I propose that the issue list template be modified to list a small portion of the most important bugs relating to the page's subject. An example of how this used to look when this was the template's functionality pre-2013 is attached. Listing issues was the function of the issues list, but a problem explained on the template's doc turn it into its current state, a somewhat handy link to the bug tracker on every page. It is possible to get it working again though, as it's been 11 years, I'm sure the more technically adept users working on this template could elaborate on that below.
I think providing a quick list of the most important bugs about a feature will expand our usefulness as a wiki overall, considering that this template is on every single feature page, even Dungeons and Legends pages. Suddenly by making this change the wiki is now the location to go to quickly know about important bugs related to a feature. While it's fine to just link users to the bug tracker, I think ideally we shouldn't have to link people to external sites for important information about features. Of course, you can't list every bug, but we can ensure the section's usefulness despite that by listing at least the most important bugs (the highest voted/highest priority). - Harristic / Talkπ Image 23:14, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
Although yes, this is a very good idea, I'd like to ask exactly how you'd determine what would be considered an "important bug" for any feature? Are you saying you'd want each bug that is highlighted on a page to be hand-picked, or would you rather say a more generalized query should be formulated instead? If the latter, this would be an integral aspect of this very proposal. I know there was a discussion about this on the discord server, do you want to mention a conclusion about it here? - Jack McKalling (talk) 06:33, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
π Image Support. Based on the Discord discussion that led to this forum proposal, I'll add that the plan is to only show bugs with a confirmation status other than "Unconfirmed", and there will be heavy caching so the list of issues only needs to be queried once every week or few weeks. ββ Sonicwavetalk04:14, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
Latest comment: 22 July 202411 comments7 people in discussion
I propose that, only once the first proposal goes through, we move the Issues section up in Style guide/Features from between History and Trivia to between Advancements and Video.
The section's placement makes a bit of sense currently, as it's essentially just another external link. However, with the first proposal the section will include gameplay information relevant to the feature. I get the likely impression that the sections are ordered in relevance to a person playing the game, and everything past the Advancements section is either about things outside the game, or past versions of the game (History). Therefore between Advancements and Video is the most sensical location for the Issues section, as bugs are relevant to the current version of the game, but (usually) are not noticeable to players and therefore the least important gameplay-relevant section.
There could be concerns that this could confuse frequent readers, but I think the presumably low usage of the section due to it being not very useful would alleviate this. Essentially, people aren't going to be too confused by a section moving if they weren't really using it before anyway. There could still be slight confusion, but not enough to prevent this change happening in my opinion.
It isn't more important than history section. Yes, the issues section will be more useful than it is now, but I believe history is way more "interesting" than a list of bugs. TreeIsLife (talk) 19:16, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
History is more interesting than sounds and data values and videos to the majority of people Iβd assume, but we arenβt going to put history above those of course because history is not relevant to the featureβs current state, it is not relevant to a player playing the game and looking for information on how it works. By the same logic, we wouldnβt put it above Issues, because bugs affect the feature in its current state and are relevant to a player wanting to know about the feature in its current state. History is certainly an interesting section, but itβs just that, interesting, not important information to most people, and therefore itβs lower down the page. - Harristic / Talkπ Image 19:24, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
π Image Wait It's hard to judge this until the issue list is implemented. The usefulness of the section greatly depends on the quality of the sorting. A concern could be layout shift, if there are sections below the issue list and issues take time to be populated by the javascript on a slow connection. -- jacobsjo (talk) 20:43, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
π Image Support, the history section might be more "interesting" to read, but I think a list of bugs affecting the feature in the current version of the game is much more useful. Any sections related to features in their present state should take precedence over historical information.--Capopanzo (talk | contribs) 13:27, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
π Image Neutral on moving up the page in its current state. I would be opposed moving it higher than the current proposal. It is relevant to the current game so putting it above history makes sense, but I am not a big fan of the current state of the issues list. The list can take up a large portion of the screen and I doubt the usefulness of most bug reports to readers. From browsing around the majority of reports are small parity issues of sound or texture, parity issues of generation, graphical glitches, and even some issues that are arguably working as intended and simply haven't yet been marked as such. Theres also an issue with how the search is done that will probably never be completely solvable. Log#Issues for instance currently returns a plethora of issues related to "logging in/out" and server "logs". Yes you could exclude the word "server" from results and exclude a lot of the irrelevant issues, but that will end up hiding real issues with log blocks that also use the word "server". I'm not familiar enough with the module to know if there is an easy fix to this, maybe only show bugs marked as over a threshold of importance or votes. Mudscape (talk) 21:27, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
