78 (talk) 19:48, 16 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't really see a FLAG problem, because we're identifying the task force right next to them. Plus, the combined flag/clapperboard effect is a nice combined graphic that really is only relevant for this kind of purpose anyway. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 20:54, 16 August 2008 (UTC)


 * If the icons are not distinguisable—as with the examples above—then they serve no real purpose. I'm also mildly concerned about the use of the Chinese flag for a task force that includes Taiwanese cinema; we don't use a South Korean flag to represent all of Korea. Perhaps if nothing else the existing icons can be made larger? PC78 (talk) 00:32, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Eh, it doesn't bother me that much, to be honest. I just think there's a little room for improvement, that's all. Just thought I'd mention it. :) PC78 (talk) 17:19, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
 * The Taiwan/China issue is somewhat problematic, admittedly. I'm certainly open to other solutions, if they are available. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 23:11, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

British task force
As per this diff. Many thanks! Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 23:11, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅ Happy</b>‑<b style="color:darkorange;">melon</b> 08:55, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Baltic task force
As per diff. Many thanks! Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 07:14, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅ GbT/c 12:37, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Portal icon
Would it be alright if we changed that portal icon upper right from a puzzle piece to the same as the image at left - and then change the image at left to something else iconic? Perhaps or ? Open to other ideas. Cheers, Cirt (talk) 04:16, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I made a change and just used the same image icon in both places . One is smaller than the other and not too prominent so it shouldn't be a big deal. Cheers, Cirt (talk) 22:35, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Nordic task force
As per this diff. Many thanks as always! :) Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 22:22, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅. Cirt (talk) 22:27, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Bug in the template
When pages are tagged as either Disambig-Class, Category-Class, Template-Class or NA-Class, the banner links to the following categories:


 * Category:Disambig-Class film articles
 * Category:Cat-Class film articles
 * Category:Template-Class film articles
 * Category:NA-Class film articles

none of which exist! (Except the latter, which is a redirect.) The correct categories are:


 * Category:Film disambiguation pages
 * Category:Film category pages
 * Category:Film template pages
 * Category:Non-article film pages

Is there a way to resolve this, short of renaming the categories or creating redirects for all? PC78 (talk) 20:25, 1 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Well-spotted! While I'm not terribly in a rush to resolve this, I'd be happy to address it when I next play with the template. In the meantime, perhaps redirecting is the simplest solution. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 20:33, 1 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I guess (and I may just create the redirects now). I'm not to keen on the idea of renaming the categories; I despair at the widespread usage of complete misnomers like "Category-Class articles"! PC78 (talk) 21:43, 1 August 2008 (UTC)


 * It's just a stopgap for the meantime. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 21:49, 1 August 2008 (UTC)


 * There's a similar problem with WPFILMS Task force assessment level category; see its usage in Category:Template-Class Indian cinema articles. PC78 (talk) 22:30, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

In a related glitch, categories tagged with the banner (class = cat, importance = NA) are being put into Category:Unassessed film articles. &mdash; TAnthonyTalk 07:14, 20 October 2008 (UTC)


 * There's no reason for that to happen. I think it's just a cache-delay issue from an edit which went wrong and was reverted. PC78 (talk) 11:38, 20 October 2008 (UTC)


 * OK, nearly 24 hours later and the category was still full ... it appears that the template only accepts "NA" in the "importance" parameter, and not "na" lowercase. I've changed them all using AWB, but this should probably be fixed in the template for the future. &mdash; TAnthonyTalk 03:18, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
 * You do realize that there is no importance parameter anymore? We deprecated it when the core parameter was instituted. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 03:57, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Did not know that, but it's obviously still in use on many article talk pages, and in this case was mis-categorizing. I suppose, then, it won't be an issue in the future. &mdash; TAnthonyTalk 04:10, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Can you direct me to some examples? I'd love to see what you're talking about. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 05:08, 21 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Sure ... random example Category talk:Films directed by Raymond Bernard was appearing in Category:Unassessed film articles until I just changed importance=na to importance=NA; I think there were nearly 200 similar categories with the same issue that I "fixed" today with AWB. Assuming no one will add the importance=na parameter in the future, the problem shouldn't recur, but revert my change at the category I noted and see what I mean. ;) &mdash; TAnthonyTalk 05:20, 21 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Oh, that's nothing to do with the importance; that's your edit updating the cache. It was unassessed because of the aforementioned bug which has since been fixed - but the cache just hasn't caught up yet. If you make a null edit to any of those unassessed categories, it will do the same thing. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 05:26, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Future-class tracking
Please make changes identical to this diff. These new lines will allow the Future films department more efficiently track films with upcoming releases and allow them to be quickly found when they are no longer Future-class and need to be re-classified. (This has been a on-going concern since the 1.0 bot logs can't track Future-class articles.) All changes have been drafted and tested rigorously on the template sandbox. Thanks, Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 01:12, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Yes check.svg|20px]] Done. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 02:01, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
 * This has caused an error: see Talk:Doomsday (film) and Talk:Choke (film). It says, Expression error: Unrecognised punctuation character "{", and it's coming from the template. — Erik  (talk • contrib) 02:16, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Yikes! That didn't happen before. I believe it's coming from the following line:, but I don't know why... Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 02:54, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Revert for now - I am working on a fix, but I'm encountering different errors with that, so I can't say how long this will take to resolve. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 04:36, 28 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I've seen that happen with the ifexpr parserfunc when one of the parameters is empty without a default. basically, the empty parameter returns  or equivalent, which ifexpr sees as a string - that causes it to throw an error, and that mucks up code later in the template.  you can probably fix it by addint a default to futyear: {{#ifexpr:{{{futyear}}} becomes {{#ifexpr:{{{futyear|}}}


 * Reverted. Grrr... --MZMcBride (talk) 04:44, 28 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm trying a whole new code structure at User:Girolamo Savonarola/sub, but that's creating different errors for me - now it doesn't like any of the futyear parameters I've been throwing at it! Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 04:45, 28 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I tried changing the {{{futyear}}} to {{{futyear|}}}, and it didn't seem to help. What I'm really confused about, though, is why it spits out  on the template sandbox when I try it on there with a futyear parameter set to 2008 - the code's conditional statements should never reach the ifexpr function if the futyear is equal to the CURRENTYEAR magic word. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 04:51, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
 * you were missing opening brackets ( {{ ) on your second ifexpr. see if the fix I made solves it.  I also added 0 default for the ifexpr statements (which makes the template assume that everything is in the future).  you might want to tweak that.  -- Ludwigs 2  05:03, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
 * arg... scratch that - something more serious is amiss.  let me work through the code from your outline.  -- Ludwigs 2  05:06, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
 * ok, looks like you were missing the final closing brackets as well. test that now and see if it works the way you expect.  where is your test page, by the way, so I can look myself if something is still going wrong?  -- Ludwigs 2  05:17, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

{{tlx|editprotect}} Success! - Okay, try this diff. Ludwig, turns out the missing brackets were inside, not at the end. I've been testing at Template:Template sandbox, and after putting both User:Girolamo Savonarola/sub and an integrated version at User:Girolamo Savonarola/banner to the test there in a handful of different configurations, I'm fairly happy. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 05:22, 28 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Eggggsaladent (which means even better than egg salad). glad I could be of assistance.  -- Ludwigs 2  05:25, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm still a bit puzzled, though - why do I want those parameters to default to 0? I took that out, because it didn't seem to make a difference upon testing, but if that would make a difference, where would I see it? Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 05:26, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

I think there may be a bug in the code. So far as I can tell, all non Future-Class articles are being added to category:Incorrectly tagged WikiProject Films articles. PC78 (talk) 18:40, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

{{tl|editprotected}}
 * ah, I see the problem. the following snippet (near the bottom of the FutureClass section):


 * should actually read:


 * the current code will always return true, since it will equal 'or' even when futmonth and futyear are empty. can someone edit in this change?-- Ludwigs 2  20:46, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Ludwigs, is it at all possible to have this feature sort articles by {{PAGENAME}} ? PC78 (talk) 19:01, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorting is done that way by default, unless it's overridden by a "default sort". Anyway, the requested edit is {{done}}. <em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:blue">Hers <em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:gold">fold  {{sup|(t/a/c)}} 19:36, 31 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Hmmm... see {{cl|Films to be released in December 2008}} (for example) where everythign is getting sorted under T. PC78 (talk) 19:41, 31 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I see what you mean; it's because this template always goes on talk pages, so everything gets sorted by 'Talk' under T. so you're right, the change would be this (God bless RegExp...):


 * someone want to check for whatever inevitable dumb error I made before we ask to have it edited in? {{=)|biggrin}}  -- Ludwigs 2  22:03, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
 * eh, I looked it over myself and it seems solid. I'll add the editprotected tag.  -- Ludwigs 2  02:52, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
 * {{done}}. Server should re-index soon.  I tried WP:NULL editing one successfully.  —Wknight94 (talk) 17:05, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

American task force
As per this diff. Many thanks! Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 18:19, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅ لenna  vecia  21:45, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Chinese task force icon change
editprotected

As per this diff. Many thanks! Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 18:02, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Done. - auburn pilot   talk  03:41, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

C-class?
Will C-class ever be implemented into this template? Gary King ( talk ) 14:45, 19 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I wish it would as I have seen so many film articles that are certain C rather than just Start. I suspect another discussion will need to be started at the main project page first, to argue again for the Film project accepting C class, as it was rejected earlier. -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 16:25, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I figured that it was discussed at some point. Gary King  ( talk ) 16:27, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Auto parameter?
The documentation for this template lists an "auto" parameter for automatic assessments, but it doesn't seem to do anything, nor can I see any code for this in the template. Am I missing something? PC78 (talk) 15:30, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Well spotted! That's an old reference to our automation support. However, I believe it was removed during one of the overhauls, so I have removed it in kind from the documentation. Thanks, Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 19:23, 22 December 2008 (UTC)