Template talk:Sex
Contents |
[edit] 12/13
Seems to be something wrong with this template - sometimes it displays 12 entries, sometimes 13. My limited Wiki skillz are insufficient to locate the problem, though. --AKjeldsenGodspeed! 12:00, 11 October 2007 (EDT)
- The template was a part of the Human Sexuality category. I made the category part "includeonly" and now get 13 results consistently (refreshed 10-20 times or so without getting 12 results), so I think it's fixed... --Sid 15:42, 11 October 2007 (EDT)
- Thanks guys! I was surprised I got it to work at all... human
17:01, 11 October 2007 (EDT)
- I don't think it worked, I just counted 12. Here's what I think is happening - it is quite possible for the template to include the article currently being viewed, and I never really worried about it, thinking if that happened at would just turn up as a black link. However, I bet that it is simply not listing it when that happens. So testing the template itself won't show that issue (now that the cat has been includeonlyed). Is there a way to eliminate the "current pagename" from consideration for the random list? Not that this is really important, except for people thinking we can't count sometimes... or that we have cheap bakers... human
17:50, 11 October 2007 (EDT)
- I know how to fix it, but I'm hesitating:
- Thanks guys! I was surprised I got it to work at all... human
| skipthispage Syntax: skipthispage=no The default is yes, i.e. the page where your DPL query stands will never show up in the result set. Setting this parameter to 'no' may lead to runtime errors which are hard to track down. You should only use that parameter if your query is straight forward in its structure and you need the current page to show up in the result (if it matches the selction criteria). |
- It's exactly what we're looking for, but "may lead to runtime errors" sounds kinda ominous - no idea how they'd show up or what they'd do. This isn't my place, I'm not a sysop, so I won't put stuff in that may do damage.
- I'll try something else now, but I felt like pointing out that there is an easy, but potentially buggy solution anyway. So "BRB". --Sid 18:38, 11 October 2007 (EDT)
- And back. I think the workaround does what I want it to do, although there might be bugs (which I doubt at this point). I took out all pages matching the title {{PAGENAME}} from the selection between the steps "all pages from this category" and "13 random articles". Checking a couple of times led to 13 articles, so I think it worked.
- My main concern had been that the matching would be too greedy, as in: the Sex page would never have Sex toys in its list. However, the matching seems to be exact, so the only worry would be two articles with the same pagename, but in different namespaces. But I don't think we actually have that case... and even then, we could probably work around that, too... maybe... --Sid 18:47, 11 October 2007 (EDT)
- Yup, you didn't break it, and might have fixed it. And if we had, say, "sex" and "fun:sex" they should either be merged, or link to each other explicitly anyway. human
18:57, 11 October 2007 (EDT)
- Yup, you didn't break it, and might have fixed it. And if we had, say, "sex" and "fun:sex" they should either be merged, or link to each other explicitly anyway. human
[edit] category
Do you guys think it is good practice to automate the catting like I did? human
18:58, 11 October 2007 (EDT)
[edit] He's Right, You Know
Sex isn't all about gayness.
...that's fanfiction! --Kels 22:49, 23 December 2007 (EST)
- If I am right, then how come you reverted my edit? 209.17.190.78 22:53, 23 December 2007 (EST)
- Because the flag includes everyone. human
23:16, 23 December 2007 (EST)
- How does it inudle everyone?
- The point of the rainbow is to show the incredible range of human sexuality. Even so-called "straight" or heterosexual people engage in a wide variety of, um, "practices". Hence the rainbow flag. It even includes you. human
23:22, 23 December 2007 (EST)
- The point of the rainbow is to show the incredible range of human sexuality. Even so-called "straight" or heterosexual people engage in a wide variety of, um, "practices". Hence the rainbow flag. It even includes you. human
- How does it inudle everyone?
- Because the flag includes everyone. human
How did the flag image get broken? It's still in the source, but vanishes before it loads. ħuman
17:35, 4 February 2009 (EST)
- Ah, I see, it was too wide to fit in the table I guess. Fixed. ħuman
17:38, 4 February 2009 (EST)
[edit] Style
I'm beginning to wonder if we shouldn't make this into a wide, at-the-bottom-of-the-article style template, since it's buggering up our ability to appropriately thumbnail illustrations on quite a few shorter pages. Thoughts, anyone? ħuman
17:30, 10 February 2009 (EST)
[edit] Reformat
As most of this doesn't revolve around pseudoscience, I just wanted to flag this up on talk first. I've recently gone and made a few sub-category templates all based around {{pseudosciencenav}}. IMHO, they're pretty, they're consistent and they're neat. Would anyone object to altering this one to match?
pathetic 16:29, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
- Go for it. These sidebars are really nice - David Gerard (talk) 16:41, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
- I'm not convinced that the red does clash with the flag, at least in my last edit I changed the colours slightly and it seems to match with the red in the flag. As for the things matching, I like the concept of a house style for RW articles, it's something worth working on in order to distinguish the look of the site from Wikipedia, which I think we often run the risk of being confused with.
pathetic 19:32, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
- At least change the red to pink? (I will). I don't see a need for these all to look alike, but, whatever. By the way, there is a sizing error in all these - the box around the "header" title thing at 30 px high leaves a chunk of empty space below the text. I've changed a few to 20 so far. Why do they all have to say "part of the series on", by the way? ħuman
20:19, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
- Better than "20" is to ditch the height tag entirely. ħuman
20:21, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
- The "series on" comes from the pseudoscience template, I like it as a generic template header but if there are better wordings, please change it. The hot pink is... well, nice, sort of, very blithe and gay. But I see what you mean about the height parameter. I'll kill it on all of them.
pathetic 21:00, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
- Ah, I see. My only "quibble" with it is that most of these are random selections from the category that is auto-added, which isn't quite a "series". Not much of a big deal of course. Thanks for fixing the height thing, you remember where these things are better than I since you were just working on them. I come across them randomly... I wonder if they should go in a subcat of "navigation templates" to make them easier to find? Ditto the other "styles" of nav boxes we have? ħuman
02:27, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, it probably needs a bit ol' sorting out. I'll take a look.
pathetic 10:52, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, it probably needs a bit ol' sorting out. I'll take a look.
- Ah, I see. My only "quibble" with it is that most of these are random selections from the category that is auto-added, which isn't quite a "series". Not much of a big deal of course. Thanks for fixing the height thing, you remember where these things are better than I since you were just working on them. I come across them randomly... I wonder if they should go in a subcat of "navigation templates" to make them easier to find? Ditto the other "styles" of nav boxes we have? ħuman
- The "series on" comes from the pseudoscience template, I like it as a generic template header but if there are better wordings, please change it. The hot pink is... well, nice, sort of, very blithe and gay. But I see what you mean about the height parameter. I'll kill it on all of them.
- At least change the red to pink? (I will). I don't see a need for these all to look alike, but, whatever. By the way, there is a sizing error in all these - the box around the "header" title thing at 30 px high leaves a chunk of empty space below the text. I've changed a few to 20 so far. Why do they all have to say "part of the series on", by the way? ħuman
- I'm not convinced that the red does clash with the flag, at least in my last edit I changed the colours slightly and it seems to match with the red in the flag. As for the things matching, I like the concept of a house style for RW articles, it's something worth working on in order to distinguish the look of the site from Wikipedia, which I think we often run the risk of being confused with.
- Whoops
pathetic 11:17, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
[edit] Heternormative Bullshit.
Is there a way to have the intertwined male/female symbols at the bottom of the template randomly appear as various combinations of genders? P-Foster Talk "a cheetos-eating, Mountain-Dew drinking vlogger living in someone's basement." 02:17, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
- Agree with the title, and yes, if we have the images to select randomly from.
Acer Blue 02:23, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
- Well, they are intertwined so it could be interpreted as intersex. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 02:23, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
- we stole it from here, and there are several others : http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Sexual_identity_symbols
GodotDear god, fucking grow up 02:27, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
- we stole it from here, and there are several others : http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Sexual_identity_symbols
- Well, they are intertwined so it could be interpreted as intersex. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 02:23, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
Alright, I have no idea to do that. Can somebody else? P-Foster Talk "a cheetos-eating, Mountain-Dew drinking vlogger living in someone's basement." 02:39, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
I think it'd look better if we had little stick figures instead of gender symbols. Balaam (talk) 11:40, 17 January 2012 (UTC)