Wikipedia talk:Village pump (idea lab) - Wikipedia


2 people in discussion

Article Images

This page is for discussion about the page Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab) only. You may want one of the village pump subpages above, or one of the links on the village pump main page. Irrelevant discussions will be moved or removed.

Section sizes in Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab)

Section size for Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab) (15 sections)
Section name Byte
count		 Section
total
(Top) 2,038 2,038
Uppercase fullname policy shortcuts 10,536 10,536
Fix Draftification with a new template 62,205 62,205
Can we consider EC level pending changes? 16,711 17,793
Maybe what is needed is this... 1,082 1,082
#### in [topic] 3,103 3,103
URL expansion bots 2,141 2,141
Creating Template:Wikidata Infobox 8,284 16,624
Continuation 8,340 8,340
Verifiability does not guarantee inclusion 2,282 2,282
Vital articles-but for red links 4,749 4,749
Automatically add archive date 2,077 2,077
Public figure photos on infoboxes 2,738 2,738
Show good articles on main page 812 812
Lowercase or uppercase initials at titles of entries as their true spelling 7,127 7,127
Total 134,225 134,225

What the hell is happening here? Page formatting seems to be beaking after my edit... but I can't see anything wrong with it... help!

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Village_pump_(idea_lab)&diff=1021389698&oldid=1021285781 -- {{u|Gtoffoletto}} โ€ฏtalk 13:16, 4 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Fixed. Thanks Chicdat! -- {{u|Gtoffoletto}} โ€ฏtalk 13:27, 4 May 2021 (UTC)Reply
You're welcome. ๐Ÿ”ย Chicdatย  Bawk to me! 10:01, 5 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Does the initial discussion of proposed new templates belong in Idea Lab or in Technical? Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 13:15, 24 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Chatul, both would be good places. The Idea Lab is perhaps a more theoretical venue, if that helps. EpicPupper (talk) 23:52, 9 April 2023 (UTC)Reply
ย 

@Mrfoogles and EEng: I agree that the image is a bit silly, but there's a long-standing tradition that being a bit silly in project space is acceptable, or at least tolerated, as long as it's not disruptive. Probably not worth edit-warring about. RoySmith (talk) 22:47, 30 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

Exactly. Maybe, Mrfoogles, when you have more than 267 edits total you'll understand better. EEng 23:29, 30 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
Ok, will stop messing with it. It does make it hard to figure out what the thing is talking about, though, like a bad cue. Not worth edit warring about. Mrfoogles (talk) 02:09, 31 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
One function of humor is to exercise the faculty of figuring out what things are really talking about. EEng 02:15, 31 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
@EEng, Mrfoogles, and RoySmith: After some consideration, I've removed the image, as an irrelevant distraction from a serious discussion. As I've discussed with EEng before, humor in its place is a very good thing, but a sense of occasion is also important, and not every conceivable visual homonym-based pun ought to be made. Newyorkbrad (talk) 03:21, 31 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
Minor and miner are not homonyms; they're homophones. And you a lawyer. Geesh! EEng 05:28, 31 July 2023 (UTC)Reply