Template talk:BCP47

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Lua error and hidden docs[edit]

@Tacsipacsi Hiyo. I'm wondering if it would be 'easy' to fix the Lua error that is currently showing on this page?

(It currently just shows: Lua error in Module:Documentation at line 140: message: type error in message cfg.container (string expected, got nil).)

It seems to be (?) preventing the display of the docs subpage (Template:BCP47/doc) which left me extra-confused for a few minutes, about this already complex template! Cheers, Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 01:06, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Quiddity (WMF): Just the usual, GeneralNotability broke the half wiki by careless usage of the Include all templates option on Special:Import. This particular breakage was reverted by Billinghurst, but I suggest reverting the following fully protected templates’ and modules’ changes as well:
The first three are just potentially broken (e.g. parameters dropped), so if someone carefully examines them and determines that nothing is broken (or fixes pages that are), they don’t need to be reverted; the protection banner config is, however, definitely and severely broken—no Lua errors, but it displays huge banners where it shouldn’t and adds redlinked categories instead of existing ones, so it should certainly be reverted. Also, Template:Tqq has been protected as High-risk template despite of not having a single transclusion; I suggest unprotecting it. —Tacsipacsi (talk) 15:24, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Tacsipacsi, I've already apologized for the screwup and made it clear that I won't be doing that again, the passive-aggressive commentary isn't necessary. I've made the reverts you suggested. GeneralNotability (talk) 15:27, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@GeneralNotability: I don’t know where and when did you apologize, but I certainly didn’t see it—if I did, I wouldn’t have used this language. Also, I’m much more mad at the extension than at you personally, sorry that this wasn’t clear (the just the usual also refers to that it happened again, not that you did it again—I don’t even track whether you’ve made such mess before, but I suppose you haven’t, it’s a lesson for a lifetime 🙂). Thanks for the reverts. —Tacsipacsi (talk) 15:44, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Tacsipacsi, all right, thank you - believe me, I am very mad at myself for messing up. I apologized here a few minutes before this, and yeah - I won't be making this mistake again, trust me. GeneralNotability (talk) 15:46, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, what about Template:Tqq? Why is it fully protected without any usage? —Tacsipacsi (talk) 15:45, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Tacsipacsi, I protected preemptively - assuming people start using it, it's one of those templates that gets used all over the place (at least, that's how it is on enwiki). If that's inappropriate I'll remove the protection. GeneralNotability (talk) 16:58, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@GeneralNotability: Even on enwiki, w:Template:Tqq is transcluded 827 times, which is not quite all over the place. (w:Template:Talk quote inline is indeed used on tens of thousands of pages, but that’s not what you protected here. Its Meta equivalent Template:Talk quotation was created four years ago, and still has just over 500 transclusions.) Also, User:MusikBot II works here on Meta as well, so templates that should be protected just because they’re used a lot, will be protected when they’re actually used a lot, manual protection is needed only for not much used yet sensitive templates like those used on the main page. —Tacsipacsi (talk) 18:00, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Comment it all sucks big browns that there are not global modules and templates, and until that sort of thing happens, this will happen with the existing system. A good system would have measures in place, and not rely on human behaviour for actions and inactions.  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:59, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]