Template talk:Uncategorized

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Template:Uncategorized is permanently protected from editing, as it is a heavily used or visible template. Substantial changes should be proposed here, and made by administrators if the proposal is uncontroversial, or has been discussed and is supported by consensus. Use {{editprotected}} to attract the attention of an administrator in such cases. Any contributor may edit the template's documentation to add usage notes, categories or interwiki links.

Archives

Archive 1

About archives

Contents 1 Usage on frontpage 2 Placement 3 Edit request... 4 Addition to Template:Articleissues 5 Categorized but needs more categories? 6 Putting this at the top 7 Please add af.wiki iw

[edit] Usage on frontpage

{{editprotected}}

• Please do not subst: this template.
• The following code is the recommended use; it will produce the uncategorized template with an appropriate date as its parameter:

{{subst:dated|uncategorized}}

It says no to subst it then the next example shows it. Peachey88 03:07, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

It is correct although perhaps confusing. Do not use subst on the template uncategorized, but do use use subst on the template {{dated}}. Garion96 (talk) 19:10, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Placement

With the revamping of our templates, I think it's time to revisit the placement of this template. It was usually placed at the bottom, were categories are; but shouldn't we now aim to put it at the top, where it can stack with other templates, and where 99% of users expect them to be?-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  21:55, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't believe so. A lack of categorization has no direct impact on an article's quality. Therefore, it isn't necessary to bring this issue to readers' attention before they've even had an opportunity to read the article (and better understand what it's about). I also reject the premise that "99% of users expect" this tag to be at the top. The longstanding practice is to place it at the bottom, and that's precisely where users look to find the categories. —David Levy 22:32, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Edit request...

{{editprotected}}
The title line should be bold to match other article templates. In a similar vein, it also makes sense to add to the date parameter so it has (MONTH YEAR) at the end of the "Please categorize this article to list it with similar articles." text. I'm not sure how to go about implementing this into the current template and since it is currently protected, it is kind of a pain to test it out... regardless it doesn't seem like it is a terribly hard change and I'm sure you can re-use code from other templates that are out there... Paul^C/_T+ 15:17, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

I think this is the correct code:

| text = '''This {{#switch:{{NAMESPACE}}|{{ns:-0}}=article|Category=category|Image=image|Template=template|page}} is [[Wikipedia:Categorization|uncategorized]].'''<br /><small>Please [[Wikipedia:Categorization FAQ#How do I add an article to a category?|categorize]] this {{#switch:{{NAMESPACE}}|{{ns:-0}}=article|Category=category|Image=image|Template=template|page}} to list it with similar {{#switch:{{NAMESPACE}}|{{ns:-0}}=articles|Category=categories|Image=images|Template=templates|Wikipedia=project pages|pages}}. {{#if:{{{date|}}}|''({{{date}}})''|}}</small>

Paul^C/_T+ 15:24, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Y Done - Nihiltres^(t.l) 16:26, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Addition to Template:Articleissues

Would anyone object to this template being added to Template:Articleissues? There seems to be some concern there that such an addition might garner some objection, since uncat is supposed to be placed at the bottom of an article, while the articleissues template is always placed at the top. Would this actually be a problem for anyone? Thanks for your input. Equazcion •✗/C • 00:43, 17 Mar 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Categorized but needs more categories?

What about articles that have at least one category, but clearly need more? Is there any template for them? Richard001 (talk) 01:17, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Putting this at the top

Is there any serious objection to putting this at the top? I guess if the article doesn't have any other issues, then there's really no pressing reason to have it at the top. However, when there are other issues, it seems illogical not to include this in with the others when consolidating them with the {{articleissues}} template, even though articleissues does go at the top, not the bottom. Any comments?--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 18:31, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

At the bottom is more practical. It's not so important that it warrants a huge banner at the top, plus it is real easy to remove a bottom tag when adding categories. If the template is at the top it causes more work. Garion96 (talk) 18:56, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Is it enough of a deal to prevent it being added to {{articleissues}}? I've seen several editors placing it at the top already.--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 19:10, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

I haven't added categories in aeons, but when I did, it really was handy to simply go to the last section of a page, do a section edit, add categories and remove the tag. When placed on the top you have to edit the complete page, just a huge waste of time. Also, editors have been really good to keep the backlog down on uncategorized. Since the last year or so no uncat tag has been on an article for more than two months. Garion96 (talk) 19:20, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

That's a pretty good record. At WP:O we've got a 5-year backlog to work on! I can see how handy it would be to have the tag at the end, though. Although, I must ask, how often are the articles so long that it makes a difference? Maybe I'm just biased because I'm mostly looking at orphans, which tend to pretty short anyway, but the uncatted articles I've seen have all been able to fit in one screen, so it's not that big a deal.--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 20:04, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

From 5 random clicks I already found three articles in Category:Uncategorized from May 2008 on which is practical to have the tag at the bottom. Chronic care management, Architecture of Complexity and Bhakti Investama. The majority might be small articles, but I don't see any benefit of top placing. Garion96 (talk) 20:16, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

I usually place the tag at the top of the page, but does it really matter that much? Top or bottom, whichever is easier at the time, seems reasonable to do. It would seem a colossal waste of effort to go through pages and move a tag from one section to another, or to chase after editors and say, "You put the tag in the wrong place!" Or in other words, we could just say, "Place the tag at top or bottom, depending on what is most convenient/logical" and AGF for anything else. --Elonka 20:22, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

I do agree but a discussion is never bad. I wasn't even thinking of editors placing the tag but of Addbot which places the uncat tag automatically on the bottom. Garion96 (talk) 20:33, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Please add af.wiki iw

Please add af:Sjabloon:Ongekategoriseerd. Thanks! --Eivind (t) 05:49, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I figured out how to do it after all. --Eivind (t) 05:52, 10 June 2008 (UTC)