Template talk:WikiProject Chemicals

Intention of use
I plan to use this template to automate assessment of the WP:CHEMS worklist. This template is not to replace the chemistry template, but to augment the daughter-Wikiproject's rating process. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 20:17, 22 January 2007 (UTC).

Metabanner
I propose to convert this banner to use the meta template Template:WPBannerMeta. This would have several advantages. I would make sure that everything works properly. Does anyone have any comments/concerns about this? Martin 10:26, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The chemicals template pre-dates this meta template some three years, a lifetime in WP. So, yes, it could do with some improvements. I checked out the meta template page, and it does indeed seem to have all the functionality (and more) that the Chemicals template has. The only thing:
 * the core option that makes this template a WPChem Worklist article with different categories etc, may seem to be a challenge for the meta template. If you can make the option workable, then a move to the meta template seems quite ok to me.  Wim van Dorst  (talk)  22:44, 17 December 2008 (UTC).
 * I don't think that will be a problem. I'll request temporary lowering of the page protection and after thorough testing and if everything works well, it can be fully protected again. Martin 23:22, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

I have done the conversion. Everything seems to be working fine. (This is a particularly simple one to do!) A few points: Martin 11:51, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The purple label for core was removed as an image was required. I chose the yellow exclamation mark, but this can be changed to something more appropriate if you wish.
 * In line with the documentation I created a custom mask for the template, so that C, FL- and List- class would not be accepted. You may decide that the time is right to conform to the standard classes now, in which case the page Template:Chemicals/class should simply be deleted.
 * There are various options you might like to play with, e.g. image size. And there are lots of additional features you might like to include. See Template:WPBannerMeta for details.
 * I shall request full protection again in a few days once everything has been resolved.


 * Excellent!!! I'll tweak a bit with the 'core worklist' image, and try some alternatives. And I'll study (again) the WPBannerMeta page. Great work, Martin.  Wim van Dorst   (talk)  20:13, 20 December 2008 (UTC).
 * Thanks. Like the image but I think the size is too big as it's pushing everything over ather a lot. Martin 00:19, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * By the way, you seem to have 22 GA-class articles. What do you want doing with these? By removing GA from the mask, you will be putting those into Category:Unassessed chemistry articles. Martin 00:31, 21 December 2008 (UTC) Sorry, getting confused between chemistry and chemicals! Martin 00:34, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The size was already at 100px in my firefox (I tried several sizes, to prevent too small and too large images). For MSIE one apparently need to give the unit explicitly. Thanks for pointing out this OFI. Can you please confirm that it now works for your OS+Browser too?  Wim van Dorst  (talk)  17:08, 21 December 2008 (UTC).
 * Well I am using Firefox 3 and 100px is definitely better than just 100. Martin 18:20, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

No AUTO_ASSESS
All assessment of this wikiproject is done manually. Please change the AUTO_ASSESS parameter to: AUTO_ASSESS=No, or better yet delete the parameter althogether. It was by default created.  Wim van Dorst  (talk)  22:32, 25 January 2009 (UTC).


 * ✅ R'n'B (call me Russ) 00:52, 27 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks, Russ!  Wim van Dorst  (talk)  21:52, 27 January 2009 (UTC).
 * In fact, any value is interpreted as "yes", even "no"! If you don't want it, you will have to remove the parameter entirely. Thus restoring the EP. Please remove the following code from the template. Martin 10:01, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

|AUTO_ASSESS       = no  |auto=
 * ✅ Ruslik (talk) 06:28, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks, all.  Wim van Dorst  (talk)  17:06, 31 January 2009 (UTC).

Expanding template
Could we add the following code in, based on what we already have at Chemistry? Physchim62 (talk) 13:59, 28 February 2009 (UTC) |attention= |ATTENTION_CAT     = Chemical pages needing attention |infobox= |INFOBOX_CAT       = Chemical pages needing an infobox |note 1= |NOTE_1_TEXT       = This article is currently undergoing peer review by WikiProject Chemistry. Please feel free to leave a comment. |NOTE_1_IMAGE      = Nuvola apps designer.png |NOTE_1_SIZE      = 25px |NOTE_1_CAT        = Requests for Chemistry peer review |NOTE_1_FORMAT     = |NOTE_2_TEXT       = It is requested that a image or images be included in this article to improve its quality. |NOTE_2_IMAGE      = Image-request.svg |NOTE_2_SIZE      = 20px |NOTE_2_CAT        = Chemistry pages needing pictures |NOTE_2_FORMAT     = |note 3= |NOTE_3_TEXT       = This article is currently undergoing A-class review by WikiProject Chemistry. Please feel free to leave a comment. |NOTE_3_IMAGE      = Nuvola apps designer.png |NOTE_3_SIZE      = 25px |NOTE_3_CAT        = |NOTE_3_FORMAT     =
 * note 2=
 * ✅. Could you please create the two categories needed? The prompt for Category:none is an error - you don't need that one! Cheers, Martinmsgj 20:27, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Oops, there's a bug in the new code, caused by a non-standard parameter earlier on in the banner. Could someone replace  with. I'll check that the necessary categories exist. Physchim62 (talk) 21:49, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Done that. Also fixed the Category:none prompt! Martinmsgj 22:17, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Handling of FAs and GAs
Could someone replace the current notes section with the following:
 * (I've moved your requested code to the /sandbox to improve readability. &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:38, 26 June 2009 (UTC))

This will allow us to implement the new treatment of FAs and GAs as discussed at WT:CHEMS. Cheers! Physchim62 (talk) 09:23, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Interesting, this is the first project I've seen to go down this route. If I might make a couple of points before I make the edit.
 * This is going to require a lot of effort (I presume a bot will be used?) to go round setting FA=yes to all featured articles, etc. Would it make sense, as a temporary measure during the transition, to also accept class=FA to trigger the note? e.g. |note 1= or something similar.
 * What changes are you planning to make at Template:Chemicals/class? Will FA class be automatically graded to A-Class?
 * As you are pulling these classes out of the assessment scheme, have you considered changing the category naming? e.g. from Category:GA-Class chemicals articles to Category:WikiProject Chemicals good articles or something? (In effect there will be no GA-Class in your project anymore, so why have categories which infer that there is?)
 * &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:38, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

WP:MEASURE also uses a similar system, but it is a smaller project and its assessment scheme was written from scratch only a few months ago. I know the code works because it works for Measurement. As far as I know, we don't have any featured lists, but I thought it wise to set up the mechanism for handling them just in case we get one in the future. Physchim62 (talk) 10:12, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * All of featured articles (there aren't that many of them) have already had the tag inserted by hand. I'm working through the GAs at the moment. The most annoyingly petty job will be updating the documentation!
 * As a first step, yes, I will set FA as an alias of A-Class at Template:Chemicals/class. There are a couple of articles which will need reassessment, but that's doable within our current project resources. In the long term, the best solution would probably be to remove these classes from the classmask altogether, so that someone setting an article at "FA-Class" will actually be setting it to "Unassessed": this will give a clearer indication of the relationship between the two assessment schemes.
 * The classes will be pulled out of the bot assessment scheme, i.e. they will no longer be subcategories of Category:Chemicals articles by quality. Instead, I would have them as subcategories of Category:WikiProject Chemicals. I don't think they need renaming, especially as they would still be subcategories of Category:GA-Class articles etc. This last point doesn't affect the bot, but lets people find the categories if they're looking for them. Note that WikiProject Chemicals has never used GA-Class as a project grading scale, despite the existence of the category: I'm having to work through the list at WP:GA to find the good articles that we have!
 * Okay, you clearly know what you're doing so I've made the edit and I'll refrain from making any further comments :) &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:16, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

All the WP:CHEMS GAs are now tagged with  : if I've missed any, just add the code to the project tag on the talk page. They'll be a slight server lag before Category:GA-Class chemicals articles shows the correct number. I'll sort out the documentation this afternoon. Physchim62 (talk) 11:44, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * One last question. Does an article automatically get delisted as a good article when it becomes a featured article? Or can it be both simultaneously? If the former, is it relisted as a good article if it ever gets delisted as a featured article? &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:07, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * We go with whatever WP:FA and WP:GA say about such questions: after all, they are the people who are responsible for those assessments, not WP:CHEMS. Physchim62 (talk) 12:20, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Move?
Would there be any opposition to moving this template to Template:WikiProject Chemicals in line with most other WikiProject banner templates? The shortcut Chemicals could still be used. &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:51, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
 * What would be the benefit? Physchim62 (talk) 23:41, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
 * The WikiProject Chemicals template is already a shortcut the other way around. If the other projects want to use an elaborate name, then that's their choice. It sure is less typing to use chemicals.  Wim van Dorst  (talk)  21:00, 19 June 2010 (UTC).
 * Wherever the template is located, the current shortcut chemicals would always work and you would not need to start typing the extra characters. The advantages of standardising these template names are described at Banner standardisation. &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:41, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Read that page yet? Any comments? &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:39, 14 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Although I don't see a difference where it exactly is (either from 'our' side, nor from 'your' side!), I don't care either way. You say that it is easier to identify etc., I think that it does not matter.  Whether you check that WikiProject Chemicals is redirecting to Chemicals, or Chemicals is redirecting to WikiProject Chemicals (the former is what a bot now has to do, the latter is what the bot then has to do, most banners on the talkpages will still be chemicals, which the bot can not recognise as the wikiproject banner).  Users don't see the difference on the talkpage either, as both the banner and the redirect will be on the talkpages .. and letting a bot changing all of them just for the sake of being in line with most other WikiProject banner templates .. nah.  Why not program the bot like here, where the bot knows the template, and all redirects to that template, so it recognises it all?  --Dirk Beetstra T  C 14:50, 14 July 2010 (UTC)