Talk:List of Serbian football transfers summer 2018
 | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
November transfers[edit]
@Gazda1970: I reverted you because these edits start to be missleading. Those were clearly summer signings that should be pointed out as signings in this summer transfers list, and their release should be added to a new List of Serbian football transfers winter 2018–19 list. We should put an end to this summer list and close it. All new transfers should go to new winter list. FkpCascais (talk) 21:12, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
Too many templates[edit]
@Wbm1058: I see you fixed a problem recently. The article is now in Category:Pages where template include size is exceeded and the templates at the bottom are not being expanded. Do you know any magic fixes? Deleting all the flagicon templates would be brutal but might work. I wouldn't think anyone wants to take the time to split the article. Any ideas? Johnuniq (talk) 06:37, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- This was caused by a recent template edit I made, which I just reverted. That got the post-expand include size back to 2,024,426 – just inside the 2,097,152 byte limit. I think rewriting this template to use a Lua module that does the "#if" logic should give more template expansion headroom here. I see that other similar "list of football transfers" articles were effected as well, I'll check to see whether any are still outside the limit. – wbm1058 (talk) 16:16, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks for the fix although I don't see how that diff would affect the number of bytes transcluded into this article but there is no need to explain it. In principle I could help with a module but it looks complicated and again, I'm unclear how helpful it would be. If this article used template (or module) A which transcluded template (or module) B, the wikitext generated by B would be counted twice. That applies to the flag icons. A module would only help if it would eliminate that chaining of A transcluding B. Johnuniq (talk) 05:56, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Johnuniq: Actually I think it's this diff that had more effect on the number of bytes transcluded. While the first revert was enough to clear this page, the second revert was necessary to clear most of the other pages that got into Category:Pages where template include size is exceeded. After the second revert the post-expand include size went down to 1,693,584 bytes – well inside the 2,097,152 byte limit. For background, see Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Holding cell#Other, Template talk:Football squad player and Template talk:Football squad player2. There's been talk of merging the fork back into its parent for years. There was a consensus to merge two templates but no consensus on how to merge them. I think the only good way to continue supporting the functionality of both templates without exceeding transclusion limits is to move the decision logic to a module, so that the only thing transcluded is the output of that decision logic and not the logic itself. I'm not particularly proficient with Lua, but as I've been working on this complex "merge" on and off for over a month, maybe this is the nudge I need to complete my crash course in module coding. – wbm1058 (talk) 17:29, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- I can help with modules but the ultimate problem appears to be flagicon. Testing suggests that one flagicon adds 110 to the node count and 710 to the include size. It appears that each of the 1280 {{Fs player}} lines calls one flagicon, and there are another 273 {{flagicon}} calls in the article. That means the flagicons add 170,830 to the node count and 1,102,630 to the include size. The article currently has node count = 864,492 and include size = 1,693,584 bytes. That's a crazily high node count which might benefit from caching of look-ups to country codes/icons. Johnuniq (talk) 03:02, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
- This edit reduced the post-expand include size from 1,693,329 to 1,554,322 bytes, and the preprocessor visited node count from 864,486 to 837,317. – wbm1058 (talk) 01:21, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- ...and this edit to mop up the upper-case usage reduced it to 1,550,037 bytes and 836,411. – wbm1058 (talk) 01:42, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- I can help with modules but the ultimate problem appears to be flagicon. Testing suggests that one flagicon adds 110 to the node count and 710 to the include size. It appears that each of the 1280 {{Fs player}} lines calls one flagicon, and there are another 273 {{flagicon}} calls in the article. That means the flagicons add 170,830 to the node count and 1,102,630 to the include size. The article currently has node count = 864,492 and include size = 1,693,584 bytes. That's a crazily high node count which might benefit from caching of look-ups to country codes/icons. Johnuniq (talk) 03:02, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Johnuniq: Actually I think it's this diff that had more effect on the number of bytes transcluded. While the first revert was enough to clear this page, the second revert was necessary to clear most of the other pages that got into Category:Pages where template include size is exceeded. After the second revert the post-expand include size went down to 1,693,584 bytes – well inside the 2,097,152 byte limit. For background, see Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Holding cell#Other, Template talk:Football squad player and Template talk:Football squad player2. There's been talk of merging the fork back into its parent for years. There was a consensus to merge two templates but no consensus on how to merge them. I think the only good way to continue supporting the functionality of both templates without exceeding transclusion limits is to move the decision logic to a module, so that the only thing transcluded is the output of that decision logic and not the logic itself. I'm not particularly proficient with Lua, but as I've been working on this complex "merge" on and off for over a month, maybe this is the nudge I need to complete my crash course in module coding. – wbm1058 (talk) 17:29, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks for the fix although I don't see how that diff would affect the number of bytes transcluded into this article but there is no need to explain it. In principle I could help with a module but it looks complicated and again, I'm unclear how helpful it would be. If this article used template (or module) A which transcluded template (or module) B, the wikitext generated by B would be counted twice. That applies to the flag icons. A module would only help if it would eliminate that chaining of A transcluding B. Johnuniq (talk) 05:56, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
Just to chime in. I think you two are going about this the wrong way around. This page shouldn't be using Football squad player, rather simple tables (such as at List of Italian football transfers summer 2020). Nehme1499 16:36, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
- Noting that I have no knowledge of the topic and I only posted here while trying to remove serious errors from articles, I believe you are correct. The straight-forward table at List of Italian football transfers summer 2020 is attractive and is much better from a performance point of view. Johnuniq (talk) 09:21, 21 April 2021 (UTC)