Second opinion(s) requested...[edit]

The current situation is imperfect because a few pages are still categorized wrongly [1] [2], and editors attempting to fix them manually get a big scary warning (multiple DEFAULTSORT calls).  Obviously I'm no programmer, so I'll wait for any reactions/corrections before proceeding.

If nobody cares, my plan is to:

  • Test in Template:Transit (only impacts one article).
  • Move new template into template space.
  • Test in Template:Map and see if the site crashes.  :D
  • Use new template in all other hub navboxes, even where it has no effect, so that future navboxes copypasting that markup will inherit the fixes.

Possible objections include:

  • This is unnecessary because the volume has been low enough to handle manually.  (Disagree — even if the modding community vanished tomorrow, we'd have documented maybe 10% of notable levels to date.)
  • If we implement this, the previously manually fixed pages will show the red warning on ANY subsequent edit.  (Yeah, my fault I'm afraid. [3]  I'd go back and remove all those obviously.)

Thoughts anyone?    Ryan W (talk) 13:11, 17 October 2015 (CDT)

I've tested it for various oddball pagenames.
Looks like the code for skipping "A" and "The" doesn't work, and it probably shouldn't cut anything for nameless levels. --Gez (talk) 13:57, 17 October 2015 (CDT)
I keep forgetting about that special page — thanks!  The first issue is obviously fatal and I'll look at that some more.  Nameless levels could still be overridden by the name= parameter (or else add another "pos" call to check whether the distance between the colon and the open-parentheses is 1?  Yecch).  :>    Ryan W (talk) 14:33, 17 October 2015 (CDT)
Awfully complicated for something that COULD just be provided as an alternate template parameter when it's necessary to override the normal behavior. I have concerns from a performance POV. This will eat up enough conditions and function calls on a per-page basis to potentially pose a threat to the use of other templates on the same article - remember that limits are cumulative on a per-article basis. Not per template transclusion. --Quasar (talk) 14:34, 17 October 2015 (CDT)
Too bad we can't mark templates as "autosubst" or something like this. A complicated template wouldn't be too much of a problem if it was only processed once in a page's life. --Gez (talk) 14:43, 17 October 2015 (CDT)
That's been requested and WONTFIXed citing vandalism concerns.    Ryan W (talk) 15:12, 17 October 2015 (CDT)
Turns out the alternative parameter already existed [4], so the manual work in the current situation is less than I've asserted.  (ETA: I called the other parameter "name" but it's really "noname".)  Maybe there isn't much call for this.  Maybe I at least need a slurpee before I make up my mind.  (Yes, that seems likely.)    Ryan W (talk) 15:16, 17 October 2015 (CDT)