Template talk:Requirements

From MeritBadgeDotOrg

Jump to: navigation, search


Requirements template idea

Okay; here's my idea for this and what I want I think we can get it done...

Using {{Documentation}} as a model, I want to create a a template that will allow us to do the following:
  • Create a subpage for any Main namespace article which contains requirements (Rank, badge, award, whatever) that looks and functions just like a template documentation page/subpage.
  • The color will be different from that used to provide template documentation; and
  • More importantly, protection will be reversed from the way template documentation works. Like so:
  • Whereas, in the case of a Template, the template itself is protected and the documentation subpage(s), e.g., '/doc', remain unprotected and, thus, may be edited... In this case, the article will remain unprotected and the requirements subpage(s), e.g., '/req', will be protected.

The original thinking (Optimist?) that brought this idea to light was to prevent vandalism. However, recent conversations have given me the idea that this type of action for requirements could also bring a very high level of trust in the eyes of ours users, registered and non-registered, alike.

Now, I could problably bang out something hard-coded that would work -- not to mention sloppy. But, that's not makes a wiki go 'round. The colaborative process is needed here to design (put all our effort) into one plug-in device that fits all sockets, then implement the thing. I know I've mentioned this before, but... a programmer, I'm not. The basics? I'm okay. The advanced template tricks (e.g., parser funtions and intricate variables)? Well, I'm still treading water there.

Any ideas, thoughts, help would be most appreciated. —RWSmith (Bureaucrat), 22:48, March 29, 2008 (EDT)

A couple more thoughts

There will be no need to worry about "viewing" in a transclusion state (as in template documentation subpage), just inclusion. So, I guess what I'm looking for is a pretty wrapper (i.e., appropriate header, subheader, and text box colors and shades) template with protection. —RWSmith (Bureaucrat), 00:16, March 30, 2008 (EDT)

Opps... We want Transclusion (or, Inclusion, if you prefer). Just not Substitution. My brain is tired. Good night. —RWSmith (Bureaucrat), 01:33, March 30, 2008 (EDT)

Great Idea!

I think that this would bring so many benefits as you have noted. I think that the most important one is trust. If someone altered a requirement, whether trying to be helpful or malicious, it may be some time before another volunteer sees the change and corrects it.

By locking the requirements text down, users will not need to worry whether the text shown is the BSA text.

Thank you for doing this. I am anxious to see how it would work. — Milominderbinder2 (Sysop) 16:12, April 1, 2008 (EDT)

Working? template

If I have the concept correct, I think I have a working version at: http://meritbadge.org/index.php?title=User:Scouterdennis/reqs. I duplicated {{documentation}} to {{Reqs}} (ugly name, I know, should be renamed) and made a few tweaks I thought appropriate:

  • Completely remove the edit/view. Admins can edit the contents by opening the page for editing and the clicking on the transcluded page link. That way, no one will even be tempted to edit the requirements, and it will be more apparent that they are locked.
  • Changed the header text and added a padlock image.
  • added the NOEDITSECTION tag
  • I had to force the TOC to appear where it made sense; that's not where the wiki was putting it.

What do you think? Is this what you wanted? Scouterdennis 22:23, April 1, 2008 (EDT)

Personal tools