Portal talk:Endocrine system
From MEpedia, a crowd-sourced encyclopedia of ME and CFS science and history
Please remove empty boxes -- notjusttired (talk) 13:41, June 30, 2019 (EDT)[edit source | reply | new]
Please delete these empty boxes
- In the news (News)
- Did you know
I have raised this before with no objections (but little feedback).
- Make Featured Images fill 100% of the width - it may need moving to do that. User:Kmdenmark notjusttired (talk) 13:41, June 30, 2019 (EDT)
- Hi User:Notjusttired, Whenever I remove the code for the empty boxes, the page is less readable, i.e., the layout for some other boxes is effected and other content sometimes disappears. If I copied the code for the entire page for you, could you specifically tell me what code to delete and/or add? Thanks Kmdenmark (talk) 12:16, July 2, 2019 (EDT)
- It would be easier for me I think it see the changed (dodgy) layout before knowing what to adjust. The page is essentially two columns of boxes. I might see if I can re-create it in my user area then I could let you copy it from there? notjusttired (talk) 14:03, July 2, 2019 (EDT)
- User:Kmdenmark I've edited it myself since protection was off. notjusttired (talk) 19:49, July 2, 2019 (EDT)
- User:Notjusttired Wonderful! Kmdenmark (talk) 17:32, July 3, 2019 (EDT)
- User:Kmdenmark can you pit protection back in place. The other Portals can probably be done with similar code, or you could remove protection from maybe 3 of them while I edit? I won't tackle more than a few in same day. notjusttired (talk) 15:52, July 4, 2019 (EDT)
- User:Notjusttired Wonderful! Kmdenmark (talk) 17:32, July 3, 2019 (EDT)
- User:Kmdenmark I've edited it myself since protection was off. notjusttired (talk) 19:49, July 2, 2019 (EDT)
- It would be easier for me I think it see the changed (dodgy) layout before knowing what to adjust. The page is essentially two columns of boxes. I might see if I can re-create it in my user area then I could let you copy it from there? notjusttired (talk) 14:03, July 2, 2019 (EDT)
- I put the protection back in place. Do you think we even need these pages protected? I'm wondering if we could leave the portals unprotected indefinitely. MEpedia rarely has had an issue with vandalism and when we did, it was usually just an insult on a doctor's or researcher's page. Thoughts? Kmdenmark (talk) 17:23, July 8, 2019 (EDT)
- I don't know. But one bonus of protection is preventing accidental mistakes, and preventing changes that have not been properly discussed from happening too soon. If it's possible to prevent moving that would be very important. There is some kind of semi-protection option which only certain groups of users can edit - eg Autoconfirmed users. Do you know how that works? I can't find out.
- I think there should be an option on the administrator’s “Page Protect” page to “Allow only autoconfirmed users” to edit. This makes the page “semi-protected”. See https://m.wikihow.com/Protect-a-Page-in-MediaWiki for some screenshots. As a reminder, autoconfirmed users include anyone who has made at least 50 edits. It certainly makes sense that the portal pages are unprotected while they are actively being worked on, but then protected once the pages are in a stable state. Unlike regular articles, portal pages aren’t subject to ongoing changes, I don’t think...
- Pyrrhus (talk) 20:25, July 10, 2019 (EDT)
- Sounds good to me User:Pyrrhus notjusttired (talk) 18:08, July 11, 2019 (EDT)
- I don't know. But one bonus of protection is preventing accidental mistakes, and preventing changes that have not been properly discussed from happening too soon. If it's possible to prevent moving that would be very important. There is some kind of semi-protection option which only certain groups of users can edit - eg Autoconfirmed users. Do you know how that works? I can't find out.
- I put the protection back in place. Do you think we even need these pages protected? I'm wondering if we could leave the portals unprotected indefinitely. MEpedia rarely has had an issue with vandalism and when we did, it was usually just an insult on a doctor's or researcher's page. Thoughts? Kmdenmark (talk) 17:23, July 8, 2019 (EDT)