MediaWiki talk:Gadgets-definition/Archive/2011

Added Gadget-popups

I have added the Popups gadget, and have it set to use ResourceLoader to pull it from WP. Further info at w:Wikipedia:Tools/Navigation popups especially with regard to configuration of options within your skin.  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:13, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Rillke^(q?) 14:44, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Added Gadget-AjaxPatrolLinks

Another of the universal kit of tools available at Meta. Allows patrollers and admins to patrol links from the diff in situ to the diff without the progression to another page. Information at m:User:Krinkle/Scripts/AjaxPatrolLinks, and uses ResourceLoader to implement and update the script.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:22, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

There should be more Ajax-tools like this. -- Rillke^(q?) 14:44, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Rillke^(q?) 14:44, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

show specific gadgets only to privileged users

Hello, with the option “rights” it's possible to hide Gadgets for Users without the required rights. Please check Special:Gadgets and Special:ListGroupRights to see which gadgets would fit to which right limitations, e.g. the admin-only scripts. --  ✓ ^Bergi 15:55, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

 Done. Unfortunately there is no way to filter by user. -- Rillke^(q?) 14:44, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Rillke^(q?) 14:44, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Syntax

Hi!

I think the correct syntax for

* AjaxPatrolLinks[ResourceLoader] [rights=patrol]|AjaxPatrolLinks.js 

is

* AjaxPatrolLinks[ResourceLoader | rights=patrol]|AjaxPatrolLinks.js 

See mw:Extension:Gadgets#Format. Helder 17:42, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

 Done Thanks! In the future you may use {{Editprotected}} to draw attention to this talk thread. –Krinkle^talk 20:15, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you! Sometimes I forget to use that template =(... Helder 22:47, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Rillke^(q?) 14:44, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

SVG-edit

Is it possible to add http://code.google.com/p/svg-edit/ so that we have inbrowser SVG editing integrated into MediaWiki with file save revision support? That would be great! Matt (talk) 16:38, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

I've already done some work on doing this as an extension (mw:Extension:SVGEdit) and have some ideas for tweaking it to work as a gadget too -- I'll see what I can whip together. I'll poke some notes at http://code.google.com/p/svg-edit/issues/detail?id=747 and here. --brion (talk) 23:28, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

 Support

But where are the notes? -- Rillke^(q?) 14:44, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Hedwig in Washington ^(mail?) 22:13, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

report

Commons:Database_reports/User_preferences#Gadgets shows the number of active and inactive users who have them enabled. --  Docu  at 07:04, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Hedwig in Washington ^(mail?) 22:13, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

Remove obsolete gadget

{{editprotected}}

See MediaWiki talk:Gadget-EnhancedUndelete.js#Obsolete. Helder 15:47, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

 Done though left the gadget parts in place, at least for the moment.  — billinghurst sDrewth 03:13, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Hedwig in Washington ^(mail?) 22:14, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

Location of category interface gadgets

Saibo moved [1] a new category interface gadget, but there are several ones in the "category" section already "cat above all" and "cat below image". What distinguishes an interface modification from a tool anyway? Confused... Rd232 (talk) 19:28, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Umm, well, at first I went to the prefs page to switch on the gadget and was looking in the interface section where I didn't find it. Then I improved the code and desc. a bit, and then I saw the still strange position beneath the categorizing(!) tools cat-a-lot and so on. Since I was chatting anyway with Rillke I asked and did not hear a oppose rather a agreeing position. Anyway, it was my decision and I didn't thought that someone opposes.

Yes I would move

• Kategorien über jeglichem Seiteninhalt
• Kategorien über jeglichem Seiteninhalt, jedoch unter dem Bild auf Dateibeschreibungsseiten

too (I may note that I did not know about those two gadgets in this section).

What else should be interface if not such visual changes? If you do not agree that it fits better in "interface" move it back - you were first. ;-) Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 22:18, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

I don't know... I tried moving some things about, as a fair amount of illogic has accumulated. Let's see what the reaction is. Rd232 (talk) 23:09, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

I hope you didn't loose some gadgets in the Toowaaboo. ;-) That looks good on first sight, thanks! Probably things will stay suboptimal until we put gadgets in several categories. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 23:29, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Yes, there are plans to eventually (a year or two?) revamp the whole gadget interface anyway. In the mean time, I wish we could get the mechanism working again where gadgets can go onto other pages of Preferences; it seems to be broken. Rd232 (talk) 23:32, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

{{Editprotected}}

Please restore the original layout and seek consensus first.

• CategoryAboveAll|CategoryAboveAll.js
• CategoryAboveBelowImage|CategoryAboveBelowImage.js

are not limited to file namespace. Let's leave this to more experienced administrators. --  Docu  at 06:52, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the error report; I've amended the section name. I'm not reverting; I used to take your insistence on prior consensus more seriously when I didn't know how little you care about consensus for things you want to happen. Rd232 (talk) 09:30, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

PS Those shouldn't even be on the "gadgets" page - they're not tools. But {{Gadget-desc}}'s |page parameter doesn't seem to be working :( Rd232 (talk) 09:47, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

We just want to make sure things are checked before being implemented as it's important that experienced editors review these change before.

Understandably, you don't want to revert yourself, but the edit request isn't addressed to you. --  Docu  at 09:53, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

page parameter: I know you mentioned it before, but I forgot about. Sorry. Should be Fixed now. Please do not use numbers, instead use the reference now. If it does not work, let me know, please. -- RE rillke questions? 10:36, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Have you seen this working? MediaWiki:Gadget-DropdownToTabbar could serve as a test case; it's not working for me. If/when it works, I'd make a helper template to translate the numbers to id names, for backward compatibility and easier use. Rd232 (talk) 12:24, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

No. Unfortunately, no js seems not to be loaded on the perferences page except the default ones by the software (mw and jquery, geoiplookup, bannercontroller, and the user's settings). Pretty useless. -- RE rillke questions? 12:46, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

That's disappointing. I can't find a related bug, if you want to file one to ask for JS to be loaded on it. Rd232 (talk) 13:15, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

I fear this is intended behavior. Gadgets are community developed and may contain unsave code. Of course we could make a hack to enable scripts here by replacing the target of the Preferences - link and instead run a JavaScript that either replaces the page with an iframe and listens for it's ready event or by sending a XHR and replace the page's contents with the altered result from the server for the preferences-page. -- RE rillke questions? 16:03, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

I wondered about it being the intended behaviour for security reasons... but I'm not sure if those security reasons are really more compelling on the Preferences page? If the concern is that a malicious gadget script could prevent a user deactivating it, it can always be disabled clientside (Javascript off) until someone with access deals with the script itself. Rd232 (talk) 16:09, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

I think the best is, if you ask a mediawiki developer directly or file a bug on bugzilla. If this whole software is documented that poorly, that you have to guess each "why", they have to deal with those questions. -- RE rillke questions? 16:29, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

There is an open bug related to this: Bug 18186. Helder 16:49, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

What should be "FilesCategories"? I like it more before this change. --Saibo (Δ) 02:01, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

MediaWiki:Gadget-section-FilesCategories: "Interface: Files and categories". It was originally "file pages", and I added "categories" to accommodate the category interface gadgets. I don't think any particular arrangement is ideal; I'm open to suggestions. Rd232 (talk) 17:11, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Leave it ===Filepages=== and make a new section "Categorypages" if you do not want to have LongNames in the "others" section. "FilesCategories" is not really a word and unclear what it means (apparently it should mean File and category pages). Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 00:42, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Your suggestion was my first instinct; but splitting would make each section rather short. And a new section could not be "CategoryPages" as some of the interface category gadgets also affect galleries and file pages. Rd232 (talk) 00:55, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Docu, can you live with the current situation since the new heading reads "Interface: Files and categories"? And this is actually what they do: Changing the interface concerning categories. And BTW, you are responsible for the confusing gadget-name. If it is not related to files only, it should not have this name and this description. But now it is too late. Changing the gadget-name will make all users loose their setting concerning this gadget. But a better description what it actually does would be highly appreciated. -- RE rillke questions? 21:39, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

I think the confusion stems from newbies moving things around, out of their original context.

I'm not sure if the "interface" section is that great. It works well with things like "display of UTC time", but for other items?

As the gadgets are category related, I think it's perfectly fine in the category section where it was. --  Docu  at 19:45, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes, interface is ambiguous. HotCat is also an interface. But until someone has a bright invention, I won't change anything again. -- RE rillke questions? 20:30, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Somehow I think you contradict yourself: one side your saying the newbie change confuses you and the other side you don't want any change.

"Interface: Files" seems just as silly: the entire Commons is about files. I know some just get lost in "Commons:" namespace, but still .. --  Docu  at 22:06, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

"newbie change" -- never said this. Such a disrespectful wording, I would never use, Docu. And I did not say it confuses. If you want to do something constructive, you can think about how to reduce the count of the gadgets or how to improve their descriptions like you started with cc. The amount and cryptic words in the description or documentation, this was actually something confusing me when I started with Commons. -- RE rillke questions? 22:22, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

If the current description isn't understood in its context, they links should be placed back to where it was. It appears to be a newbie change as clearly the user making the change didn't understand what he was changing. As it's part of the learning process, there isn't really anything problematic about being a newbie. Obviously changing things and then saying it's confusing, that isn't really constructive. --  Docu  at 22:28, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

It is also not constructive to discuss here anymore since it seems to be impossible to for me to tell you that - when I say "when I started with Commons" - I found it confusing before that change. -- RE rillke questions? 22:47, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

In this case, I don't think you actually changed it. You are just saying the current situation is confusing. --  Docu  at 23:11, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Arbitrary break

I've reviewed what the structure was before I changed it (here), and I see no reason to prefer the old one. Looking at the current structure, I see a possible slight improvement (it's a pity we can't have subheadings on the actual Preferences tab): if we move "search-in-category" to "FilesCategories", then everything that's left in "Categories" is a maintenance-related gadget. Make that a subheading of Maintenance (in the best form we can manage, which is Maintenance: Categories and the structure is then slightly clearer, I think. Still not great, but better. Rd232 (talk) 00:09, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Hedwig in Washington ^(mail?) 22:14, 13 May 2017 (UTC)