Template talk:WikiProject LGBT studies

Active discussions
WikiProject LGBT studies (Rated Template-class)
This template is of interest to WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBT-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.
 Template  This template does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
  1. 2006-present

Why is this admin-only?Edit


Dybryd (talk) 07:12, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

PC78 (talk) 08:09, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
It's a target for vandalism. Banjeboi 20:22, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Add some text for NPOVEdit

Per Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_LGBT_studies#Add_text_to_project_tag.3F, Inclusion of the LGBT wikiproject tag does not imply LGBT support or objection to the subject of an article (per WP:NPOV). should be added to the template. Gary King (talk) 18:26, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Dunno. This sounds rather like the proposal made above, and has the same problems, i.e. it's basically a disclaimer, and a potential violation of WP:DISCLAIM. As noted above, if you need to provide some sort of justification for tagging an article for this project, then the template already has an "explanation" parameter. I would prefer to have a wider concensus before such a change is made. PC78 (talk) 18:41, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Alright; feel free to join in on the discussion over there :) Gary King (talk) 18:45, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
It is not a disclaimer. It simply states a fact. The tag is commonly mispercieved as something it is not - IE, LGBT endorsement of an articles subject. The tag is no such endorsement, as the tag is neutral... It merely indicates that an article's subject comes under the remit of LGBT studies, and as such, neither support or objection is implied. That is a mere statement of fact. If it were advocating that "this particular tage doesn't mean that we support" and on a different article saying "this particular tag doesn't mean we object" then it would be a disclaimer. Stating that the tage niether supports or objects generally without reference to any specific source of controversy disclaims nothing. All it does is make a factual statement about the nature of the tag itself which corrects a common misinterpretation... as mentioned above, there is discussion on the wikiproject talk page. Crimsone (talk) 18:49, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

The text is not a disclaimer in any of the senses specified at WP:DISCLAIM -- which are disclaimers about the accuracy and reliability of WP content either in a general or specific sense (medical, legal) or else warnings about content (explicit material or spoilers).

It is a simple reminder of a central WP policy -- that the LGBT project adheres to NPOV in its editing. It ought to go without saying. It doesn't go without saying, it comes up again and again.

Dybryd (talk) 21:20, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

I've already posted further comment over at the project talk page; lets not carry on the discussion in two different places. PC78 (talk) 21:27, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Edit request, 15 November 2008Edit

{{editprotected}} Please replace this template with the contents of User:PC78/lgbt. The DEFAULTSORT in this template seems to be causing a conflict with the "listas" parameter in {{WPBiography}} (see Talk:Alan Turing for an example of this). I have removed this feature from the template code, but added PAGENAME to the various categories to ensure that they are still sorted alphabetically. Regards. PC78 (talk) 14:43, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Your request sounds reasonable, PC78. I'm going to leave it for someone else to do though, so that someone more familiar with template code can check it out first. Maybe you should post a note on Satyr's talkpage? Aleta Sing 16:16, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
Isn't [[:Category:Somecat|{{PAGENAME}}]] redundant? And wouldn't that force a different sort order than the {{DEFAULTSORT}} if one were present? I'd prefer just removing the DEFAULTSORT and leaving the others alone, but let me know if there's a reason for the PAGENAMEs that I'm missing. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 18:49, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
It is only redundant for pages in the article space, but for the purposes of this template it is necessary to prevent articles from all being categorized under T (i.e. Talk:Somearticle). At present the DEFAULTSORT is set to PAGENAME anyway, so I'm not sure why you think this change would force a different sort order. PC78 (talk) 19:02, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
Ah - right - that explains the DEFAULTSORT. However, with biographies the WPBIO template would impose a "LISTAS" defaultsort, right? So then this template would override that. However, I don't know any coding way to overcome that conflict, and the benefit of *not* having everything listed under "T" is probably stronger than worrying about the conflict. I'll make the change you suggest. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 19:19, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Edit request, 3 December 2009Edit

Hi, I just noticed that the Spanish interwiki links with the wrong template (an early test version that was soon discarded). The right link would be this one. Could someone please change it? Thanks Raystorm (¿Sí?) 12:20, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

You can do this yourself at the bottom of the documentation page Template:LGBTProject/doc. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:55, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Aha, thanks for the pointer. Raystorm (¿Sí?) 17:28, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

No importance of article capability?Edit

This template doesn't allow users to categorize what importance the article is in? Isn't that typically used for templates like these, or is there something I'm missing?Wikiposter0123 (talk) 04:30, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

It does allow quality assessment, by using the class parameter. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:37, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, I meant to say importance ranking.(edited to reflect)Wikiposter0123 (talk) 20:30, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
You're right it doesn't do importance ratings. This option could be added if there was agreement by the WikiProject. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:31, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Kk, I was just wondering if it was supposed to or not. Guess not. Thanks.Wikiposter0123 (talk) 20:50, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
To avoid misleading people about this template's functionality, I've removed the part of the documentation which suggested that this template had an 'importance=' parameter; obviously, the documentation should be restored iff the functionality is restored. -sche (talk) 02:05, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
@-sche: I added it to the documentation with this edit at 22:59, 30 August 2015, but it was a valid parameter at the time - between 19:37, 30 August 2015 and 23:20, 1 September 2015. --Redrose64 (talk) 09:36, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
I figured. To be clear, I wasn't suggesting that your edit was misleading, merely that the failure of whoever removed the functionality to also remove the documentation left things in a state which had, just before my edit, resulted in someone adding an effectless importance= parameter to Talk:Transgender. -sche (talk) 08:51, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Edit Request, 16 June 2020Edit

I'd like to see the Template:WikiProject LGBT studies have a link to its unassessed articles. That could make it easier to assess unassessed articles. This link would go to en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Unassessed_LGBT_articles and would look something like this:

You would have to use the {{URL|example.com|optional display text}} template b/c using brackets does not work.

Makes sure to view the source code of my comment -- that's the only way you'll be able to copy my edit into the template.

The final product would look like this:

P,TO 19104 (talk) (contributions) 14:48, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

@P,TO 19104:   Not done: please make your requested changes to the template's sandbox first; see WP:TESTCASES. Please do not paste code examples into the talk page, that's why we have the sandbox. Similarly, demonstrations belong at the testcases page. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:42, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
@Redrose64: Ok. I put the code into the sandbox. You can also view the code in the test cases page where it would be the second and third ones down. Is my edit accepted? P,TO 19104 (talk) (contributions) 20:54, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
OK, so your sandbox changes show your proposed change much more clearly than posting blobs of code into a talk page. Question on that: why are you using {{URL}}? In fact, why use a full URL at all?
But this is not how we make test cases. All you should need to do is provide two example transclusions using identical parameters: one transclusion of the live template, and one of the sandbox - see for example the two lines immediately above your new lines. This should be explained at WP:TESTCASES. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:19, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
@Redrose64: Ok -- I have now put the live template and the proposed changed template in the sandbox.
Answer to your question on why I am using the {{URL}} template: The WikiProject uses a category to categorize all unassessed articles; however, unfortunately using {{[Category:Unassessed LGBT articles]}} ( I used single brackets for a reason since double brackets would yield {{}} ) does not show without viewing the source. The reason for this is because this source code is supposed to be used at the top of article to categorize them NOT to link the articles to categories in a template.
Let me show you in this example:
As you can see, there is nothing in the box!
So, the only solution is to use {{URL}} or to use [2]
P,TO 19104 (talk) (contributions) 14:53, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
No, no, no. With edits like these, you're just making it even more difficult to work out exactly what you want done. In the box above, beginning "It is requested that an edit be made ...", do you see a link titled sandbox diff? Click it. That compares the live template with the sandbox, and so should tell me what specific change is desired - but it doesn't. You seem to have added some headings and made extra copies of the template in there, which not only makes it difficult to work out what the specific change is, it also makes it impossible to test on the testcases page.
Start off by making the sandbox an exact copy of the live template, such that the sandbox diff link shows the text "(No difference)" - this is what I did here. Then edit the sandbox, making only those changes that you would have made to the live template if it was not protected.
If you want to link a category, you don't need to jump through hoops - there are two easy ways; and one is very easy indeed. H:WIKILINK explains in the last paragraph of that section that you merely need to insert a colon at the start:
Then there is the template {{cl}}:
So your "only solution" is demonstrably untrue. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:14, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
@Redrose64: Okay- see my proposed revisions [3] or in the sandbox. P,TO 19104 (talk) (contributions) 22:56, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
Your link doesn't work, my browser throws a "Server not found" error. Why do you want to complicate matters by using templates like {{URL}}? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:25, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
@Redrose64:Try it now. P,TO 19104 (talk) (contributions) 13:46, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
These are your proposed changes. Please review WP:TESTCASES again - it should be possible for an editor with the appropriate user right to copy the whole of the sandbox to the live template, replacing everything that is presently there; but I tell you straight - if they do that, there will be trouble because of broken transclusions.
  • Why do you want a {{Sandbox notice}} to be added? That would be totally unacceptable on the live template.
  • Why do you want the {{documentation}} removed? When a template has documentation, we always provide it.
  • Why do you want the </noinclude> tag to be removed? This will leave an unclosed <noinclude> tag whcich is bad practice.
Changes like these will simply not be put live. I am on the point of rejecting your request outright - and I haven't even got as far as looking for verification that WikiProject LGBT studies actually desires any of your changes. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:02, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
Return to "WikiProject LGBT studies" page.