Forum:CT:Fixing the Expand template

As discussed in this Senate Hall thread, the {{Expand}} template, as it is used right now, is problematic and frequently creates confusion among authors. The default code for the Template only provides a generic message that requires the "expansion of one or more sections of the article" as well as a suggestion for editors to "check the article's Talk Page or listing for more information". The issue lies in the fact that very rarely do editors actually elaborate on the sections that need to be expanded upon in either the talk page or listing, leaving others with no option but to have to guess the previous editor's intentions. Although common, this process can seriously impact would-be Status pages which, as per the relevant rules, cannot be nominated if they are tagged with one or more maintenance templates.

Discussions on Discord and in the previously linked SH thread pointed towards a need for the template code to be updated in order to help users specify the changes they wish to request. There are currently two options, proposed by User:Imperators II and User:Sakaratte. These are:

1) To update the default template code with an additional section in which users can specify the sections they think need to be expanded upon in the form of an optional, trackable parameter; in this case an additional category has already been created which will contain articles where the parameter hasn't been added by the users. This option makes using the template easier and doesn't require much effort from the side of the user; it does however require a staff team to take a look at the newly created Category and take action on a case-by-case basis, either removing the template when its use in an article is inappropriate or keeping it when the article is in need of major expansion which would be impractical to explain in the template.

Updated code:

{{iumb | id = Expand | bg = #79895E | image = [[File:TPMCGYoda.jpg|150px]] | caption = Master {{USERNAME|Qui-Gon}}, ''more'' to say, have you? | message = It is requested that this article, or a section of this article, be expanded. | comment = See the request on the [[:Category:Articles to be expanded|listing]] or on this article's [[Talk:{{PAGENAME}}|talk page]]. Once the improvements have been completed, you may remove this notice and the page's listing. {{#if:{{{1|}}}|The following needs expanding on: {{{1|}}}.|[[Category:Pages using Template:Expand without a parameter]]}} }}<includeonly>{{SpecialCategorizer|[[Category:Articles to be expanded|{{PAGENAME}}]]}}

2) To require users to list the sections in need of expansion in the talk page and assign a Lua script to check the talk pages of any article newly-tagged with an Expand template for the presence of specific markers indicating that the expand info has been added if the reason is not directly supplied in the template. This option would also allow for the use of multiple expand templates at a time.

Updated code:

 {{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACEE}}|1||{{#if:{{{marker|}}}||{{iumb | id = Expand | bg = #79895E | image = [[File:TPMCGYoda.jpg|150px]] | caption = Master {{USERNAME|Qui-Gon}}, ''more'' to say, have you? | message = It is requested that this article, or a section of this article, be expanded. | comment = See the request on the [[:Category:Articles to be expanded|listing]] or on this article's [[Talk:{{PAGENAME}}|talk page]]. Once the improvements have been completed, you may remove this notice and the page's listing. {{#if:{{{1|}}}|The following needs expanding on: {{{1|}}}.|[[Category:Pages using Template:Expand without a parameter]]}} }}}}}}

AxMech (talk) 22:14, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

The Lua Module

As mentioned above there would be a Lua module for option 2 to check the talk page, this wasn't written at the time of the CT starting, but as there are a few votes I've moved forwards and written it as it is likely to go in. The actual format of option 2 for the template will be:

{{#invoke:Expand|main
| id = Expand
| bg = #79895E
| image = [[File:TPMCGYoda.jpg|150px]]
| caption = Master {{USERNAME|Qui-Gon}}, ''more'' to say, have you?
| message = It is requested that this article, or a section of this article, be expanded.
| comment = See the request on the [[:Category:Articles to be expanded|listing]] or on this article's [[Talk:{{PAGENAME}}|talk page]]. Once the improvements have been completed, you may remove this notice and the page's listing.
}}

Everything in option 2 is still happening, but in Lua instead to reduce loading time, the existing template already uses Module:SpecialCategorizer. Adding the second Lua script to the existing template would mean loading Scribunto twice: once to check the talkpage and once for SpecialCategorizer. Making the whole thing a module means Scribunto is only loaded once and does both tasks. Sakaratte - Talk to the catmin 00:01, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Support Option 1

1. Imperators II^(Talk) 11:49, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
2. Clarification is good, but users shouldn't be made to go out of their way to do it on the talk page, so I won't support option 2. OOM 224 (he/him) 22:36, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
   • I thought it'd be mandatory, but theoretically one could always choose to use the template with the parameter instead of noting issues on the talk page, so that's good with me. OOM 224 (he/him) 10:09, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
3. CT-1742 (talk) 22:13, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
4. Dentface (talk) 18:49, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
5. Rsand 30 (talk) 15:46, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
6. Cade Calrayn 22:06, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
7. 01miki10 ^{Open comlink} 22:09, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
8. JediMasterMacaroni^(Talk) 22:26, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
9. —spookywilloww^talk 22:32, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
10. Since it was pointed out that they're not mutually exclusive,I'm a fan of both Dropbearemma (she/her) 07:19, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Support Option 2

1. Imperators II^(Talk) 11:49, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
2. OOM 224 (he/him) 10:09, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
3. CT-1742 (talk) 22:13, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
4. Dentface (talk) 18:49, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
5. Rsand 30 (talk) 15:46, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
6. Cade Calrayn 22:06, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
7. 01miki10 ^{Open comlink} 22:09, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
8. JediMasterMacaroni^(Talk) 22:26, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
9. —spookywilloww^talk 22:32, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
10. Dropbearemma (she/her) 07:19, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Oppose both-suggest another option

Discussion

• Are these two options really mutually exclusive? The solution that I've proposed works in cases where there's a smaller amount of info to give on what exactly needs expanding, while Sakaratte's proposal could presumably work well for cases where an editor wishes to convey more, or more detailed, information. Imperators II^(Talk) 15:46, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
  • They don't have to be mutually exclusive, it can be an and/or scenerio. If the reason isn't given directly on the template we can iterate through the talk page to check if there is an active expand comment and flag this as valid. Sakaratte - Talk to the catmin 07:47, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
• I don't quite understand option 2. Would users be mandated by policy to give explanations in the template? Does "multiple Expand templates" mean the same template will need to be used for separate areas for expansion, rather than having a centralised notice akin to {{Multiple_issues}}? OOM 224 (he/him) 12:03, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
  • Users would be mandated by policy to give explanations for the "expand" in both cases. The difference is that in option 1 they'd have to add the explanation in the template itself, otherwise it wouldn't work (kind of like the "update" one), and in option 2 they'd have to write up an explanation in the article's Talk page-but this is by definition not immediately enforceable, thus the suggestion for the Lua script to track whether they did or not.AxMech (talk) 22:13, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
    • Ah okay, thanks for the clarification. Then I guess with option 1 it wouldn't be actually mandated by policy, but simply a practical necessity. OOM 224 (he/him) 22:34, 29 January 2023 (UTC)