Jump to content

Template talk:Automatic archive navigator

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Handling year-named archives[edit]

Would be good if this also auto-detected archives that are named for years, e.g. all those at Talk:The Walt Disney Company.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  13:19, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Should we add diff and histoffset parameters?[edit]

REMOVE
After a month of no further comments, there is clear consensus to remove the |diff= and |histOffset= parameters. (I am formally closing this to hopefully help the merge along.) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 02:57, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


{{Archive}} is being merged here now and has two parameters that this template doesn't hav, |diff= (~73 uses in this very unreliable search) and |histOffset= (~68 uses). These add a link to the original revision of the page and the appropriate part of the history respecivly. I could easily add these and carry them over without any issue, but I find these links completly useless. I want to keep unnecessary complexity at a minimum to keep the template easy to use and removing this in my view useless feature used by under 0.1% of transclusions seems reasonable. Pings to TfD participants and the 4 people who use this feature on their user talk pages and have edited in the past month. @SMcCandlish, Gonnym, Caeciliusinhorto, Anomie, RayneVanDunem, Nsgaeverine, and Anon126: --Trialpears (talk) 02:02, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You can add a tracking category to find usages if the search isn't good enough. Regarding your question if the parameters are that underused, then either editors don't know about them and might be useful or they just aren't useful. If they aren't useful there is no reason to carry them over. Gonnym (talk) 07:46, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm in favor of omitting them. They are not useful, for at least two reasons. No one needs to see the talk page in the exact state it was when the archive page was created, since that just shows the same threads, just in their original context (it provides no additional information). And archive pages are usually added-to over time until they get so long that a second (third, etc.) archive page is later created, so the two "snapshotting" parameters are not going to relate to the archive page's contents for very long in most cases and will just end up being confusing to anyone who tries to use them. In the weird case that someone does feel a need to look at the original talk page in the state it was in when the archive page was created (e.g. because the archive page was created by someone who later turned out to be a subtle vandal), this is what the page history feature of the website is for. Look at the dates and times of the archived discussions, and go back in the orignal talk page history to whatever date and time is of interest to you.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  12:20, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have no objection to removing these parameters, as one of the (apparently very few) people who use them. I think they provide some convenience but I recognize that this may not be worth the added complexity. Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 08:15, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Later archives are not linked[edit]

{{talkarchivenav}} no longer shows later archives, see e.g. MediaWiki talk:Common.js/Archive 21. The list stops at Archive 21, even though Archive 22 and Archive 23 both exist. I don't know when it stopped working as intended. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:39, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Redrose64, the root cause of the issue is that at Special:PrefixIndex/MediaWiki talk:Common.js/Archive, pages MediaWiki talk:Common.js/Archive 3, MediaWiki talk:Common.js/Archive 4 ... MediaWiki talk:Common.js/Archive 13 don't exist. This causes Module:Highest archive number to fail in the middle of its search.
Archiving was done in following ways:
A solution could be to unify the archival numbering system. Move:
—⁠andrybak (talk) 12:04, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Implemented the proposed moves in these edits. The links to further archives at MediaWiki talk:Common.js/Archive 21 have been fixed. —⁠andrybak (talk) 23:11, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, although it would be great if AAN could handle gaps in sequence. For example, if used on /Archive 22 it should always check for the existence of /Archive 23, regardless of whether /Archive 3 ... /Archive 13 exist or not. The pre-Lua version did this, IIRC. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 08:09, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Overflowing[edit]

I've noticed that on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 439, while logged out and in the new Vector 2022 skin with the "standard" text appearance, the horizontal list of archives overflows off the right edge for certain screen widths. Can this be fixed? PBZE (talk) 22:52, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's not specific to Vector 2022, it happens with all skins when the available width is less than the width required. It just shows up more obviously with Vector 2022 because of the patronisingly-narrow width that has been forced on us "because people have difficulty reading long lines of text". --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:03, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template_talk:Automatic_archive_navigator&oldid=1230973396"