User Talk: Andrybak

Server-side rendered snapshot of this editor's Wikipedia talk page discussions.

{{lowercase title}}{{Show by date|2031|1|1||{{Not around}}}}{{Archives}}{{User:MiszaBot/config
| algo = old(180d)
| archive = User talk:Andrybak/Archive %(counter)d
| counter = 2
| maxarchivesize = 200K
| archiveheader = {{Archive}}
| minthreadstoarchive = 3
| minthreadsleft = 0
}}

Problem with your revert

Regarding this edit ↗. The problem with this edit is that now the backlinks at the top of the page don't show up correctly.

Currently: <code>< Template:Uses TemplateStyles | sandbox</code>

Previous: <code>< Template:Uses TemplateStyles | styles.css</code>

Additionally, this messes up database reports, which is a minor issue compared to the one above. The change should be to Module:Uses TemplateStyles to change the way it looks up the sandbox. Gonnym (talk) 13:10, 25 November 2025 (UTC)

:The current sandbox logic in the module comes from Special:Diff/861001237 ↗. The edit summary references this discussion: Wikipedia talk:TemplateStyles/Archive 1#Sandbox naming convention ↗. —⁠andrybak (talk) 13:48, 25 November 2025 (UTC)
::I understand and you completely ignored what I wrote above. The backlinks for the way {{em|all}} pages work on Wikipedia, is broken when the naming subpages is incorrect, as it is with your edit. Gonnym (talk) 13:50, 25 November 2025 (UTC)
:::I'm sorry I didn't make myself clear. There is prior consensus that the sandbox pages for TemplateStyles should be named this way. This consensus was reached in the discussion I linked above. The argument about backlinks was taken into account there and other arguments won. —⁠andrybak (talk) 14:20, 25 November 2025 (UTC)
:Gonnym, please join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Templates#Where to put styles.css of a template's sandbox? ↗. —⁠andrybak (talk) 14:52, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Anniversary Andrybak 🎉

Hey @Andrybak. Your wiki edit anniversary is today, marking 11 years of dedicated contributions to English Wikipedia. Your passion for sharing knowledge and your remarkable contributions have not only enriched the project, but also inspired countless others to contribute. Thank you for your amazing contributions. Wishing you many more wonderful years ahead in the Wiki journey and a blessed New Year. :) -❙❚❚❙❙ GnOeee ❚❙❚❙❙ ✉ 17:15, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

Speedy deletion ↗ nomination of :Category:North America political leader sidebar templates ↗

48px|left|alt=|link= ↗

A tag has been placed on :Category:North America political leader sidebar templates ↗ indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category ↗, a category redirect ↗, under discussion at Categories for discussion ↗, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion ↗.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may '''contest the nomination''' by visiting the page ↗ and removing the speedy deletion tag.   '''''L'''''iz '''''Read!''''' ↗ '''''Talk!''''' 17:37, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

January 2026

25px|alt=Information icon ↗ Hello, I'm Zackmann08. Thank you for your recent contributions to :Template:Guatemalan political parties ↗. When you were adding content to the page, you added duplicate arguments ↗ to a template which can cause issues with how the template is rendered. In the future, please use the preview ↗ button before you save your edit; this helps you find these errors as they will display in yellow at the top of the page. Thanks. '''Zackmann''' (Talk to me ↗/What I been doing ↗) 20:46, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Long diatribes

I've always liked them and have never been one to TLDR. Feel free to throw that at me anytime. :) It's one of the upsides of my instincts ↗. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 03:26, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

:Clovermoss, for a technically-minded wikignome like myself, it is very rare to indulge in metapedianism ↗. Thank you for the encouragement.
:I hope this whole shebang leads to positive change. —⁠andrybak (talk) 03:37, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

{| style="background-color: var(--background-color-success-subtle, #fdffe7); border: 1px solid var(--border-color-success, #fceb92); color: var(--color-base, #202122);"
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | 100px ↗
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''The Editor's Barnstar'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | Thank you for correcting - Special:Diff/1340451970 ↗. It was a typo. KnowMosaic 14:55, 26 February 2026 (UTC)
|}

edit on my userpage

Hi there, I am a fairly new editor and I saw that you edited my user page (thanks by the way, that phrase should not have been there). I am just curious at how you noticed, are you the template creator? NJNPer (talk) 16:40, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

:NJNPer, such user pages are found using a database report generated on the Quarry website: quarry:query/93085 ↗. See WP:QUARRY ↗ for more details. —⁠andrybak (talk) 18:03, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:Navbox/doc

Hi, on your edit here ↗ on the Navbox /doc page, when you move the vertical bar to be outside of the include onlys, then templates do not expand when listed on a /doc page where there are other templates. For example: if you look at this edit ↗ on Template:Antarctic research stations, if you put the vertical bar within the include only, then the template expands and shows. If you put it outside of the include only, the research station template stays collapsed on the /doc page, which is not ideal. I think the Navbox directions need to be changed back. --Funandtrvl (talk) 21:29, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

:{{tq|1=If you put it outside of the include only, the research station template stays collapsed on the /doc page, which is not ideal.}} – you mean on the template's page itself, because the page Template:Antarctic research stations/doc ↗ (as of Special:Permalink/1345763730 ↗) has never had any navboxes on it.
:Yes, I see the difference between "pipe inside" and "pipe outside" in Special:Diff/1345721266/1346445423 ↗ (live ↗ vs sandbox ↗). However, there is a second element that together with the placement of the vertical pipe that is causing this – Template:Antarctic research stations ↗ actually has four transclusions of Template:Navbox ↗, which means that it triggers the autocollapse behavior of Template:Navbox ↗ for itself by itself (see Special:Diff/1346445777 ↗).
:If, per your suggestion, the pipe is inside the {{tag|includeonly}} tags, then it is equivalent with passing {{para|state|{{param|state}}}} to Template:Navbox ↗ (the value of parameter <code>state</code> is literally the word "state" surrounded with three pairs of braces). See Special:Diff/1346446111 ↗. I don't think I ever looked into why Template:Navbox ↗ reacts this way, but it does. As an opposite example, Template:Alveolata ↗ uses <code><nowiki>| state = {{{state|<includeonly>collapsed</includeonly>}}}</nowiki></code>, but doesn't autocollapse, because there aren't other transclusions of Template:Navbox ↗ in the vicinity.
:My recommendation for such navboxes, that trigger their own autocollapse behavior, is to expand them on their own page explicitly, without relying on the behavior of Template:Navbox ↗ that I mentioned in the previous paragraph. Example of how to explicitly expand navbox: Special:Diff/1346446413 ↗.
:Regardless of the above, it does seem like my Special:Diff/1344554494 ↗ would be causing more harm than good, so I brought back the main recommendation to have the pipe inside: Special:Diff/1346448051 ↗. —⁠andrybak (talk) 22:01, 31 March 2026 (UTC)
:: I've linked to a couple of diffs above, but whether or not the preview for an opened diff link is shown depends on the browser (mobile vs desktop) and probably user preferences. —⁠andrybak (talk) 07:43, 1 April 2026 (UTC)
:::Yes, you're right, it's when using the Navbox with collapsible groups and setting the state to collapsed that it doesn't expand the template when you're looking at the template page, not the /doc page. Thank you for your detailed explanation! I wish I knew what all the ramifications would be concerning placing the vertical bar within the includeonly vs. not. But I'm not that knowledgeable about the coding. Is there anything online that would explain this? (or do I need a degree in computer science??!!) Thanks --Funandtrvl (talk) 01:13, 2 April 2026 (UTC)
::::Just placing a question at Template talk:Navbox ↗ should be enough. —⁠andrybak (talk) 06:50, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

The Original Barnstar

{| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #fdffe7;"
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align:middle;" | 100px ↗
|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Original Barnstar'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | In recognition of your valuable contributions to the Polish nobility ↗ and heraldry ↗ templates. Karnemir (talk) 19:42, 15 April 2026 (UTC)
|}

Could you help some more?

Template:WikiProject Spam header ↗ and Template:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam ↗ have the same issues that I failed at fixing for the blacklist and whitelist. I tried to figure out how to implement something myself based on what you did for the others (I didn't actually save anything this time), but I failed to figure anything out. Thanks. lp0 on fire () 15:52, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

:Done in Special:Diff/1352701709 ↗ and Special:Diff/1332385513/1352702018 ↗. —⁠andrybak (talk) 19:36, 5 May 2026 (UTC)
::Sorry to waste more of your time, but could you help me again? I just tried to use CSS variables for {{t|usm}} (Special:Diff/1352814759 ↗ in the sandbox), but it doesn't seem to work. I tried purging, but the testcases still show up with the wrong colours. Thanks, and please let me know if you want me to stop asking you these questions. lp0 on fire () 12:08, 6 May 2026 (UTC)
:::The way the /testcases page was written wasn't using the modern approach, so I rewritten it ↗ using Template:Test case nowiki ↗ – it makes checking the differences between output of live and sandbox templates easier.
:::Template:User summary ↗ (aka {{tl|Usm}}) was fixed in Special:Diff/1352875105 ↗. I went with the color scheme I used recently for Template:User21 ↗.
:::Here's the diff from your version to what I ended up with: Special:Diff/1352814759/1352875134 ↗. Here's what is important to point out:
:::# You started with an unsynced sandbox. For more details, see instructions at Wikipedia:Template sandbox and test cases#Updating existing /sandbox and /testcases subpages ↗.
:::# You missed one of the hyphens in the name of the CSS variable <code>--color-progressive--active</code>. If you typed it manually, I recommend copy-pasting from Web development tools ↗ of your favorite browser. When trying things out in the CSS rules tab of developer tools, the browser will even help you by auto-completing with the names of the colors it already has from loaded CSS. I just type <code>--color</code> or <code>--background-color</code> and press down many times going through the list of suggestions. If you want to just familiarize yourself with what is available, the CSS variables usually end up near the bottom of the CSS rules tab/window in big lists under selectors <code>:root</code> and <code>html</code>.
:::Don't worry about taking up my time. I'm a volunteer here, and there is no deadline ↗. —⁠andrybak (talk) 19:43, 6 May 2026 (UTC)
::::Thanks a lot! There's the same issue on {{t|ipsm}} if you feel like making the update, not that that really gets used much any more. lp0 on fire () 19:50, 6 May 2026 (UTC)
:::::Changed colors of Template:IP summary ↗ in Special:Diff/1352878856 ↗. I also went through the rest of Template:Userspace linking templates ↗. —⁠andrybak (talk) 21:54, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

Adding parameters to hundreds of existing userboxes

We've worked together on userbox cleanup in years past. I recently noticed that you've made hundreds or thousands of edits such as {{Diff2|901603691|this}}, {{Diff2|901603828|this}}, and {{Diff2|1337740924|this}} (to pick one userbox). I'm concerned about all the additional syntax that this creates, seemingly needlessly. Please note that we kept existing parameters when converting the old HTML table syntax to templates ↗. Said parameters might have been in use. However, I don't think there's a need to breakout {{Em|every}} parameter from {{Em|every}} userbox, as that violates MOS:MARKUP ↗. I suggest tempering the years-long editing frenzy and only adding parameters when actually needed. The existing formatting should be fine in most cases. — <kbd>voidxor</kbd> 19:46, 28 May 2026 (UTC)

:I don't remember what exactly happened in 2019. Adding parameters {{Parameter|id-c}}, {{parameter|border-c}}, and similar to userboxes for customization is a standard practice – these parameters share their names with the underlying parameters of Template:Userbox ↗, which are known widely enough.
:Specifically for {{tl|User member}}, I did it because I used these parameters myself. The customized transclusion has been at User:Andrybak/Userboxes since around Special:Diff/905899279 ↗. —⁠andrybak (talk) 17:02, 1 June 2026 (UTC) {{small|1=fixed the diff link. —⁠andrybak (talk) 17:15, 1 June 2026 (UTC)}}
:As for conversion of old table-based layout of userboxes to {{tl|Userbox}}, I try to make sure that any removed parameters aren't being used. —⁠andrybak (talk) 17:05, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing my userboxes

Appreciate it man. Keep up the good work. Ihave0balls (talk) 01:55, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

Archive length

Hi Andrybak, what's the reason for setting archival time to 1825d here ↗? That means any discussion will persist for five years before being archived. Most archive times are 30/60/90 days. CMD (talk) 12:06, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

:New discussion sections do not appear frequently at Talk:Kuala Lumpur ↗ nowadays. There are only five sections and the oldest—Talk:Kuala Lumpur#Factcheck ↗ (permalink ↗)—is from February 2020. 30/60/90 days is too fast of an archival pace for such talk pages. —⁠andrybak (talk) 12:10, 21 June 2026 (UTC)
::Five sections is a normal amount, many pages have fewer. The minthreadsleft parameter keeps threads on the page if no new ones are made, even if they are older than 90 days. CMD (talk) 12:14, 21 June 2026 (UTC)
:::That's correct.
:::A longer archival period that is aligned with the rate of the regular discussions is a good idea. Too fast archival can in some situations lead to unnecessary archival of discussion sections, that should have been just removed, because they are not worth keeping in the archives. A popular case is empty edit requests for semi-protected pages. This is just a general note, not applicable to the talk page in question, because the corresponding article hasn't been protected for long periods of time. —⁠andrybak (talk) 12:21, 21 June 2026 (UTC)
::::Sometimes unnecessary sections are archived, but that does not seem relevant to a five-year timeframe. I've trimmed the time back to a standard amount, if you think multi-year archive times should become implemented across less used talk pages, please raise that in a more general discussion. CMD (talk) 15:07, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!

{| style="background-color: var(--background-color-success-subtle, #fdffe7); border: 1px solid var(--border-color-success, #fceb92); color: var(--color-base, #202122);"
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | 120px ↗
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | Thank you for your support and readership of ''The Signpost''. ''' Bluerasberry '''(talk) 00:18, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
|}