This Forum has been archived

Visit the new Forums
Forums > Consensus track > CT:Flagging bugs

Bugs are a huge problem. Both in-game and on the wiki. Users seem more interested in reporting poorly written bugs than useful content nowadays. In order to ensure that only the most useful information is added to articles, while also directing users to places where they can get help and report bugs without infringing on our style sheet, I have devised the bugs template. Based on the {{disambig}} template, this template ({{Bugs}}) would be added to the very top of the "Bugs" section on each article. The template denotes that bugs must be confirmed on talk pages before being added to pages. It gives the common sense fix of reloading an old save (hopefully, this will prevent it from being added to the afterword of each bug on the article), and also instructs them to use those colorful game-name templates. As the template stands, I am not impressed by home large it is. Partially because the Oasis skin is so narrow. With a wider margin, it would look much slimmer. Now, it's chunky and clunky. So, stylistically, I'm looking for something better, sleeker, slimmer to be added to articles. Again, this template would be added to every single article on the wiki with a bugs section. Here is how it would be formatted in source mode:

*{{XBOX}} Bug one.
**Solution: Solution to bug one.
**Solution: Another solution to bug one.
*{{PC}} Bug two.
*{{ALLPLAT}} Bug three.
**{{PS3}} Solution: Solution that only works on PS3.

I assume the template will be outside of any collapsible tables enclosing the bugs. For the visual learners:

{|blah blah blah tabl
BUGS GALORE!!!1!!11!!@
*{{XBOX}} Bug one.
**Solution: Solution to bug one.
**Solution: Another solution to bug one.
*{{PC}} Bug two.
*{{ALLPLAT}} Bug three.
**{{PS3}} Solution: Solution that only works on PS3.

I added the template to Proventus Avenicci#Bugs. Check it out and let me know what you think. Obviously, I want the template to be slimmer, so try to visualize that when viewing the above article.--—Deyvid Petteys (bother \ stalk) 06:38, August 7, 2012 (UTC)


Voting-support Support – As nominator. --—Deyvid Petteys (bother \ stalk) 06:38, August 7, 2012 (UTC)

Voting-support SupportG0LD3NF1RE Questions Goes Here 06:55, August 7, 2012 (UTC)

Voting-support SupportAxel Shiokawa (talk) 07:02, August 7, 2012 (UTC)

Voting-support Support – I felt like making something similar yesterday. Good timing. ~ Flightmare (talk) 12:06, August 7, 2012 (UTC)

Voting-support Support – Chances are we will need to make a ridiculous number of edits to correct people not realizing this, but it never hurts for me to be less lazy Mask2697 (talk) 00:32, August 8, 2012 (UTC)

Voting-support Support – I like the concept, assuming we can trim down the size a little -- and maybe add some color? GramsJ (talk) 01:15, August 8, 2012 (UTC)

Voting-comment Comment – I fully support the notion of adding color to the template, but I know a few others would be highly resistant to such a proposition. Also, I should mention that we may not be able to slim down the template any more than it currently is. At first, I was extremely bothered by it, but it's starting to grow on me, hour by hour. :) --—Deyvid Petteys (bother \ stalk) 02:27, August 8, 2012 (UTC)

Voting-support Support – Hopefully this will fix the mess that most bug sections currently are. Dar'Rajhin (talk) 02:17, August 8, 2012 (UTC)

Voting-support SupportRaulfin Talk 03:30, August 8, 2012 (UTC)

Voting-support SupportKennyannydenny (A question is never stupid, only he who asks it) 21:30, August 10, 2012 (UTC)

Voting-support Support – After seeing yet another bug added to an article without being confirmed on the talk page, I have been convinced that it is needed. While a lot of editors may not pay attention to it, it's better than nothing. Balagog gro-Nolob (The Gourmet is listening) 00:59, August 27, 2012 (UTC)




Voting-comment Comment – I like the idea of telling people to confirm bugs on talk pages before adding them to articles, but at the moment the template is way too big. I know I'm supposed to visualize it being slimmer, but I'll have to see what it's going to look like before I vote. On Proventus Avenicci it looks very out of place. In the massive bugs sections that are in collapsible tables it wouldn't be so bad, but with only a couple of bugs, it's just clunky. Balagog gro-Nolob (The Gourmet is listening) 07:02, August 7, 2012 (UTC)

Voting-comment Comment – Although it's still pretty chunky, I still enjoy the way it looks on that particular article. But, then again, I obviously have no taste when it comes to design and page layout. --—Deyvid Petteys (bother \ stalk) 12:13, August 7, 2012 (UTC)

Voting-comment Comment – The Oasis skin is not to blame for the size of the box. There are line feeds all over the template so it wouldn't differ much. Something that can be done is decreasing the line feed gap, so it will be more compact. ~ Flightmare (talk) 12:08, August 7, 2012 (UTC)

Voting-comment Comment – Come again? The latter part of that sentence made little sense to me. Too much jargon. Lol. At any rate, the template would appear similar if there was a greater range for it span across. We could force it to be wider, but it would look awful and overlap the sidebar etc. --—Deyvid Petteys (bother \ stalk) 12:14, August 7, 2012 (UTC)
Voting-comment Comment – Making it wider would not solve anything. The way the ordered list (#) is set up makes every point appear on a new line. But those lists use large separators between lines which appear to be unaffected by the smaller font size. The template at its current state wraps only one line. That is the maximum you would save by widening it. ~ Flightmare (talk) 12:17, August 7, 2012 (UTC)
Voting-comment Comment – I struggled to find a form of indentation that allowed for better spacing, but failed, since, obviously, astricks and hashtags don't produce any type of wikimarkup when placed in a span style. If you can think of something, I'm willing to consider it, but it has to have some sort of list formatting to it.--—Deyvid Petteys (bother \ stalk) 12:21, August 7, 2012 (UTC)
Voting-comment Comment – It would involve creating a separate class for this template in MediaWiki:Wikia.css, but I think it would succeed. ~ Flightmare (talk) 12:23, August 7, 2012 (UTC)

Voting-comment Comment – Ya it is a bit large, but it has that quality of jumping out at you almost begging to be read. For that I personally think the template should stay how it is. Perhaps reword #3 so it's only one line. —This unsigned comment is by Jaymz6 (talkcontribs) . Please sign your posts with ~~~~!

Voting-comment Comment – I tried really hard to reword that sentence into one line. It did not work, obviously, and I ended up cutting out crucial information for size. If someone has a suggested rewording, I would be willing to implement it. --—Deyvid Petteys (bother \ stalk) 12:32, August 9, 2012 (UTC)
Voting-comment Comment – I made a small change to the template in an attempt to compact it somewhat and fit each point one line - it seems to have worked so please check The original horizontal lines have been reworked so it uses the line under the bugs header - saves even more space. If it's not suitable, then revert it.
Personally I feel the bullet points should be moved to a seperate page altogether that outlines the policy of adding bugs - we leave a link on the bugs banner that points to it. This would solve two thing: 1) We can detail the policy much better as we don't need to worry about a bloated template. 2) The template would be compacted even further.--Jimeee (talk) 13:10, August 9, 2012 (UTC)
Like have a Proventus Avenicci/Bugs page? Possibly with a larger more detailed template just for them. Also the change makes it look better. Raulfin Talk 13:36, August 9, 2012 (UTC)
No, I mean a general policy page that lists the four bullet points on the bugs template in more detail.--Jimeee (talk) 13:42, August 9, 2012 (UTC)
Voting-comment Comment – This could work well, maybe something like "This section contains bugs related to {{{PAGENAME}}}, before adding a bug to this list, refer to the bug policy". This would be much less chunky and still give the same info. Balagog gro-Nolob (The Gourmet is listening) 21:47, August 10, 2012 (UTC)
Voting-oppose Oppose – As I've said on the IRC, I do not think linking to a bug policy will help spread the message. Most editors are too lazy to read our style and formatting guidelines before they add their bugs to begin with, so if the information isn't right in front of them, they will utterly disregard the template altogether. Most will likely continue to avoid our bug policies, even after the template goes live on all articles, but I believe having some of the prohibitions listed right there will help trim down on the massive influx of bug edits to some extent -- definitely more than if we simply linked off to another page. --—Deyvid Petteys (bother \ stalk) 13:08, August 11, 2012 (UTC)
Voting-neutral Neutral – I'm at the stage where I just know that most editors simply won't care if there is template there with the bullets or a link to a policy page - they are determined to add some bugs and trivia. Most of our editors have proven time and time again that they largely disregard any form of guidelines for pages - call me a pessimist. If the template is to be a permanent fixture on hundreds of pages we should at least make it as painless as possible. --Jimeee (talk) 13:26, August 11, 2012 (UTC)
Voting-comment Comment – It's, honestly, no less dysfunctional than gruesome templates like tl|spoiler. And all lore-related infoboxes. --—Deyvid Petteys (bother \ stalk) 13:34, August 11, 2012 (UTC)
Voting-comment Comment – I agree, a lot of people won't bother adding it to the talk page and discussing it and stuff. It may make people use the platform templates, and possibly even stop them from using first person. But they will still add it to the article without discussing it, and they will still write possible fixes on the page. Balagog gro-Nolob (The Gourmet is listening) 21:37, August 11, 2012 (UTC)
Voting-comment Comment – Possibly, but now we can easily revert these types of edits, as they blatantly neglect our policy and standards. Plus, many of these editors do mean well, they are simply misinformed. If they saw a banner, telling them how to do things properly, they are more likely to do so. The difference may not be huge, but I think it will do some good nonetheless. --—Deyvid Petteys (bother \ stalk) 02:02, August 16, 2012 (UTC)
*Disclosure: Some of the links above are affiliate links, meaning, at no additional cost to you, Fandom will earn a commission if you click through and make a purchase. Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Stream the best stories.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Get Disney+