Template talk:inprogress

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search

I still think this should be changed to include page. A-like so.

This page/section is in progress.
As always, you are welcome to assist by editing this page/section, but be aware that another user is currently adding and/or changing substantial content.

smileyface.PNG11945 (Talk/Ctrbs) 23:05, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Never mind, thank you, It's dot com. smileyface.PNG11945 (Talk/Ctrbs) 23:11, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, I didn't notice the difference between {{pageinprogress}} and {{inprogress}} when the former was up for deletion and then redirection. "pageinprogress" has been un-redirected, as you have already seen. :) — It's dot com 23:12, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
The color of one of them should probably be changed, just to differentiate. I'll do that to pageinprogress. smileyface.PNG11945 (Talk/Ctrbs) 23:16, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
A think a reminder to remove when done for whoever put the notice up might be nice to put back given the change in the template's wording. Hi, and Good night! --Stux 07:42, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] This tag is not a claim

Far too often recently I have seen this tag or its cousin the {{pageinprogress}} tag be used to stake a claim to a section or page, but with no intention of actually adding or changing content right then. That's not what these tags are for. They are a temporary hold designed solely to avoid edit conflicts. If someone puts a tag on a page and then leaves it for hours and obviously either is not editing the wiki or is editing other, unrelated pages, then the tag should be removed so that someone else can make the proper edits. I have added some verbiage to encourage the correct use of these templates. — It's dot com 20:59, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Hooray! The Wiki is saved! — Defender1031*Talk 21:01, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
Could you make similar changes to {{transcriptinprogress}}? It does get abused the same way occasionally (though, fortunately, not nearly as often). wbwolf (t | ed) 21:17, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
I think I've seen it with transcripts more than sections in general, but I agree; that's been an issue for a while on this Wiki. Thanks for the blurb, Dot com! --Jay (Talk) 21:31, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
Discussion copied from Talk:Punkin Show:

Dang, these transcripts get claimed fast... almost too fast, it seems. I think we need to make the guidelines a bit more clear for the pageinprogress template (namely when a person loses their claim to a transcript) to prevent this kind of thing from happening again. Maybe a more clearly defined time limit? That Game Dude 386 00:40, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

1:Yeah you can't hold off on something, or it's gonna get claim├Ęd. Plus sign, you don't need to do your homework now. We get off tomorrow for Veteran's Day. 2: They do get too claimed fast. That's prolly because there's prolly like *estimated guess*100 peopleses trying to go for it at once. But it takes longer to do transcripts then it does to claim them. Weird...ed out. CrabAttack1999 01:21, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
That Game Dude, how much more clear can we make "15-30 minutes"? — Defender1031*Talk 02:32, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
No, what I mean is a way for people to realise when a pageinprogress is invalidated. It can be very frustrating to have to check page history, count 15 minutes, take down the pip, then cause an edit conflict because the guy wasn't regularly saving, and he's mad because 30 minutes haven't passed. Perhaps saying "save after 20 minutes" instead of "try to save every 15-30 minutes" would help? That Game Dude 386 02:48, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
The instruction to save every 15 to 30 minutes is a friendly reminder, not a strict timer. At 30 minutes plus 1 second, we're not gonna yank the template off the page and declare the transcript open for anyone else to claim. On the other hand, after an hour with no update, we just might. Or we might not. It depends on the page, the time of day, and other factors. The template is intended to prevent edit conflicts, and that's all. Other editors are requested not to edit a particular section as a courtesy. The person doing the major editing should likewise extend other editors the courtesy of letting them know work is still being done. — It's dot com 16:37, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
But is it such an inconveinience to transcripters that they can't be bothered to save the work they've done? I mean, obviously transcripting takes a while, and edit conflicts are a problem, but at that 30 minute mark it gets murky— is the person using a word processor? Or maybe they're taking a while because of a bad internet connection? Or did they go out for supper? The possibilities are endless, but the fact remains that there's no real way to tell, since they only time we can contact the author is when they're not doing what they're supposed to be doing. So I think that there really should be a cutoff time period- and it should be at least an hour- and it would be a fair way to let anxious users who ARE commited know when they can step over the lellow tape. The use of pip is not like the use of bid button during the last 10 seconds of a rare item on eBay- this template needs to enforce a commitment and have a way to deal with those who are not commited to finishing. That Game Dude 386 21:26, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
I'm having trouble discerning which side of the issue you're on. The person using the tag is requesting a courtesy. It is therefore incumbent upon them at regular intervals to prove they are still working or they risk the courtesy being disregarded and the tag removed. Additionally, it is necessary for them to prove they are still working precisely because some editors feel they may put up the tag and then go off to supper. They may not. I don't think that asking an editor to save their work about every half an hour is too much to ask. — It's dot com 22:05, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
Personal tools