Template talk:UIPM

No more ID in url

The website was updated to exclude id number in url. The new page is something like that. This means that this template should be reworked, if possible.--User:Tomcat7 (talk) 20:53, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Wikidata is using the new form of string ID (e.g. laura-asadauskaite). The template can fetch and use those IDs. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:10, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

When I write {{UIPM|aleksander-lesun}}, I will still be redirected to [1], instead of [2].--User:Tomcat7 (talk) 12:30, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Indeed. But if you put that ID in Wikidata, and remove the ID from the template in the article about lesun on this wiki, it will work correctly. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:49, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

I have made the equivalent of [3] here [4] to fix our url's. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:24, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

I've undone your changes. The identifiers have changed, not just the URL structure. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:50, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

I have tested 10 transclusions at Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:UIPM. All 10 are broken in your version and as far as I can tell it's impossible for the articles to fix any of them because the url structure in your version is never supported. All 10 cases worked perfectly in my version with no need for the articles to change anything. In view of this I have reverted again. If you disagree then please try to give a good explanation. If there are any of the untested articles where my version is broken then I think it can be fixed in the article or at Wikidata but would be impossible to fix with your version. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:35, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

After further testing I found 5 articles where my version didn't fix the link. All 5 were fixed by simply removing the id like [5]. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:58, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

You need look no further than the two examples in the template's documentation. Both are 404. The reason your five latter examples work is that the updated ID for each happens to be in Wikidata. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:56, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

But examples with a number as ID are broken in both versions. Isn't it better to be 90% right with the last 10% being fixable in article/Wikidata than being 0% right with nothing being fixable? I think the five articles I fixed were the only broken cases so it's now 100% right in current uses. The documentation just needs an update. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:50, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

I know the ID numbers are broken in both versions; that is why I wrote, yesterday, "The identifiers have changed, not just the URL structure". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:57, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

I have updated the documentaion.[6] The archive parameter was and still is undocumented. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:58, 29 August 2016 (UTC)