User talk:Lucario: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 87: Line 87:
:How could you... This new category can help us find the old problem that should've been crossed out with {{tl|s}}{{tl|/s}} if the issue has already been fixed. "fixed" doesn't have to mean that the issue is actually fixed as seen in bug tracker, it just means that ''this'' issue is "no longer the case" for ''that'' game. Again, it was supposed to find and update the old problems that's since been fixed. The fixed and active problem categories are not same. [[User:Lucario|Lucario]] ([[User talk:Lucario|talk]]) 02:23, 11 November 2015 (CET)
:How could you... This new category can help us find the old problem that should've been crossed out with {{tl|s}}{{tl|/s}} if the issue has already been fixed. "fixed" doesn't have to mean that the issue is actually fixed as seen in bug tracker, it just means that ''this'' issue is "no longer the case" for ''that'' game. Again, it was supposed to find and update the old problems that's since been fixed. The fixed and active problem categories are not same. [[User:Lucario|Lucario]] ([[User talk:Lucario|talk]]) 02:23, 11 November 2015 (CET)
:: The point is, you '''should not''' jump straight to a template currently used in a lot of pages and just throw something new at it (that'll change how the template works). You '''discuss''' it first, show a sandbox with the concept, then, if you got positive '''consensus''', you go implementing it, I'm just sick of you and Wildgoosespeeder‎ failing to properly isolate whatever concepts you're proposing in the sandboxes instead of messing with templates and pages already in use by the wiki just to show how that concept will look. Not to mention also that your new wanted category could be instantly achieved with a simple snippet in {{tl|issue}} to check if the page that's including it already isn't a member of [[:Category:Pages with fixed problems]] and if not, tag it with the [[:Category:Pages with active problems]] instead of go spreading |fixed everywhere on the wiki (and even then the concept you proposed would still be somewhat wrong since a problem doesn't necessarily include a link to an issue and so the proposed category would have missing pages). - [[User:Jhonn|Jhonn]] ([[User talk:Jhonn|talk]])
:: The point is, you '''should not''' jump straight to a template currently used in a lot of pages and just throw something new at it (that'll change how the template works). You '''discuss''' it first, show a sandbox with the concept, then, if you got positive '''consensus''', you go implementing it, I'm just sick of you and Wildgoosespeeder‎ failing to properly isolate whatever concepts you're proposing in the sandboxes instead of messing with templates and pages already in use by the wiki just to show how that concept will look. Not to mention also that your new wanted category could be instantly achieved with a simple snippet in {{tl|issue}} to check if the page that's including it already isn't a member of [[:Category:Pages with fixed problems]] and if not, tag it with the [[:Category:Pages with active problems]] instead of go spreading |fixed everywhere on the wiki (and even then the concept you proposed would still be somewhat wrong since a problem doesn't necessarily include a link to an issue and so the proposed category would have missing pages). - [[User:Jhonn|Jhonn]] ([[User talk:Jhonn|talk]])
:::: You can test if a page exists, but I was of the impression that an additional extension would be needed to perform "Is page in category" tests[https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:PageInCat (1)] [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:CategoryTests (2)]. Am I missing something? [[User:Kolano|Kolano]] ([[User talk:Kolano|talk]]) 04:05, 11 November 2015 (CET)