Template talk:Backlog

Admin backlog?

Resolved.

Shouldn't this actually say "requires the attention of one or more administrators"? Most of these tasks can't be done by a simple editor; they require sysop powers to complete. Should another template be created, such as {{adminbacklog}}? Bratsche^{talk 5 pillars} 04:24, August 23, 2005 (UTC)

Frankly, no. Most of the tasks here can be performed by any user - e.g. merging, moving, lonelypages, categorizing, etc. Radiant_>|< 11:42, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Sigh. Okay, guess I'll go create {{adminbacklog}}. —Locke Cole 11:48, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  - Why do you want it split, exactly? Generally an admin is treated as a normal user. Note that most of the TFD closing work can also be done by a non-admin (I did it for at least a month before I was adminned). Radiant_>|< 11:55, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    - They can close the debate, sure, but they can't perform the most critical part of TFD: the actual act of deletion (if that's the outcome of course). I'm not trying to imply that administrators are a higher class or anything, but it's just the reality of the situation that only administrators can perform certain actions. I think there needs to be a way of informing admins of a backlog requiring their attention (and not just an experienced editor). —Locke Cole 12:21, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    - As a side note, I'd close the older TFD nominations myself, but I've voted in some of them; I wouldn't want to give the wrong impression. I'll close some of the ones I haven't voted in though. —Locke Cole 12:44, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
No need, I've just cleared it up. Note that people don't really look at {{backlog}} all that much, so there's no need in forking. Experienced editors know which kinds of processes they can work on and which ones they can't. If you wish to notify admins, use WP:AN. R adiant _>|< 12:46, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

End note: During this discussion the {{adminbacklog}} message box was created and has been in use since then.

--David Göthberg (talk) 17:00, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Autoreport feature

I am planning to add an autoreport feature to {{adminbacklog}}. I can also add that feature to this {{backlog}} message box. But I don't use these templates much so I don't know if that would be a useful feature, so I would appreciate any comments on this. See the discussion over at Template talk:Adminbacklog#Autoreport feature.

--David Göthberg (talk) 17:00, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please! But see also Category talk:Wikipedia backlog. –Drilnoth (T • C) 20:50, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done - And it looks very nice for instance over at Category:Stubs. And I have joined that other discussion.

--David Göthberg (talk) 03:54, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Autoreport wording

Drilnoth: I just noticed that you reverted yourself. (I had left this edit comment when doing a little cleanup after his previous edit: "I don't like this new wording that Drilnoth just changed to.") But you don't need to be that "submissive". We have different views on what is the best wording, but my view isn't more worth than yours. And I am not even a native English speaker, so the wording I used perhaps was bad? And we still have my wording in {{adminbacklog}}. So I think we can just as well have your wording here in {{backlog}} so people can see both and comment on them.

The reasons I prefer my wording are that I think it is simpler, and it makes the hide sentence shorter. Your hide sentence is much longer than the more important "this is a backlog" sentence, which kind of looks strange. But your wording "fewer than" sounds better than my old "less than", so I changed that in my version below.

Here are my (David's) version:

This page has a backlog that requires the attention of willing editors.
This notice will hide when this category has fewer than 10 items. (recount)

If this category gets 10 items or more, it will report as a backlog. (recount)

And here are Drilnoth's version (but with the small fix I added after his edit):

This page has a backlog that requires the attention of willing editors.
This notice will be hidden whenever this category has fewer than 10 items. (recount)

Whenever this category has 10 or more items, it will be reported as a backlog. (recount)

I think we should revert to Drilnoth's version as shown here, and then wait for comments from people.

--David Göthberg (talk) 03:01, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Page or category?

See the documentation page examples. The final one (situation: "there is no backlog"), says:

"If this category has 10 items or more, it will report as a backlog."

But other instances says "This page ...", and the template indeed may be used on a regular page (not a category page). May I expect a word change? -DePiep (talk) 22:25, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I was asked to fix this on my talk page. This 23 December 2013 edit added a page parameter to alter that text, which was never documented. I suppose we need to check what uses that parameter to avoid breaking things, but I think the best approach is replacing that with a namespace check which uses "category" in the category namespace, and "page" in all other namespaces.

Currently there are 276 transclusions of this template:

245 categories
24 in project (Wikipedia:) namespace
4 in user namespace
3 in template namespace (this template, its documentation and sandbox)

– wbm1058 (talk) 20:39, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I finally got around to implementing that namespace check which uses "category" in the category namespace, and "page" in all other namespaces, with this edit. – wbm1058 (talk) 11:45, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Adding silent feature from adminbacklog

I added |silent= to this template, copying its implementation from {{Admin backlog}}. If I did it wrong, please fix it. I tested it in the sandbox and used the sandbox version on a live page before copying the change to the main template. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:57, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please provide a title for your discussion topic.

add topic Natee9969 (talk) 09:52, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Edit Request

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

I don't trust myself to not absoultely break the wikitext. Would anyone mind adding support for Error: No text given for quotation (or equals sign used in the actual argument to an unnamed parameter)? Currently there is an nindex page marked as having a backlog, and this is the only thing I think I could track down as for why its doing so. {{tlrow}} seems to have support for nocat= so I think it's one more level up in {{admin backlog}}, a wrapper of this template. Happy Editing--IAm Chaos 02:21, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In progress: An editor is implementing the requested edit. Tollens (talk) 03:34, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dvtvjhr 160.182.5.59 (talk) 20:55, 8 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done Tollens (talk) 03:42, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Huge banner

@Jonesey95 and @HouseBlaster regarding this revert: I've just realised the reason this template has always looked so huge to me is its use of upright over fixed px size!

I've never seen any other notice use upright. Obviously upright is better for images in articles, but the clear common practice is to fix the imagesize in template notices. I suggest you try setting your default image size to 400px to see how huge it looks for users of custom image size. FaviFake (talk) 15:36, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My thumb size is set to 300, about 25% higher than the default, and the icon looks fine to me. I'd be OK with a fixed pixel size matching the message box templates, which recommend 40 to 50 px. The main reason I reverted was that the explanation given in the edit summary was incorrect, and I did not see a relevant discussion. I tried this template with 50px, and the image looks a little small to me. HouseBlaster's choice of 60px might be right; again, I mainly disagreed with the edit summary rationale and thought there might be undesirable side effects. If you want to change the icons back to 60px for consistency with other banners, it's fine with me. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:53, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Makes sense! I also agree 60px is a good size, not too big but not too small. FaviFake (talk) 15:55, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I could've sworn it was only functional on upright. Thanks, Jonesey, for enlightening me :)

If there are other reasons to use a fixed size, I support using one. Best, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 19:02, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have changed the size to 60px per this discussion. Thanks for engaging in good faith and not blowing up at my initial revert. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:05, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]