Template talk:Top icon

Template covers edit link for lead section

This template covers the edit link for the lead section, if a user has that Gadget enabled. Could this please be fixed? I used to use id="featured-star" as a quick workaround, but that doesn't seem to work anymore. Could this be because of the donation banner (which I had hidden so it didn't occur to me at first). Gary King (talk) 22:34, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

The whole idea of any such element is totally expected to break when a sitenotice is active. However, it seems the edit section gadget has hardcoded offsets for when one of the 3 official topicons is in use. (featured article, spoken article and protected article). Using id=featured-star to piggy-back on this is a dirty trick however. I'll see about fixing the gadget to move any topicon. --TheDJ (talk • contribs) 23:02, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Note that currently, the script moves the link aside for the top icons. Ideally, this behavior should be reversed - the script should move the icons for the link (or even better, the devs should just implement a lead edit link in MediaWiki by default). —Dinoguy1000 23:05, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

I have created a new version of the edittop script that should fix issues like these: User:TheDJ/Gadget-edittop.js. I'll show it to AlexSm, and barring any issue, it should go live somewhere this week. --TheDJ (talk • contribs) 17:26, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Cool... I decided to suggest a Spanish translation of the tooltip, since I don't have much anything better to do at the moment... —Dinoguy1000 01:25, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Description non-functional?

Currently the template description indicates that the tooltip text can be customised (via "description"), though this seems to be overridden by the wikilink text in both Chrome and Firefox. Example: I'd like an icon to have the tooltip as "In memory of...", clicking through to the link on Cysic Fibrosis. Is this a glitch? Am I missing something? - chicgeek ^talk 15:04, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

I'll look into it. --TheDJ (talk • contribs) 15:12, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks very much. I've tried to use it here, as an example. Feel free to use that as a testing/battleground if it helps. Of course it's not urgent, though it's not great that the function doesn't match the description. Cheers again, - chicgeek ^talk 15:28, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Confirmed. This is because {{click}} (and this template which was based on that) no longer use the imagemap trick, but the new image syntax. I don't forsee this functionality returning any time soon. I'll have to think about this. I really don't want to return to a imagemap solution. --TheDJ (talk • contribs) 15:56, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Ah, okay. Thanks for looking into it. It's a bit of shame, but I prefer usability over gizmos any day. Perhaps the function should be removed from the description page? Cheers again. - chicgeek ^talk 17:21, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

The ImageMap extension allows clickable image maps. An image map is a list of coordinates in a specific image, which hyperlinks areas of the image to multiple destinations (in contrast to a normal image link, in which the entire area of the image links to a single destination). – wbm1058 (talk) 14:30, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

So the issue above from 2008 seems to have been resolved, however I'm here because WP:NAVPOPS isn't compatible with tooltips used in top icons. The edit I just made allows specifying the parameter {{{link}}} / {{{wikilink}}} / {{{2}}} as "defined and empty" to suppress the wikilink so that the tooltip appears rather than the navigation popup. – wbm1058 (talk) 16:47, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

Proposed update for administrator template

I've recently created {{oversighter}} and {{checkuserer}} (the good name was taken), and have also proposed updating {{administrator}} to use this template. Feedback on that last proposal would be appreciated at Template talk:Administrator#Standardization with top icon template. – Luna Santin (talk) 06:18, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Project space?

Is there any reason for this to be disabled in project space? WP:JAPAN, for one, likes to use a hardcoded top icon on their pages; they could create a dedicated template for it and use this if it was allowed to be used in the project namespace. 「ダイノガイ千？！」^{? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000} 21:17, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Not really, it's just that we though it would be best to keep this as contained as possible. (And definitely OUT of mainspace) —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 22:20, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Containment for something like this is definitely good, but there's no reason to have a death grip around its neck. ;) I think, probably, it could safely be allowed pretty much everywhere but main and main talk spaces. 「ダイノガイ千？！」^{? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000} 18:14, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Shorter parameter names

Would there be any objections to adding the following, shorter, alternate parameter names? I'm not asking to completely replace any (if someone wants to, kudos to them, though), just provide alternates.

• {{{imagename}}} --> {{{image}}}
• {{{wikilink}}} --> {{{link}}}
• {{{description}}} --> {{{text}}}
• {{{icon_nr}}} --> {{{number}}}
• {{{extra_offset}}} --> {{{offset}}}

Many of these also seem (IMHO) to be more intuitive, and match what some widely deployed templates use. Thoughts? 「ダイノガイ千？！」^{? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000} 18:20, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

There've been no comments on this, so I'm going ahead and doing it. 「ダイノガイ千？！」^{? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000} 17:21, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

 Done. I'm going to hold off updating the documentation to see if any further tweaks should be made first. 「ダイノガイ千？！」^{? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000} 17:25, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Includeonly

{{editprotected}} To avoid the code in the top-right corner of this templatepage, I propose adding <includeonly>...</includeonly> tags. Debresser (talk) 14:07, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

I really can't see the benefit to this. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:49, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

If you don't see the benefit, don't do it. Perhaps others will see that there is no reason to have a piece of code sticking on a corner of a template page. Or do you see any benefit in having it?? Debresser (talk) 17:08, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

I've been intending to look into adding alternate parameter names to this that would bring it more in line with {{click}} and company (since that template has been used to create clickable top icons in the past); the includeonly tags could be added at that time. Until then, I probably wouldn't bother making such a cosmetic edit. 「ダイノガイ千？！」^{? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000} 18:21, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

I prefer seeing the code as it quickly shows what is required to get the template working. We only really need to hide the code when templates use complex branch logic like in the cite web series of templates. — Dispenser 20:49, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Actually, the reason I got {{Cite web}} in includeonly tags wasbecause of the error message that showed before. Debresser (talk) 22:36, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Problem

Please see my userpage, that two top icons don't show. Can something be done about that? Making a row of top icons? If this is not possible, at least the documentation should be updated to warn about this. Debresser (talk) 14:10, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

It's fully documented. You just need to set the |icon_nr= parameter. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:48, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

I find that documentation to be clouded by technical jargon, so I added "has to be used if you have more than one top icon". Debresser (talk) 17:10, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it probably wouldn't hurt being further rewritten to be more accessible to the layman. The technical stuff is necessary for those looking to create new top icon templates, but it doesn't all have to be technical. 「ダイノガイ千？！」^{? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000} 18:23, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

editprotected re IDs

{{editprotected}}

Please change:

• id="{{{id|}}}

to:

• {{#if:{{{id|}}}|id="{{{id}}}"}}

as-is, this is generating id="" in pages when no ID is specified, which is invalid. The change suppresses the generation of the null id attributes entirely while correctly generating the attribute/value pair when an ID is specified. I'm pretty sure this change would benefit other templates, too.

Indecently, this whole id mechanism is dodgy (here, lots of other templates) because it can easily result in pages with duplicate IDs, which is also invalid. Cheers, Jack Merridew 11:12, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

 Done. thanks, and just report any of such cases when you encounter them. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 14:18, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Good articles

{{editprotected}} Somewhere in the documentation is says that only the Protection lock icon, spoken word, and feature article symbols are supported in article space but the good article symbol is also included. Should be changed. Devourer09 (t·c) 01:27, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Good point. However the documentation page Template:Top icon/doc is not protected and you could fix this yourself. Therefore I have disabled this request. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:58, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

added to documentation page

===Example===

{{accountcreator|icon_nr=2}}
{{Rollback|icon_nr=1}}
{{Autoreviewer|icon_nr=0}}

Creates three icons, from left ---> right, account creator, rollback, autoreviewer.

Igottheconch (talk) 18:40, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Articlespace prohibition

This template has historically errored out when used in mainspace, presumably to prevent abuse. This doesn't really make sense, as anyone could trivially fork it for that purpose. As {{good article}} and {{featured article}} should really both be subclassed here, it's about time that the switch statement was updated to move ns0 into the allowed namespaces. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 12:40, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

I've now made this change, by adding ns0 to the whitelist. (Do we really need to whitelist this to specific namespaces?) Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 12:21, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

I agree; it makes more sense to me to bin the namespace restrictions in this template entirely. Also, the documentation of this template under "See also" needs some updating, and there are a few additional templates that could be made to use {{top icon}} ({{Featured list}} for example). Ucucha 12:38, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Per the above, a mere 18 months later

Not sure how necessary a namespace whitelist is if it's allowed in mainspace (e.g. why mainspace but not helpspace?), but, if it's going to be used, the error message should be changed from {{tlx|Top icon}} cannot be used outside of the User, Template, or User talk namespaces. {{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACE}}|{{ns:0}}|Try {{tlx|Spoken Wikipedia}} or {{tlx|Featured article}} instead.}} to {{tlx|Top icon}} cannot be used outside of the Article, User, Template, or User talk namespaces. Seriously, though, as pointed out above, anyone who really cares can just copy the source code and disable the namespace detector. — Francophonie&Androphilie^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 15:05, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

 Done; I've just binned it entirely. Thanks. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 15:12, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

New icons

I'm not sure where to put this, but I'm proposing a switch of the FA, GA, and protection icons. The current icons are simply scaled versions of larger icons—not optimized for the small size. The result is blurriness and generally looks bad.

Here are the new icons, which are aligned to pixel grids and free of unnecessary detail—

—Kelvinsong (talk) 20:52, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

I love them. I strongly support your proposal Kelvinsong. — TintoMeches, 16:13, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks? This proposal is literally like a year old thoughh—Love, Kelvinsong talk 01:01, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Make that four years, and still a good idea. - ZLEA _Talk\^Contribs 04:18, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Moved to Wikipedia talk:Protection policy

Requested edit - fix Example

The example fails

{{Autoreviewer topicon|icon_nr=0}}

should be replaced by

{{Autopatrolled topicon|icon_nr=0}}

Widefox; talk 17:52, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Done. For future reference: documentation pages are not protected; you can make any fixes yourself. — Edokter (talk) — 18:15, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

and I guess there is a missing redirect from Template:Autoreviewer topicon -> Template:Autopatrolled topicon (if desirable, and needs locking) Widefox; talk 18:42, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Nothing links to Autoreviewer topicon, so no redirect is needed. — Edokter (talk) — 19:05, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Top icon spacing

Currently, on my user page, I have both the reviewer and account creator top icons displays, but they are on top of each other. How do I make them spaced so that both are shown? Upjav (talk) 01:41, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

The icon_nr=x argument will move these, I changed your page for you, look at the wikitext to see or change further. — xaosflux ^Talk 03:52, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, I appreciate it! Upjav (talk) 14:46, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Page status indicators

From meta:Tech/News/2014/45:

Some wikis have icons at the top of a page to show if it is protected or featured. Icons show up using CSS. You can now use the <indicator> tag in these templates instead to add the icons. [1] [2]

Helder 02:30, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Nice... time to convert all top icon templates. We should do an inventory. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 07:56, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

I created Template:Top icon/sandbox. --fryed-peach (talk) 15:53, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Good start. Let's seize the oppertunity to do some parameter cleanup. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 16:47, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Sandbox has been up for a while, I made some small fixes. The following parameters can be safely ignored as they no longer have meaning: |number=, |icon_nr=, |offset=, |extra-offset=, |class= and |style=.

That leaves: |id=, |image= (|imagename=), |width= and |link= (|wikilink=), |text= and |description=. The last two are one and the same.

I have depracated the following parameters: |imagename= and |wikilink=. If you know any icons using these parameters, then please fix them. There are too many uses of these still remaining, so I will pair them with image= and link=. Then the sandbox version an go live. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 16:13, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

I added |height= to give more control over size. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 10:18, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Busy topicon

Hi, I felt need of Busy topicon for Template:Busy, i have designed one template at User:!dea4u/sandbox. Please check & suggest improvements. ( !dea4u  15:36, 6 November 2014 (UTC))

It looks good, I'd change the click target real life or something besides the other template though. perhaps then move to Template:Busy topicon — xaosflux ^Talk 15:56, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for suggestion, i have created Template:Busy topicon, Please correct, if any mistake done from my end. Also add this topicon to suitable category in Template:Top icon(i feels it should be added to OTHERS) ( !dea4u  17:29, 6 November 2014 (UTC))

• @!dea4u: I updated Template:Top icon templates to include. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:17, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Broken module

@Mr. Stradivarius and Edokter: I can only guess that you were aware, but just in case you weren't, everywhere that used topicon had messages like this, including all FA/GA articles, etc — MusikAnimal ^talk 00:26, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Also semi/full protection icons are no longer offset from GA/FA icons [3] — MusikAnimal ^talk 00:35, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

@MusikAnimal: I checked at Barack Obama after the switch and it was working fine there. What pages in particular were broken? — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 01:06, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

I first saw it on my userpage (screenshot), then I followed the series of tranclusions and identified topicon as the source. I checked {{good article}} and saw it was broken and only assumed the other templates and pages that used topicon were also broken. Maybe the cache hadn't been cleared yet on Barack Obama? After I reverted the change I had to purge the cache on my userpage for it to go back to normal. Also what about the positioning of the protection icons? — MusikAnimal ^talk 01:13, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

@Mr. Stradivarius: Looks good now, except there's some spacing being added by what I think is the protection icons. Compare Barack Obama and Miley Cyrus — MusikAnimal ^talk 01:20, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Ah, I see the problem was at Template:GA user topicon and Template:FA user topicon, not Template:Good article. Basically, we are in the process of switching over top icons to use indicator tags, which are a better way to support top icons than the hacky absolute positioning that we've been using up to now. The new indicator tags require a "name" attribute for them to work - in the case of this template, that means that somehow it needs to find a name to put in the attribute from its input. If templates don't specify either the |name=, |id= or |image= parameters, then the error you saw will show up. The best way of fixing this would be to find those top icon templates which haven't specified a name, and then add |name= parameters to them. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 01:27, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

The spacing is added by the <indicator>...</indicator> tags themselves. The position is slightly different than it was before, but I gather that this was a design decision, rather than a mistake. The positioning of all the top icons can be adjusted in MediaWiki:Common.css, if that's desired. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 01:31, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Hmm earlier the {{top icon}} template itself was showing the error, which is how I could tell it was the source. Probably some other mumbo jumbo that wasn't in place. Anyway, looks good now minus that extra spacing. If the spacing was a design decision it should be reconsidered as it looks quite odd and especially since the amount of spacing seems to differ article to article, may be based on how many topicons are used? Finally, are the GA/FA icons supposed to be oversized like they are now? Thanks! — MusikAnimal ^talk 01:34, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

@Mr. Stradivarius: I'm going to guess the usage of {{top icon}} without the required parameters is widespread. For instance see User:Reaper_Eternal/articles. Is there a way to provide a default parameter value that is overwritten if passed in? — MusikAnimal ^talk 02:03, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

The trick would be to make that default value different for every top icon - if it is the same, then the last one on the page will overwrite all the other ones. I've reinstated the |icon_nr= parameter, which should both help to alleviate this and allow users to have control over the order that icons are shown in. Perhaps we can add a random number onto the end if nothing else is specified? Or perhaps using the image name would work. As for the GA and FA icons, if the size needs to be tweaked that can be done with the |width= and |height= parameters. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 02:20, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

It looks like the |imagename= parameter should be safe to use (it was an alias for |image= before as well, so I've made it an extra fallback for the name attribute. There shouldn't be any top icon templates out there that don't specify one of these, as then they wouldn't display any image at all. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 02:38, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Works for me, but was the addition of |icon_nr= supposed to retain the original order of top icons? Because I believe it may instead have broken it (or it was already broken since the switch to indicator tags): User:MusikAnimal/Headers – Those are in what seems like a random order, when it should be in the order of FA/GAs/DYK/Mop. — MusikAnimal ^talk 02:41, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

@Mr. Stradivarius: I'm confused how |name= is to determine the order? Also is there any backwards support for the other parameters documented for {{top icon}}? I like the idea of the indicator tag, but I don't like how we've broken preexisting documented functionality. Maybe we should rollback the indicator tag and devise a better way to implement it. Perhaps enlist a bot to fix the ordering of topicons on pages still using the presumably now obsolete |icon_nr= and |extra_offset= params? — MusikAnimal ^talk 03:00, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

There's also the mysterious extraneous markup being added that creates that extra spacing you see, what I'm seeing is <p><br/></p> but I can't pinpoint what in the template is causing it, but I'm quite certain it's not any CSS. — MusikAnimal ^talk 03:06, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

@MusikAnimal: What page are you seeing this on? — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 03:10, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) The icons are sorted in alphabetical order of the name attributes. In your case, you have numbers like "9.2" and "10.4". In numerical order, 9.2 comes first, but in alphabetical order, 10.4 comes first, which is why the order seemed random. This can be fixed with zero-padding, but there is a bigger problem - the {{administrator}} template didn't have a number set, and so resorts to the default of "wp-administrator" that is set in the template. However, it appears that with indicator tags, numbers are sorted after letters, not before. This isn't PHP's default behaviour, so there must be something in the MediaWiki code that's causing it - at the moment, I'm not sure whether this is intentional or what the best approach would be to fix it. (Also pinging Edokter.) — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 03:09, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

It looks like only some topicons are adding the spacing. Compare my userpage, Barack Obama, Miley Cyrus, which all have the extraneous spacing (use your browsers inspector), versus Gerald Ford and Bob Dylan which both have {{pp-move}} and {{featured article}} top icons. Either way I think we should find a way to add backwards support for the documented parameters, or automate repairing the deprecated usage in order to achieve the same intended effect. — MusikAnimal ^talk 03:23, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

@MusikAnimal: I'm not seeing any obvious difference between those articles, either when I'm logged in or logged out. Perhaps it's caused by some JS somewhere? Try logging out (or using a private browser tab) and see if the problems persist. Also, could you take a screenshot of the extra space? That would be helpful for working out what has gone wrong. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 04:03, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

My user space top icons User:Gaff/Gaff Top Icons are now experiencing a huge block of white space as well. It is there with me logged in, or viewing through a private window in a different browser. --Gaff (talk) 04:15, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Logged out, vector skin: See Barack Obama which has extra spacing between the title and the start of the content. If I preview with the topicons removed the spacing is gone. Meanwhile Gerald Ford does not have any extra spacing, but I think that's because the {{featured article}} template is at the bottom, where the extraneous markup is not noticeable. So perhaps {{pp-move}} is not a culprit template. I do not think this is a browser/OS issue as there's actual unexpected markup in the source HTML, as opposed to how the browser would uniquely interpret it. Mind you my userpage has the same issue. — MusikAnimal ^talk 04:29, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Ok, fixed it. I thought you meant whitespace around the actual top icons, not at the start of the article body, which is why I was confused. User:Gaff/Gaff Top Icons was too obvious for me to mistake the problem, though. I've added <nowiki /> hacks to this template and to Module:Protection banner to prevent the whitespace issue. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 04:46, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Seems I missed all the fun again. Thanks for fixing {top icon}. I trust everything is working now? -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 08:23, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Sorting

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T94307

@Edokter, Gaff, Mr Stradivarius, and MusikAnimal: PROBLEM - seems the "extra_offset" parameter has now become unresponsive? - this parameter was used to sort the top-icons on my "User:Drbogdan" page — compare with my earlier ok version/WebCitation(20150313) — is there a new work-around for sorting the top-icons? - in any case - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 11:30, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Yes, some parameters are now obsolete (see {{Top icon}} documentation). The system places them in alphabetic order. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 11:37, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

@Edokter: Thank you *very much* for your reply - it's *Greatly* appreciated - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 11:45, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

FWIW - Brief Followup - seems sorting top-icons, besides an alphabetical-sort, may also work by a numerical-sort(?) => via of the "id" parameter - at least afaik atm - in any case - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 12:17, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Update Note => after more tests, seems the "id" parameter doesn't sort top-icons after all - maybe an additional sorting method, besides alphabetical, like numerical, can be developed? - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 12:52, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

@Mr. Stradivarius and Edokter: So there's no way to order them at all except alphabetically? This is far from ideal. At least with the user GA/FA topicons the name parameter is supplied with article_name, which obviously we can't change because we want to link to the right place. And what if I have a GA/FA topicon for an article starting with the letter Z? Now my admin icon is no longer the rightmost. To be frank I find this change to be very unfair. Perhaps a new template should have been made for the new system, rather than breaking functionality and appearance of where all the other places topicon are already being used. Was there a discussion anywhere about this change prior to implementing it? — MusikAnimal ^talk 15:40, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Actually, I've just finished writing Module:Top icon, which should allow reliable sorting using the existing |icon_nr= and |number= parameters. This isn't a complicated template, but in Lua it is much easier to do reliable zero-padding for arbitrary sort keys that may not even be numbers, so I basically converted the template just for that. (The expanded file link wikitext also looks prettier, if you care about that kind of thing.) You can test it out using {{top icon/sandbox}}. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 15:59, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

If sortability/order is really an issue, then this should be fixed in the parser, instead of in a module. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 19:06, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Sorting is definitely an issue. It's unclear if losing this functionality was overlooked or if the deprecation was intentional. Supporting the old params in the same capacity would be most ideal. — MusikAnimal ^talk 19:14, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

The old params (and in fact the entire template) were an absolute hack, and the params' only purpose was to prevent clashing with other top icons. Sorting was never really a feature; just an unintended benefit. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 20:18, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

I can see what you mean by unintended benefit, but many of us have relied on it, and the fact that it enforces an alphabetical sorting makes very little sense to me, or how that is any bit better than getting to choose my own sorting. I had my GAs sorted by my involvement in working on them, and my admin icon always the rightmost. If I get Zebra to GA then it will appear I'm more proud of that than being an admin. Theoretically the same is true with topicons in the mainspace, if there's one that has a name starting with a letter after F than the featured article is no longer the rightmost, which we definitely do not want. You could provide a different name to correct the sorting but that is equally as hacky in my opinion. Can we weigh out what we've gained and what we've lost? Under the hood I'm sure there's more benefits, but visually the only thing I see is that the icons are bigger, but we could have implemented that under the old system. Meanwhile we've lost long valued functionality, and have single handedly change the appearance across every page that uses this template, and evidently without prior input from the community (correct me if I'm wrong!). Is allowing custom sorting going to be feasible? If not I believe a new template should be made to accommodate this need. — MusikAnimal ^talk 20:55, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

<rant>Leave it to the community to be offered a greatly improved and simplified mechanism to show top icons that no longer require an orchastrated assignment of space and allows universal use of all icons whithout ever creating a conflict... and then demanding that it be re-encumbered with sorting and ordering options.</rant> Like I said above; an option to allow for ordering these icons should be made in /core; not by implementing hacks at template/module level, because that will ultimately bring back the unreliable hacking to control the system. Phabricator is thattaway. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 21:13, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Apologies if I came off confrontational, but surely you see where I am coming from. Generally there's at least some forewarning or something when deprecating functionality, and again this wouldn't be so bad if it didn't enforce a sorting order, especially one so unfitting as alphabetical. That's an odd assumption that we'd want it to be sorted that way. Assuming it's not just me, I think what we want in the interim is the customization back for the user topicons, at the very least. You and I both know the phab report will land quite low on triage and take forever to get tended to. If Mr. Stradivarius's patch works than I think that's a good short term solution, otherwise maybe create a new template that still uses the older system and have the user topicon templates use that? Furthermore I do not think we should interfere with how {{good article}} and {{featured article}} are always rightmost. That is purely decisive and not stylistic, we want to make it clear which articles we are most proud of. — MusikAnimal ^talk 21:37, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

If I understand it right, the primary benefit of indicator tags is that we don't have to put in the absolute positioning, it does it for us. This is fantastic, but I believe that should be only a default mechanism and that there should be a way to override it. Is the sorting by |name= part of the core functionality or is that something we came up with? How about checking for a |sort= parameter that is numerical, and if present append that to the name. That way we have the ability to assign sorting values for a given set of topicons, but we won't lose the default automatic sorting. — MusikAnimal ^talk 21:48, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

The better course would be to not automatically sort at all, but display according to order encountered on the page. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 22:52, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

100% agree. Is that something we can do? I'm happy to help but have preciseley zero experience with Lua. — MusikAnimal ^talk 22:54, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Totally agreed, in that case no sorting-related parameters would be needed. — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 22:57, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Cannot be done in LUA; sorting will have to be disabled in /core. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 23:03, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

What's the current sorting key? Could we maybe prepend a number to that key (the number would be passed to the template) and affect the sorting order that way? — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 23:27, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

That's exactly what Module:Top icon does. However, as Edokter and others have said, it's a hack. For solving the order problem, I think the best solution may be to go through all of the top icon templates and add a {{{name}}} parameter that can be specified by users, with a sensible default value if the name is not set. Then we can allow users to sort their own top icons without going through all of the complications that Module:Top icon introduces. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 03:51, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

While looking at the source code in Module:Top icon, function makeName() in particular, it seems to me that having a |number= template parameter might be a more clean solution? Am I missing something obvious there? — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 04:35, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

For the sorting hack to work, names can't be integers. This is because integer names are sorted after alphabetical names. I'm not sure exactly what is going on inside PHP to make it work like that, but it probably has something to do with the way PHP casts integer array keys to the integer type. This means that while top icons with name attributes containing only integers would sort properly relative to each other, they would appear after all of the other top icons on the page, which seems wrong. For example, on User:MusikAnimal/Headers, the administrator icon would end up coming first, when it should be last. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 04:49, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Hm, but that shouldn't matter if all names are integers (or prefixed with integers), if I'm not wrong? Speaking of PHP, it just goes by the order of characters in the ASCII table, in which 0–9 comes before A–Z and a–z. — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 05:00, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

No, integer names sort differently from names merely prefixed with integers. The former are sorted numerically, but the latter alphabetically. And pure integer names sort after alphabetical names. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 05:35, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

In that case, a solution might be to pad number prefixes with zeros to, say, five digits, and move 0–9 prefix digits up the ASCII table to a–i letters. With that, everything would sort alphabetically ("aaaaa-...", "aaaab-...", "aaaac-...", etc.), with no surprises while achieving desired results. — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 05:54, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

But then you're breaking sorting for names that begin with something other than letters or numbers.

The sorting is screwy because it uses PHP's default "SORT_REGULAR" mode, and the sorting algorithm gets confused when transitivity is violated by cycles such as 3 < "10x", "10x" < "foo", "foo" < 3. The real fix might be to update MediaWiki pass SORT_STRING to the relevant ksort and accept that numeric names will be ordered as "1 10 2" to match "x1 x10 x2" that already happens. But to work around it locally, either prefix all names with a constant string so they can't be numeric anymore (and pad numbers with 0s, if you're so inclined), or prefix names beginning with [0-9/] with '/' so they're not numeric anymore but otherwise sort correctly in relation to unprefixed names. Anomie⚔ 13:28, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

I'm going to request that automatic sorting be disabled outside article space. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 14:15, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Hm, can't we simply say in the template's documentation something like "sorting will not work as expected unless all top icon templates included on a page have sort positions assigned to their |number= parameters". IMHO, something like that wouldn't be ideal, but would be much better than the current situation. — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 15:56, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

|number= doesn't work anymore. And we want to get away from all these hacks. I created T94307; let's see what comes out of it. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 17:35, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

I've mentioned |number= just as an example... If the automated sorting becomes disabled on user pages, should it mean that top icons would be displayed in order of their appearance in the Wiki code? If so, that would be the best possible option – no "hacks", nothing, with clear means for customizable ordering. — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 17:41, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

That is the basic idea. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 17:46, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

@Edokter: To help clarify this even further if possible - if T94307 is "enabled", does this mean that the present automatic alphabetical sorting is disabled - and that - manual alphbetical sorting - and/or, perhaps - manual numerical sorting is possible? - if so, what might be the exact sorting procedure under such a situation? - in any case - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 17:55, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

@Drbogdan: In article space, they would still be ordered alphabetically (by name). On any other page, the order in which the icons appear would depend on the order in which they are called. Put simply; first come, first serve. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 19:44, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

@Edokter: Thank you for your reply - it's appreciated - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 21:14, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Your comments show why, when 6 years ago this technique started to become more and more popular, we put in this explicit warning that such a reliance was bound to result in users eventually being disappointed. The whole template and the technique it used was a hack, it was a hack back then, it was a hack yesterday. It's less of a hack today. icon_nr was of course a feature of this template, just not a promise to perpetuate this feature until eternity, because you simply cannot depend on a hack to continue working in the exact same fashion. Now there is a better way to do this. One that does not clash with VE or live preview, or mobile or non-standard skins or any number of other things that are increasingly more important than 'does it look nice to a user of the default system on a desktop computer'. I don't care about the sorting, but I'm sure we will end with a Module doing a feeble attempt at sorting, because i've never seen a user invented 'hack' disappear, no matter how stupid it's implementation is. :) Doubt this will be accepted in core, because probably only en.wp relies on it, but one can always try. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 21:58, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Seems like this discussion is dying down, does anyone still have interested in actually providing a sorting solution? — xaosflux ^Talk 15:27, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

FWIW - I'm still interested in having a solution to the "sorting" problem - hopefully, a solution will be provided by those able to do so of course - in any case - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 16:45, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Recent changes

Hello! I've noticed messed up top icons on my user page, and after a short "investigation" I've landed here. :) After briefly reviewing the template history, I'd say that recent changes actually made it worse. Why was the |icon_nr= parameter removed? I really like to arrange the icons. Also, |width= parameter no longer seems to be working and image widths remain at the default value (20) no matter what's passed as the parameter value. Thoughts? Any insights would be highly appreciated! — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 22:11, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

See the section above; it explains why the switch was made. The width and height parameters are restrictive, meaning if either unspecified hits the default, it will not grow further. The solution is to specify both width and height. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 22:57, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the explanation! Thus, other templates that use this template need to be modified so they pass heights as well. Went ahead and made a few of those rather straightforward changes, and the results are as expected. — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 23:14, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

A note: I delibirately choose not to link width and height automatically, because height is scarse in some skins, so it needs to be set explicitly. If this is changed, it should be done here; the indivudual templates should just pass the parameters. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 08:49, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I understand, thank you for the correction! Have you seen my comment about the 0–9 → a–i prefix conversion above? That might be a solution for the sorting, and might be able to reuse previously present |icon_nr= parameter. — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 08:54, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Icon sizes

Whatever the reasons for the recent changes to the template, they're breaking things on people's pages—a number of my topicons simply won't show up on my userpage now. There must be a better way to roll out such changes—as it stands things are all broken. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 05:10, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

What is you skin? I tested all the skins and found no breakage of any kind. If there are icons missing, it is probably because of a missing name/id parameter. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 08:13, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Whatever the default skin is the one I'm using. I've been using this template for a couple years now with no issue. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 08:26, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Read up on the discussion above for why behaviour has changed, and why "breaking" user pages was an acceptable tradoff (which can be fixed on your user page). -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 08:34, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Like I said, "there must be a better way to roll out such changes". Users shouldn't have to be expected to trawl through template talk pages to find out why template behaviour suddenly changes. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 08:42, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

"The system places them in alphabetic order."?—this isn't even in the documentation, and is going to create more work that I imagined to clean up the mess. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 08:46, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

A (sort of) solution while this is being fixed

Since the "new improved" system for topicons sort them alphabetically, there is only room for one "topicon" of each name in the top row. So it you have done more than one GA/FA, only one will show since they are all named the same. This little dilemma does not seem to be solved any time soon, so I made a hack combining things from the old Wikitable in its simplest form and a bit of Picture tutorial. This allows for the little darlings to be aligned horizontally or vertical, left, right or center, however you want them, wherever you want them. You can see an example of this on my user page. Hope this helps some of you, w.carter-Talk 13:12, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Hello! This just shows that current issues with the top icon template should be resolved in an "official" way as soon as possible. The whole rationale behind the recent changes is to reduce the amount of "hacks", but the editors will just introduce more new hacks if there's no official solution. — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 13:20, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Fixing the ordering

As others above have said, I think there needs to be an official way of allowing editors to customise the order of their top icons. There doesn't seem to be much of an appetite among the technically-minded people here to use Lua to process the |icon_nr= parameter and use that for sorting, as that would be too much of a hack. This means that to get sorting working properly, we are going to have to require editors to change their top icon template invocations. I can think of two ways of doing this:

1. Edit every top icon template to have a {{{name}}} parameter that can be specified by editors, and that falls back to a sensible default. This would require users who want custom sorting to set a name for each of their top icons so that they sort alphabetically into the order that they want.
2. Create a template that can display multiple top icons in order. This would involve editing every top icon template to have a {{{raw}}} parameter, so that instead of outputting <indicator>[[File:Foo.png|20px]]</indicator>, they would output [[File:Foo.png|20px]]. Editors would then use code like {{top icon list| {{some top icon|raw=yes}} | {{another top icon|raw=yes}} }} to display their top icons.

What does everyone think of these alternatives? Is one better better than the other, or should we use both? And are there any other better ways of solving this? — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 17:41, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

My preference would be to just have them appear in the order they are presented in the text, outside that any sort key should do - this functionality was clearly present prior to recent changes, and these discussions are suggesting that the last changes were made without consensus. — xaosflux ^Talk 18:46, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

(ec) I don't like either one; both require editing all top icon templates, which is just not a solution. My initial proposal in Phabricator was to only sort in article space; now I propose sorting only be disabled in user (& talk) space. Failing that, some native parameter should be added. So let yourself be heard at T94307 (because I'm not going through all top icons again). -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 18:51, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

As I've already noted, reducing the number of "hacks" is prefectly fine. However, there needs to be some kind of an "official" support for sorting, as otherwise editors will find their own ways for doing that, which will result in even more "hacks", this time scattered all around user pages. Having a |name= parameter might be ugly, but that one should be better instead of other hacks all around – as it seems that disabling the automated sorting hasn't been accepted. — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 22:04, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

I have submitted a patch to remove sorting alltogether. Awaiting review. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 14:25, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Judging by the amount of changes, it's a rather simple patch that should be accepted. Let's see whether that happens. — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 22:38, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Topics Broken and distorted

For some reason, my custom topicon is now missing and all of them shrunk and moved to a different location. Can someone please explain to me what happened?—^cyberpower_{Chat:Limited Access} 13:41, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

All standard topicons have been migrated to use page status indicators (see discussions above). The energy meter slipped under the radar and is not working. I attempted a fix, but the template needs a rewrite because it does not handle parser functions inside parser tags very well. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 14:37, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

They're way too small. Can't I control the size of my topicons?—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 15:43, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Also can you point me to the discussion that supports these changes? I see a million discussions here complaining of the same thing I'm complaining about.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 15:46, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Most top icon templates accept width and height parameters (they are restrictive with a default max of 20px, so you need to set both). Mind you, the current default size fits all skins, and the old icons were a lot smaller. As for discussion... it started above. We desperately wanted to get rid of the old horribly broken hack that generated the top icons until now. Using indicator tags uses a native mechanism that eliminates the need to set icon numbers and ofsetts just to prevent them overlapping with eachother. I say that's a defining plus. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 16:44, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

I was using the width parameter the entire time. Now my topicons have shrunk back to the default. Extremely tiny. Also my custom topicon is still missing so the attempted fix failed. I would tinker around, but I'm worried I might step on someone's toes.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 00:38, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

There also appears to be more opposition to these changes. As it seems, I'm one of many experiencing issues. I'd advise reversing the changes until the sandbox version can roll out changes that doesn't require major cleanup by users.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 00:41, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Opposition is moderate, and center around the ordering, which is expected to be fixed in the somewhat near future (patch pending). I ammended the documentation; set both width and height to override the default. Be carefull though of other skins as icon larger then 20px high may break out of their container. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 07:14, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

I think I have mine set to 40px.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 15:53, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

You have. Does not look too good here and here though. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 17:08, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Neither do those skins look good with my js. My icons have always been 40px. They make them easier to see. Any chance you can get my energy meter template to work as a topicon again?—^cyberpower_{Chat:Limited Access} 13:57, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

The problem is that Template:Energy Meter uses a hack like {{#if: {{{istopicon|}}} | <div class="topicon"> }}[[File:Foo.png|40px]]{{#if: {{{istopicon|}}} | </div> }}, where the image code contains lots of parser functions. To fix this in wikitext, you would have to use {{#if: {{{istopicon|}}} | {{#tag:indicator|[[File:Foo.png|40px]]|name=energy-meter}} | [[File:Foo.png|40px]] }}, but that would mean doubling the length of your code and duplicating all the code that makes up the image. The best fix here would be to convert the template to Lua - that would avoid code duplication and still keep the existing functionality. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 14:22, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Being that you're the master of Lua, do you think you can do it? :-)—^cyberpower_{Chat:Limited Access} 14:45, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

@Cyberpower678: I can make you one that does pretty much the same thing easily enough. I'm reluctant to try and convert Template:Age in days, though, as it is complex and would require a lot of testing to prevent all the existing uses from breaking. It would be much easier to do something with #time for the expiry date, if that's ok with you. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 15:48, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Sweet. Let's do it.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 15:51, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

@Cyberpower678:  Done at Module:Energy meter. You can test it with {{Energy Meter/sandbox}}. Everything should work the same, with the exception of the bot expiry date, which is determined using a single |expiry= parameter which accepts any date compatible with the #time parser function. Let me know if you spot any bugs in it. Also, you might want to adjust the top icon size to fit the altered placement of the indicator tags. (Maybe limit it by height as well as width?) — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 18:16, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Ordering

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T94307

Is there no way to order the icons on a user page? My order is AWB > Reviewer > Twinkle > GA, but they display as AWB > GA > Reviewer > Twinkle. Alex|The|Whovian^? 01:44, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Afraid not. This is due to automatic sorting in the page status indicator system which cannot be disabled. See a few threads up. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 10:52, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Now possible through the use of |sortkey= parameter on most popular top icons. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 07:44, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Works for the most part. Listed {{pp}} before {{GA user topicon}}, but {{GA user topicon}} still comes after {{pp}} on my user page. The rest works enough for me, though. Alex|The|Whovian^? 08:17, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Only user top icons are sortable at this time. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 08:42, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Edokter. Thank you for fighting the good fight. Without appearing naive can we use both numeric and alpha characters to create a sort? (using one or the other.) Ping me back. I do not watch this page. Also, didn't the parameter number= used to take care of this? Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 04:37, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

@Checkingfax: Yes you can use letters, the parameter is sortkey now, number used to work, but doesn't now. See User:Xaosflux/Topicons for an example. — xaosflux ^Talk 04:42, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Xaosflux (with to Edokter and AlexTheWhovian). Sorry for the lack of clarity in my post. I know about sortkey=. My questions were can letters or numbers be used as the the sorting switch (one of the other) ... (e.g.- sortkey=1, sortkey=2, sortkey=3) or do only letters work (e.g.- sortkey=a, sortkey=b, sortkey=c); why was number= deprecated before sortkey= was up and running?; I wanted to give Edokter props for fighting the good fight in this matter. I am happy too that there is a default sort too where if you do nothing the topicons will automatically alphasort. Ping me back. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 06:03, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Checkingfax, the sortkey is alphanumeric, so you can use basically use any string, including number. Numbers come before letters, etc. The number parameter was removed over a year ago when switching to indicators, which had no native control for sorting. I added sortkey, and did not bring back any old parameter names to prevent parameter pollution. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 10:49, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Edokter. Thank you. I suspected as much but I thought you might even offer some other cool features. Please continue to fight the good fight. I really appreciate your efforts. So, you had to add sortkey to all 300 topicons or were you able use a Lua module? Ping me back if you have a reply. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 17:13, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

FWIW - this may have been covered earlier above - but should note that sortkey=1 ... sortkey=9 - only seems to work for 9 (or less) topicon items, and does not seem to work for 10 (or more) items; for 10 (or more) items, sortkey=01 ... sortkey=99, may work better - hope this helps in some way - in any case - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 21:01, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Sortkeys not working.

I'm trying to use the sort keys, but they don't seem to be sorting. Help would be appreciated.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 06:33, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Some examples would probably be helpful... Alex|The|Whovian^? 06:35, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Right. Here you go.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 06:36, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

@Cyberpower678: That was because Module:Energy meter wasn't using Template:Top icon and didn't have a |sortkey= parameter. I have now rectified that situation. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 07:53, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

@Mr. Stradivarius: Mine aren't working either. Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 05:57, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

@Ks0stm: What's not working, exactly? It would be helpful to have a description of what behaviour you expect, and what behaviour you are actually seeing. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 08:26, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

@Mr. Stradivarius: This is what I was expecting, this is what I was getting. Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 08:28, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

@Ks0stm: I don't understand - could you elaborate some more on what the problem is? — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 08:45, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Until DeltaQuad completely removed the sortkey parameters in the first diff I linked, the topicons were all out of order compared to the order I was trying to place them in with the sortkey parameter. Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 08:48, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

@Ks0stm: Ok, now I see the problem. The |sortkey= parameter sorts alphabetically, so, for example, "19" sorts before "2". To fix this you can add a zero before sort keys that have a single digit, e.g. |sortkey=01, |sortkey=02, etc. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 10:27, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Gotcha! Thanks! Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 10:31, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

WMF account menu

Is there any Wikimedia menu for all accounts like this?:

{{Topicon|imagename=Commons-logo.svg|wikilink=commons:User:David_Hedlund|description=My Wikimedia Commons user account|width=23|}}
{{Topicon|imagename=Incubator-logo.svg|wikilink=incubator:User:David_Hedlund|description=My Incubator user account|width=23|}}
{{Topicon|imagename=MediaWiki-logo.svg|wikilink=https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:David_Hedlund|description=My MediaWiki user account|width=23|}}
{{Topicon|imagename=Wikibooks-logo.svg|wikilink=wikibooks:User:David_Hedlund|description=My Wikibooks user account|width=23|}}
{{Topicon|imagename=Wikidata-logo.svg|wikilink=wikidata:User:David_Hedlund|description=My Wikidata meta-wiki user account|width=23|}}
{{Topicon|imagename=Wikimedia_Community_Logo.svg|link=meta:User:David_Hedlund|description=My Meta-Wiki user account|width=23|}}
{{Topicon|imagename=Wikinews-logo.svg|wikilink=wikinews:User:David_Hedlund|description=My Wikinews user account|width=23|}}
{{Topicon|imagename=Wikipedia-logo.svg|wikilink=wikipedia:User:David_Hedlund|description=My Wikipedia user account|width=23|}}
{{Topicon|imagename=Wikiquote-logo.svg|wikilink=wikiquote:User:David_Hedlund|description=My Wikiquote user account|width=23|}}
{{Topicon|imagename=Wikisource-logo.svg|wikilink=wikisource:User:David_Hedlund|description=My Wikisource user account|width=23|}}
{{Topicon|imagename=Wikispecies-logo.svg|wikilink=wikispecies:User:David_Hedlund|description=My Wikispecies user account|width=23|}}
{{Topicon|imagename=Wikiversity-logo.svg|wikilink=wikiversity:User:David_Hedlund|description=My Wikiversity user account|width=23|}}
{{Topicon|imagename=Wikivoyage-Logo-v3-icon.svg|wikilink=wikivoyage:User:David_Hedlund|description=My Wikivoyage user account|width=23|}}
{{Topicon|imagename=Wiktionary-logo-v2.svg|wikilink=wiktionary:User:David_Hedlund|description=My Wiktionary user account|width=23|}}

please ping me. --David Hedlund ^SWE (Talk) 01:46, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

@David Hedlund: for all WMF accounts - not really - you could put one icon and link it to Special:CentralAuth/David_Hedlund though - that shows "all" your accounts. — xaosflux ^Talk 01:59, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

@Xaosflux: Can you please tell me where I should submit this menu? --David Hedlund ^SWE (Talk) 04:09, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

What exactly do you want to happen - you want all those icons on YOUR page? — xaosflux ^Talk 04:12, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

I submitted the menu to Wikipedia:User_page_design_center/Menus_and_subpages#Menu_.2318. I'm done now. Yes, I use it on my user page. --David Hedlund ^SWE (Talk) 04:29, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Simplify

I wanted to simplify the template so that editors didn't need to call each parameter by name... or maybe I'm the only one who cares. I went into Template:X19, one of the sandbox templates, to play around with the code of the template.

• I managed to successfully make the imagename, wikilink and description parameters function just by using them without naming them.

• The amended template code, available here, looks like this: {{#tag:indicator|[[File:{{{image|{{{imagename|{{{1|}}}}}}}}}|{{#if:{{{width|}}}|{{{width}}}|20}}x{{#if:{{{height|}}}|{{{height}}}|20}}px |{{#if:{{{link|{{{wikilink|{{{2|}}}}}}}}}|link={{{link|{{{wikilink|{{{2|}}}}}}}}}}} |{{#if:{{{alt|}}}|alt={{{alt}}}}} |{{{text|{{{description|{{{3|}}}}}}}}}]] |name = {{#if:{{{sortkey|}}}|{{{sortkey}}}-}}{{#if:{{{name|}}}|{{{name}}}|{{#if:{{{id|}}}|{{{id}}}|{{{image|{{{imagename|{{{1|}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}
• If it's unclear what I mean, I mean that, for example:

• {{top icon|Cscr-featured.svg|Potato|Clicking this icon will send you to the article on potato}}

• Will do the same thing as

• {{top icon|imagename=Cscr-featured.svg|wikilink=Potato|description=Clicking this icon will send you to the article on potato}}

• I'm not confident enough to play with the id parameter, but hypothetically you could turn it into {{{4|}}}
  Refer to {{X19}} for a history of my edits. I struggled with getting imagename to work because I missed it in the id parameter. Though the above code and link worked fine on my usertalk page.
• Also, would this change be beneficial to the template for users? It won't prevent anybody calling the parameter by name, but will allow lazy peeps like me to use the template without calling all the parameters directly. I hope I'm using all this jargon correctly. Or, at the very least, that y'all have a clue what I'm trying to say. Mr rnddude (talk) 13:39, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

I'm happy with the simplification, and the code looks robust. For future reference, it's probably best to sandbox at the companion page - Template:Top icon/sandbox. Because this does affect the template's usage, I'll leave the changes for 48 hours to establish consensus. ∰Bellezzasolo✡ Discuss 13:47, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Of course, no problem. I actually forgot that templates came with their own sandbox. Will make sure to use the accompanying sandbox in the future. Mr rnddude (talk) 13:58, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

 Done ∰Bellezzasolo✡ Discuss 15:27, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Mr rnddude and Bellezzasolo. BappleBusiness was interested in changing the size parameters in {{Committed identity topicon}} from {{{width|}}} and {{{height|}}}, to just {{{size|}}} for both of them. It's my understanding {{Top icon}} uses the separate parameters for a reason, and I recommended that such a change be first proposed for the parent template. I must admit my own curiosity, given that both width and height are specified. Can a top icon change size in one direction and not the other? Please consider taking part in the RfC voting. — CJDOS, Sheridan, OR (talk) 11:18, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

Discussion regarding a topicon

Notification of a discussion regarding {{pp-move}} at VPP, here. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 14:09, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

20 Year topicon

There's now a {{20 Year topicon}} to go with the 10- and 15-year ones. ClaudineChionh (talk – contribs) 11:31, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

FWIW - tried to add {{20 Year topicon}} and update the {{Top icon}} template - but to no apparent avail (and before reading above comments re Template Page Protection) - hope it's *entirely* ok - iac - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 15:13, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

"TP:TI" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect TP:TI and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 March 11#TP:TI until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 09:45, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Made a new topicon, have a question about placement within the topicons at the top of user pages...

Just created Template:Editor of the Week topicon. On my user page - User:Shearonink - it now appears first, before all the other topicons there (FA, FL, GA, Protection, and the 10 Year Society topicons). I would like for EotW topicon to appear last, or at least next to the Ten Year Society laurel leaves, after any and all GA/FA/FL topicons. I think the EotW is appearing first because, yeah, "Editor of the week" comes first alphabetically. To make it appear last or next to the Ten Year Society the solution would seem to be to move it to the new title of "Wikipedia:Editor of the Week" but before possibly doing that I wanted to check here to make sure that such a title change/page move is WP-correct. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 18:57, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Please don't fork discussions on the same topic to multiple forums. See replies at WP:VPT. — xaosflux ^Talk 21:32, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

WikiProject Soviet Union topicon

I have created Template:WikiProject Soviet Union topicon. Let me know what you all think! -- KomradeKalashnikov (talk) 20:07, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 10 January 2024

Please add Template:Ultraviolet topicon into this template as a tool topicon, Thanks. Natsuikomin (talk) 23:48, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

To editor Natsuikomin: you appear to have the incorrect template; this template is a meta template used to make top icon templates. Seems this change is wanted in the {{Top icon templates}} navbar in the Tools section, so that is where the UV topicon has been added. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^{put'er there} 03:28, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Oh yes, you're correct. Thanks for adding it there. Natsuikomin (talk) 03:39, 11 January 2024 (UTC)