Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Userboxes/Archive 2021

Standardisation of WikiOgre & WikiOgress
Instead of User wikipedia/WikiOgre & User wikipedia/WikiOgress, I propose a single customizable template, something like this: User:Est. 2021/sandbox/WikiOgre Let me know your thoughts. — Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 05:20, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Be bold, I guess. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 15:55, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Standardisation of Political userboxes
I'm trying to clean and standardise the code of political userboxes, among other things. Here are some examples I worked on so far: Let me know your thoughts! — Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 05:50, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
 * 1) User:UBX/Pro-EUSO&WithoutUSA
 * 2) User talk:JJARichardson/EU support reform
 * 3) User talk:Buzz105/Pro-EU Russia Integration
 * 4) User:UBX/EU enlargement wish
 * 5) User:UBX/Euro adoption wish
 * 6) User Support EU

Where do template bug reports go?
I have reported a template bug on the template's talk page Template talk:User lives in. Is that correct, or should I do it here? --Verbarson (talk) 22:06, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Solved by PrimeHunter --Verbarson (talk) 22:51, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Template:WikiProject Userboxes
Is this template meant to be placed on "user talk" pages? 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 15:57, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Sure, if they are userbox pages. - Ahunt (talk) 16:13, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
 * To me this seems a bit intrusive, given that a user is allowed to do with their userspace whatever they want (within some boundaries). What if they don't want the assessment template? It usually has a reason why the user publishes a userbox into their userspace instead of template space. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 16:27, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Well then remove it. - Ahunt (talk) 22:25, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Streamlining of WikiProject userboxes
We currently have three different generic WikiProject userboxes (, and ), in addition to more than 2.400 specific WikiProject user templates. I propose to introduce a single customisable WikiProject userbox, here is my draft. We'll have to update a single subpage composed of switch statements, instead of thousands of pages. Let me know your thoughts! Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 06:00, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
 * 20 days passed and nobody opposed, meanwhile my draft has been formally recognised as part of this project. I'll wait a few extra days before making these edits, in case somebody else would like to comment. Thank you, Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 01:52, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Update: after additional users' comments (both on my talk page, WikiProject Portals and Requested moves), the merger has been completed and my draft has been moved to Template namespace. We kept the name . Regards, Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 14:03, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Just found time to comment. This is not a good idea for many reasons including making customization less streamlined for those wanting to adjust the userbox of a project they are involved in or update it and makes substitution for personal use harder substitution. This discussion was also very poorly advertised. Also, this is unacceptable due to errors to the switch template (emblematic of how easy it is to break something like this scheme and protecting it could lock others from being able to edit something that should not be heavily constrained): Catastrophic userbox error.png Thus, I will be removing the templates of projects that I am a member of from this scheme. Consensus to reimplement them there should be discussed on the respective project talk page (and please ping me if you start any). It is not always good to take silence to mean that something is a good idea but rather merely that no one who cared saw it. I would suggest a full rollback of this seemingly quite problematic idea. — Godsy (TALK CONT ) 05:16, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * The error in the switch subtemplate has been fixed after ten seconds from the mistaken edit, what are you talking about? Your comment does not make sense at all, since the template works perfectly and it actually gives user a wider possibility of customisation. You clearly didn't even read the documentation. By the way, this discussion has been mentioned and commented everywhere, you come late and without any serious point. Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 05:21, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Where is "everywhere"? Between Feb. 19 and Mar. 11, where do you post links to encourage participation in this arcanely placed discussion? — Godsy (TALK CONT ) 05:26, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * This "arcanely placed discussion" (and by the way this is its proper place) has been mentioned and commented on WikiProject talks, Template talks and User talks, and I talked about them too in my past comments. Instead of acting so poorly and inventing non-existent issues with the subtemplate, you could just check what you missed in the past month and try to be useful someway. Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 05:36, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * So a very wide and broad change was mused about in other fairly arcane places but not given a request for comment or list somewhere widely watched. Got it. Look ... the fact that no one commented here and the lack of making those affected aware is very unideal. I could start an rfc and pose whether or not this is a good idea to the community in a better way. There would be grounds for reversion to the status quo given that not much time has passed since the "consensus" between you and yourself was "established" here. However, I am content with moving the three or four projects I am involved in off this bandwagon (and I'll leave proper notice to those projects that this was done) and letting it go (though I still think it is a terrible idea based on the poignant points I provided above and more; happy to explicate upon those if requested) when I find the time. Otherwise, this matter may become drawn out. Left as much frustration out of that as I could muster leaving out. Warm regards, — Godsy (TALK CONT ) 05:51, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * The "consensus" between me and myself? haha, damn, I'm crying. The template has been flagged by another user, commented by other users and moved by another one, just like all the fixes I made depend on some request made by other users on my talk page or elsewhere. You can do whatever you prefer with your user page, but if you don't like an userbox, just explain your point of view and make suggestions; don't revert the updates, because you could break the customisable parameters on other users' pages. I'm here for whatever you need, I'll be sincerely glad to help you understanding this new code, but the userboxes stay customisable and everybody chooses the layout they prefer. Thanks, Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 06:05, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Patrolling merely indicates it is free of vandalism and other inappropriateness etc., comments are often given freely, the move venue you chose is merely for uncontroversial technical requests (i.e. I could likely go there right now claim it is controversial and have it moved back), and fixes indicate it likely broke or would have broken things. Members of particular projects have always traditionally gotten to decide the nature of the userbox for their project; I plan to follow that custom. Given this is new, it is unlikely many have implemented the new-fangled (but more complicated) parameters. They were already customisable more simply through substitution. Feel free to make an appeal on each of the individual wikiprojects to gain proper consensus for this locally should any choose to reject it or properly advertise this and gain consensus to force wikiprojects to use this scheme. Good day, — Godsy (TALK CONT ) 15:40, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

As I said, there's nothing broken. We just merged the previous templates, made all parameters customisable (still heavily shortening the code) and fixed the previous categorisation method using. The only changes have been: You can read the list of parameters on the template documentation. There's also the TemplateData, and since it's transcluded on more than 7 thousand user pages we'll be able to check the TemplateData parameter usage tool next month. Regards, Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 16:49, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * 1) the user category has been made customisable too, as per discussions you can find on my talk page.
 * 2) since User WP has been moved to Template namespace, an optional line break has been added for WikiProjects with longer names.
 * E.g. Template:User WikiProject Portals now contains  instead of  . That is fundamentally different; one can no longer simply open the template and edit it. I reverted and challenged your changes to the template on Jan. 22. You came back March 13 with your self-consensus from elsewhere. I do not understand why you wish to force this issue almost unilaterally. The community has not agreed or been properly queried for such broad changes (userboxes and changes to them have long been highly controversial in the past) to this on a small or en masse scale. —  Godsy (TALK CONT ) 17:08, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * That's false. You can do it. Just add named parameters: image, size, id-c, info-c, info-fc, border-c, etc... you have them all at your disposal, but the resulting template will be anyway shorter. Check Template:User WikiProject Journalism for an example. Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 17:14, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Shorter ≠ better. The new way is less clear as how to edit it and more convoluted. There is no good reason for the "base" template not to be fully on the page itself. — Godsy (TALK CONT ) 17:17, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Here's the code for your example:.
 * It gives you the same exact userbox you mentioned, that is: . Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 17:20, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * The problem is having to look up the parameters to change them; in the old version one might only have to do that if wanting a parameter not already used. Every parameter used was present and easily adjustable; this is no longer the case and is detrimental to those wishing to easily change something regarding the userbox of a wikiproject they are involved with. — Godsy (TALK CONT ) 17:26, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * So you just miss a complete list of parameters? It's here. They're the same parameters you had before, they just work better now, giving back the appropriate text, links and categories automatically, and they should not be easily editable anyway, despite I made everything customisable. They're 'official' badges of Wikipedia projects, not personal userboxes. Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 17:38, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * No. I miss all of the parameters that are used being present on the template as opposed to invisibly "invoked" from elsewhere. That aside, active members of a wikiproject should certainly be able to easily edit or update the templates (and the templates themselves belong much, much more to the domain of the individual projects as opposed to this one). Perhaps that is the fundamental point of our disagreement. — Godsy (TALK CONT ) 18:07, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * They can customise every template based on User WP, on their user pages. They couldn't do this before. If you wish to change the default results instead, we can do this too. That's why we have a central switch subtemplate mentioned and linked in the documentation. Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 18:16, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * It was easily possible for an individual to customize every template before, e.g. through simple substitution. It was easier to customize the default without jumping through the hoops now present that were not before. The perceived small benefits of the new system do not outweigh the heavy downsides I explicate above. — Godsy (TALK CONT ) 18:29, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Links and categories in substituted templates become soon dated or even obsolete, often populating redirected or deleted categories, while customising the template without subst allows users to keep their links and cats automatically updated. Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 18:35, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Links to the main wikiproject page and perhaps a participant user category very rarely change, and those are what is generally included in such templates. Thus, that is an extremely minute benefit and not a good reason for such a grand overhaul with great drawbacks. — Godsy (TALK CONT ) 18:44, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * No. By the way, the only "downside" you specifically mentioned is that this template is "more complicated" for you to understand despite it's objectively simpler and shorter and has the same parameters working better, but still you talk of "heavy downsides" so, please, expose them. Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 19:52, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I have explained the weighty downsides and why it is certainly not "objectively simpler and shorter" at length above. — Godsy (TALK CONT ) 13:30, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I have explained the weighty downsides and why it is certainly not "objectively simpler and shorter" at length above. — Godsy (TALK CONT ) 13:30, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Malfunctioning template.
Hi, I left a message on the template talk page at: User:Littlecat456/Userboxes/Userboxes in here about the documented parameter not working due to the fact that it still links to the userboxes of the template creator no matter what parameter you put in. I didn't know what other talk pages I should report the issue to. Thanks. Huggums537 (talk) 10:49, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I replied on the linked talk page. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 11:50, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you for fixing that. I made my own userbox that has a more Wikimedia software friendly naming scheme that works better for me, but whatever you did was a good patch for this one. Huggums537 (talk) 19:16, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Template:UBX/Male chauvinist and Template:UBX/Female chauvinist
Hey all, I just noticed these new userboxes for users to identify as chauvinists, with the templates noting that a user thinks women/men are better than men/women. While I'm not an expert on userboxes, this strikes me as a violation of WP:UBCR, which states in part that Userboxes must not be inflammatory or substantially divisive. I think these should be deleted, especially given Wikipedia's efforts to ensure an inclusive environment for users and editors regardless of gender. Does anyone else have input? RunningTiger123 (talk) 00:20, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I guess they are not intended humourously, are they? Probably worth noting that neither one is used on any user page, so probably can be filed under "will not be missed". - Ahunt (talk) 00:22, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I can't tell if it's supposed to be humorous, so I'm assuming it's not... RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:29, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
 * So probably not. - Ahunt (talk) 03:04, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I've created an MfD nomination per this discussion. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 19:50, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Weird template reactions.
Hi. I've made several userboxes of my own, but also borrowed code from others to make derivatives. One such code that I copied was a documentation template, and the weird thing is that at least two of my userboxes don't display correctly when I go to the template page and copy the transclusion code from the documentation where it says; usage: copy xxx to your userpage.

I can copy my userbox xxx from any other location where I have it listed such as the main userbox gallery, or the new userbox talk page, or even my own personal gallery, and it works fine, but like I said, if I copy it from the documentation on the actual template page and then post it somewhere it fails. I even tried switching the template from documentation to quote frame and still had the same problem. I don't know if it is because I'm trying to do it from my own user page, or if it will work weird for everyone.

I'm thinking about ditching the usage documentation entirely or just going with simple text. People aren't going to want my boxes if the documentation tells them to copy it, and then when they do it doesn't work.

The latest example of this happening is here:

I got it to work in my personal userbox gallery and on my userpage. In fact, you can probably get it to work now by copying it from this page, but that is only because I copied it from the title of the template page and added brackets. If you try to copy it from the documentation on the template page you will see it probably doesn't work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Huggums537 (talk • contribs)


 * Thanks for bringing this here. I just tested out and it seems to display fine. The documentation on that page says to use  which does not work due to the "User:" missing. Is that the issue? - Ahunt (talk) 12:08, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Oh jeez I feel retarded. I was trying everything I could think of to figure out where the code was going wrong, and overlooked the obvious. That's what I get for editing under the influence of sleep deprivation. Thanks for figuring it out for me. Doh! Huggums537 (talk) 13:57, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
 * No problem. That sort of thing happens to all of us, if you are hear long enough. Sometimes all it takes is a fresh set of eyes to find it. I hope you get some sleep. - Ahunt (talk) 14:12, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
 * The worst part about it is that I made the exact same mistake like 2 or 3 weeks ago, but caught it myself last time, so I shoulda known better. Oh, well. I betcha I avoid doing that again. Good "night" everyone... Huggums537 (talk) 14:42, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
 * No problem, collaboration works. You always have friendly help available here! - Ahunt (talk) 15:03, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Template:Uiw listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Template:Uiw to be moved to Template:User in body of water. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 21:50, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
 * To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Questions on WikiProject Userboxes/Assessment
Having read this page I can make no sense of it at all. The text seems to have all been copied from assessment of articles and some attempt to re-label it as userboxes, but the the text doesn't fit the subject. For instance there are no "featured articles" for userboxes and there is no agreed "assessment department" for them either. What is the aim here? Where is any discussion and consensus that says we need an assessment system for userboxes, when by definition they are user content? Perhaps someone can fill me in on what this is all about. - Ahunt (talk) 12:04, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm in the process of setting up the bot to run reports on all the userboxes, and any of the pages associated with them. Yes, I copied the language from somewhere else. I'm going to modify the page based on what the bot finds out there. This is a work in progress. --evrik (talk) 16:55, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Well currently it makes no sense at all. You need to first gain a consensus for even having an assessment process. You can't just unilaterally impose an assessment process on the project and I am not sure you will find any support for doing that. Maybe you can start off by explaining why you think that user content, like userboxes, need to be assessed by anyone? What will this achieve? Ahunt (talk) 18:24, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Requests
Hi, I'm not too sure about how exactly to make a good userbox, and how all the formatting and code works. I'd love if someone could make a userbox for me which has the following parameters (anything not listed is up to the creative freedom of the person creating it):
 * Says "This user is a musical theatre actor."
 * I'd like there to be a no-parameter version (as above), as well as a parameter version.
 * If there are any parameters, I'd like it to say "This user is a musical theatre actor, and has performed in "
 * If there's only one parameter, I'd like it to append that parameter to the end of the text in the userbox.
 * If there's more than one parameter, I'd like it to make a nicely looking list with each parameter in it at the end of the userbox text.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Geordannik (talk) 00:20, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
 * You should ask someone here. Those are editors who take requests. Jerm (talk) 21:09, 10 September 2021 (UTC)