On 27/02/07, darthvader1219(a)gmail.com wrote:
On 2/26/07, William Pietri wrote:
Another possibility that occurs to me. Could we do
a little stylesheet
and JavaScript magic to hide the specific warning templates unless
people click on something in the {{notverygood}} box? That would let us
keep them as part of the main article, but make them invisible to casual
readers. Further magic would make them by default available to logged-in
editors.
I really like the idea of hiding the specific warning templates in the
{{notverygood}} box at the top of the article. It could work similarly
to {{Template:WikiProjectBanners}}.
It would have some standard message concerning how the article is not quite
up to par, with all the specifics hidden inside it. It would be far more
visually attractive for those articles that have three or four maintenance
templates at the top, but would still keep those templates on the main
article page.
Hmm. I like it.
"The Wikipedia community has identified issues with the quality of
this article; [click here] to show more specific details or [see the
talk page] for discussion regarding the issue"
First link brings a dropdown as with the banners template; second
takes you to talk. If you were particularly clever, "the quality"
could be changed on the fly to reflect the specific tagging...
I think basically that our software has not kept up with the kind of
innovation that has been suggested in messages like this. Our current
developers are doing what they can, but keeping the site operational
needs to be a priority. I can imagine all manner of schemes for
evaluating the worth of an article, but I'm totally incapable of coming
to terms with the software needed to make it happen. Such conceptually
simple ideas as single login, improved search functions, and stable
version have all been kicking around for a while, and I often wonder
whether it's the technology or the politics that is holding these ideas up.
Ec