Template talk:WikiProject Video games/Archive 2

NA priority for drafts
Template gods, would it be possible to set whatever parent template it is to automatically sort tagged articles in draftspace into the "Draft" quality and "na" priority? Right now they are auto-tagged as "Draft" but then require someone to go around and clean them up as "na" priority. Would be better if the template assumed they were at "na" quality unless someone says otherwise, as is the standard. (Is there a version of admin help for template editors?) czar  21:00, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
 * You say "would be better if the template assumed they were at "na" quality unless someone says otherwise, as is the standard" - what standard? Please give an example of another WikiProject banner template that does this. -- Red rose64 (talk) 22:07, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
 * , I forgot where we discussed this—do you remember?, standard cleanup for our project, not standard for other banners (perhaps evidenced by its lack of handling in a parent template). Would you recommend starting a discussion at a different talk page? Or is there any way to set this for just our project? czar  22:09, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
 * By "priority", I assume that you mean "importance". If so, it seems as if you wish to override . -- Red rose64 (talk) 22:12, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
 * If I am getting this right, then we would use a custom version of importance mask, which is done by setting subpage and making a Template:WikiProject Video games/importance subpage that is like importance mask, except it doesn't treat drafts as articles. — HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 22:29, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Importance subpages are used by (amongst others): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; . At the template's page, look for the second bullet "A custom importance mask is in use." and click that link. -- Red rose64 (talk) 23:19, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for those links, I couldn't figure out how to even find examples not knowing how they are used. Isn't the issue here that the Importance mask itself is what treats drafts as articles? That is, if we use the template, then no matter what we do in the subpage, drafts are treated as articles by: . So only Help Project from those examples would work, since it doesn't use the template. I guess simplest solution is that we'd first check if the page is a draft and return NA, otherwise pass through to Importance mask. —  HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 23:47, 20 February 2016 (UTC)


 * We discussed this at User talk:PresN- we were talking about why all Drafts are "Low" priority, and the reason was that if no priority was set (which it never is by the creator(s)) it was going automatically into Unassessed, so we/I just defaulted to Low. "N/A" makes more sense- Drafts are not live articles, and are not really rated on class and importance any more than a userspace draft would be, we just slap a default on them. Only live articles get real ratings, and as you say there, a Draft->Article space move gets flagged for review if the importance isn't set. -- Pres N  03:51, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

For information, this default behaviour was changed (by myself) in October 2014 (diff). I can't remember now if it was the result of a discussion somewhere, but I doubt I changed it unilaterally. We can revisit this decision of course. &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:59, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * The only thing I can identify out of these archives or WT:VGs is WT:WikiProject Video games/Archive 108, which precedes the edit by a month and does not mention this as a particular suggested change. --Izno (talk) 15:20, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * MSGJ's change is across all project banners so it was likely not local to our project. In any event, as mentioned on PresN's page, I think the main reason for auto-NA classification instead of "unknown" is that draft importance has little bearing on the project and runs the liability of not being reclassified when the draft is mainspaced. If the draft+na classification was automatic, the project banner would automatically report a need for reclassification. czar  15:26, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * That's definitely sensible to me. --Izno (talk) 15:28, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Found a very brief discussion at Template talk:WPBannerMeta/Archive 10 which only involved one other editor, but explains my rationale for the change. If you think this needs revisiting, we should probably consider changing it for all projects rather than setting up custom importance masks for your own project. Shall we post at WT:COUNCIL? &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 17:15, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * This definitely merits wider discussion, but I would suggest that the change be made here depending on local consensus. WT:COUNCIL is a good spot to advertise, but I would advise a separate discussion be at the meta banner talk page. --Izno (talk) 17:42, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Well I've reverted that change so your unassessed drafts will now go into NA-priority. If any other WikiProject wants to do the opposite we can discuss again. &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 22:13, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Confirmation
Just wanted to confirm from the above that the project has local consensus to automatically ignore importance parameters on articles classified as drafts and redirects. (The rationale being that they are always "NA importance", as are books, portals, etc., no?) If so, we can set up the Template:Importance mask to do this automatically. czar 17:23, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Sounds good to me. Drafts aren't really the type of stuff that needs importance to organize them. — HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 17:35, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Seems fine. --Izno (talk) 17:56, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Of course, it simply automates what we already consider usual practice. ☺ ·  Salvidrim!   ·  &#9993;  20:05, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Yep. -- Pres N  00:02, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

New parameter and category
We need a new parameter and category, something like  When dealing with an article subject that isn't a game, the current image request options don't fit. Adding  or   when the actual image required is neither of those is wrong. We need a separate option and category where requests for images of people, hardware and other non-game things can be categorised. Opinions? - X201 (talk) 08:52, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Screenshot - Cover art - Photograph. That would pretty much cover everything? Ben · Salvidrim!   &#9993;  14:35, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Could you code this up for  please? - X201 (talk) 15:14, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Done; will tag to Category:Video game articles requesting photos. Added count to WikiProject Video games. -- Pres N  17:22, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Great. Thanks. - X201 (talk) 19:16, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 24 October 2018
Change all mentions of "eSports" to "esports", per the RFC found at WP:Manual of Style/Video games.  JTP (talk • contribs) 02:53, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done - FlightTime  ( open channel ) 03:11, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I've undone this edit as being clearly inappropriately tested at this time. Please use the sandbox to make your suggested changes. --Izno (talk) 04:21, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I've for you. I suspect that the necessary changes are far fewer than  - for instance, the amendment to TF_2_NAME is fair, given that it is simply displayed text; but the others need more care. Altering tf 2 to tf 2 will cause all talk pages using that parameter to fail, a better change would be to tf 2 which allows the old parameter name to be recognised as an alias. TF_2_LINK should not be amended unless WikiProject Video games/eSports is moved to WikiProject Video games/esports; and the two category parameters, TF_2_MAIN_CAT and TF_2_ASSESSMENT_CAT should be left strictly alone until either a WP:CFD or WP:CFDS has closed as "rename"; if this happens, the amendment will probably be performed by . -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 09:05, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
 * WikiProject Video games/eSports was moved to WikiProject Video games/Esports, not "esports", following the RfC.  JTP (talk • contribs) 14:31, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
 * , re-done the edit with support for the old eSports parameter so multiple hundered pages aren't suddenly without the task force listing. The edit adapts to the new page and category names. Regards. Lordtobi  ( &#9993; ) 15:15, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Removal of AFD links, please?
In this template, several AFD discussions and the corresponding articles are linked. This creates at least 10,000-20,000 backlinks to the articles in question. When articles are deleted, backlinks are supposed to be removed. With such a vast number it takes extremely long (at least a day) for the cache to purge and backlinks to disappear. I don't want to exclude transclusions either, since some links that are permanent within templates (i.e. navboxes) should get the attention of the link-deleter. Therefore, can you please consider removing AFD links from this template, or better yet, only link directly to the discussion itself? Geschichte (talk) 20:44, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I'd support changing the article link to an AfD link and leaving the participant count / relisted note unlinked Ben · Salvidrim!   &#9993;  21:36, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Presumably, you refer to Template:WPVG announcements. Unlike Template:WikiProject Video games, this is extended-confirmed protected, so is editable by the vast majority of serious Wikipedia editors. -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 23:04, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

"Template:WGVG" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Template:WGVG. The discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 13 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Izno (talk) 03:19, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Potentially deprecating importance parameter
Hello all,

I have opened a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject_Video_games on if the optional importance parameter should be removed from this template, deprecating its use. Please check it out. SnowFire (talk) 17:29, 11 August 2021 (UTC)