Template talk:wotd

untitled
It would make much more sense to link to past WotDs rather than future ones. Ncik 14:06, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I've decided to make this template link to the cumulative index of past WOTDs instead of future ones. Since this is on the Main Page, we get a lot of people who are casual visitors or newbie users, so they probably shouldn't be directed to the queue of (ostensibly approved) future entries, only to the nominations page. More experienced users can get to the actual queue easily enough without needing a link on the Main Page... - dcljr 18:35, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Audio?

 * Moved to WT:GP. — Vildricianus 09:47, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Edit link
I've been bold with correcting the edit link to a) edit the entry and b) drive off a 4th parameter. This is one case where we should consider using named variables, instead of 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.

A possible "enhancement" would be to have call  and let  be stuffed in that way. But I'm sure many people would consider that complicated (even though the end result would be simpler, not requiring the "from" page at all.)  --Connel MacKenzie T C 17:12, 10 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Um, the edit link didn't work, so I tried to correct it. Did I mess things up? &mdash; Vildricianus 17:13, 10 April 2006 (UTC)


 * The edit link worked when I tried it. Perhaps it really does need  to be subst:'ed?  --Connel MacKenzie T C 17:24, 10 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I guess my question is: where didn't the edit link work? It works from the main page and from the individual templates.  --Connel MacKenzie T C 17:25, 10 April 2006 (UTC)


 * OK, I'm leaving this alone for now. --Connel MacKenzie T C 17:29, 10 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Gah! How did it break now?  --Connel MacKenzie T C 17:32, 10 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I see now.  has to be used, as MediaWiki template parser is broken, and cannot distinguish the pipe character correctly within the magic words "fullurl", "fullurle", "localurl", nor "localurle".  --Connel MacKenzie T C 17:38, 10 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Whew. :-) But did you consider what I mentioned in the BP about potential vandalism? &mdash; Vildricianus 17:41, 10 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Absolutely. I think we should have 31 days of "main page WOTDs" that are semi-protected, and let those inclined do the maintenance of cycling through them.  --Connel MacKenzie T C 17:58, 10 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Sounds like bot work to me. (Wow, a bot that has sysop rights?) &mdash; Vildricianus 17:59, 10 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Just to change topics: it is perfectly acceptable for a sysop to use a 'bot to perform edits: it is not acceptable to identify an account as both a sysop and a bot flag at the same time. Having the 'bot flag set only hides the plethora of edits from Special:Recentchanges.  Many people use bots to edit (such as the infamous Eddie Segoura) but because they are not tagged as 'bots, their edits simply appear as if they were normal human edits.  The 'bot flag does not even affect throttling rates (although in my opinion, it should.)  Humans should not be allowed to make more than 2 or 3 edits per minute, as more than that is an indication of vandalism in progress.  This is even more important for brand-new (unconfirmed) users.  The CAPTCHA images are helpful for this situation, currently, but could be improved.


 * The reason for having them recycle is to make the process error free, when the WOTD concept falls into disuse and new entries are no longer cycled in. This effort has had four false-starts in the time I've been here on Wiktionary.  Given that track record, I think we need such a safety mechanism, since it is on Main Page.  --Connel MacKenzie T C 18:55, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Semi-protection
What happened to all WOTDs being semi-protected? I've lost where that conversation was, and today's got vandalized. I've not gone through all of this month's, not next. If someone could... --Connel MacKenzie T C 16:23, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
 * So I'm really supposed to do everything, huh? :-) The June ones weren't even created as I was doing the first ones. Could someone else please keep an eye on this, too, for instance the one creating the pages? Ok, I'll do the upcoming ones now. — Vildricianus 16:46, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Done. Listed at Word of the day/Recycled pages which are and which aren't. — Vildricianus 22:34, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

2 little problems with this template

 * The article name argument doesn't allow for minor differences between basic-looking article titles and nice-looking headwords. This means curly apostrophes cannot be used unless the article name itself uses the curly apostrophe. Elsewhere in Wiktionary we use pipelinks to display the curly apostrophe.
 * Optional diacritcs and vowels are shown in headwords but not in article titles. Pipelinks are the solution here too though this is unlikely to be a problem with English words of the day since only languages such as Arabic, Hebrew, Latin, Old English, and Turkish are affected. &mdash; Hippietrail 13:17, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Adding category
To further clear out what is what, I'm adding a category to this template, so that this category can also be excluded from Request pages. --Connel MacKenzie 23:01, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Redoing this
I'm going to just overhaul this. Process:


 * 1) Copy to Template:wotd2 done
 * 2) Rework wotd2 done
 * 3) run bot to have entries use wotd2 with extra parameters done
 * 4) pick up bot-missed stragglers manually done
 * 5) move back to Template:wotd done
 * 6) run bot again to call wotd instead of wotd2

--Connel MacKenzie 02:04, 5 January 2007 (UTC) --Connel MacKenzie 07:25, 5 January 2007 (UTC) --Connel MacKenzie 21:52, 24 June 2007 (UTC)