Template talk:Graph:PageViews/Archive 1

Archive 1

template source display

Izno, I don't think hiding code and structuring graphs like that is good. I created this template to be useful for both those who want to easily insert it into other pages, but also as a tutorial on how to do these kinds of graphs. Graphs code is much more similar to the Lua modules than to regular template content, so we should always show the content. I do not object that the documentation and a sample of the graph is shown at the top. For other similar approaches, see the demo page, especially CategoryPie graph --Yurik (talk) 13:33, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

That's not the purpose of the template to most people even though it might be for you. And if someone wants to review the source, that's an [edit] button away. That's how templates have always worked here on en.wp. --Izno (talk) 13:37, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Izno, just because I placed it into the template namespace does not mean its the same type of template than the regular ones. I had a long discussion with other community members during various hackathons on how to implement graphs - if they should be in a separate namespace or other options. Graph code is much closer to Lua modules than to templates. And they have always shown code to be inspected. The "edit" button makes it extremely hard to read the code because it does not have code highlighting. So please add your suggestions to the talk page, and lets have a discussion, instead of simply changing it it while i'm still working on it. --Yurik (talk) 13:53, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

It's exactly the same kind of template in that it is a template. Your discussion with other community members seems irrelevant to this case.No, actually, a large number of templates have not and will presumably continue not to show their code for "inspection".I don't like accusing people of WP:OWN, but this is not your template anymore. I am simply bringing it to the standard expected of template documentation on EN.WP. --Izno (talk) 13:57, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Izno, any page in Wikipedia technically is a template, because it can be transcluded with the {{:page name}}. Even Modules are templates, in the sense that they are transcluded into other pages, they just have a different syntax than the regular wiki markup. But all this is not really relevant. Lets try to approach it from a different angle - what is the purpose of this page, and who is the intended audience. Most of the time, the visitor is not a casual viewer, but rather someone looking to get comprehensive information about the graph, improve that graph, or possibly learn how to make other graphs like it. So we should make it easy to satisfy all those requirements. The argument "we do it this way because we have always done it this way" does not really apply - we never had graphs with such powerful and well structured but complex syntax before. The closest thing we have is Lua modules, which, as I said before, show code just like I did here, for exactly those reasons. You said that "I" need to see the code, but this is not true. I actually don't - I wrote it and I know how it works. This is needed by all those who may wish to learn and improve this and other graphs. That's why I am designing it that way - so that all 3 use-cases can be easily satisfied. Clicking "edit" is not an option because it is 1) is much harder to read and understand, and 2) adds an unnecessary step that adds another small barrier of entry. If we want to promote this new technology, instead of being "exclusive", we should show how things are done to those who are interested. P.S. Please note that the original page name was "Template:Graph:PageViews" to specifically highlight that this is a graph that simply reuses templating technology, just as described in the graph guide. We can discuss if we should change that standard too. --Yurik (talk) 14:59, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Tooltip

Hello Yurik and thank you the third time for this tool. One of our users asked me if there is a possibility to add a tooltip with page views number when we move the mouse over the graph. What do you think? Thanks, IKhitron (talk) 15:45, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

IKhitron, it is possible, but I would advise against it. Tooltips would require the graph to switch into "interactive" mode (see examples), and download all the api data to the client, which will melt the pageview api servers. With the static graph, the image is cached, but with the interactive graph, all the drawing is happening on the client, which means it needs to get all the data. You might also be interested in this tool. --Yurik (talk) 02:13, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation, Yurik. I don't one to make problems, of course. And I know this tool. But it does show some number information. It is possible there and not possible here, on template level? IKhitron (talk) 10:39, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Yurik? Thanks, IKhitron (talk) 19:23, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

IKhitron sure, i will see what i can do. Adding numbers to a line is a bit tricky because we wouldn't want to add too many numbers - they will overlap. A bit of a styling problem :) --Yurik (talk) 20:14, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, Yurik. I already thought about this. Maybe you should make this possible for days <= 7, or something like that. IKhitron (talk) 20:16, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Axis titles and graph title

Alas poor Yurik!

Is there a better way to get a title or explanation for the graph?

Smallbones_(smalltalk) 18:42, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Smallbones I don't think I understand the question. --Yurik (talk) 03:54, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Yurik I'll try again. Note that the graph using just the template:

has no title or brief explanation of what the units are on the y axis or what the graph refers to. A simple title like Page views for the main page over the last 100 days would pretty much do it, but the method I used above seems a bit clumsy. Any help for a better method would be appreciated. Thanks Smallbones_(smalltalk) 04:10, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Smallbones it all depends on the "target audience". I think this graph is better for inserting it into other templates, or complex pages, like US Politics graphs, or adding them to the chat pages. We could create another template that adds a nice box around this graph, with a title, description, and a link explaining what pageviews are. --Yurik (talk) 04:16, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

@Yurik:

Page views for the main page over the last 100 days

Your talk page example inspired me. The above should do it for me. Would it be possible to give one number written out with the graph - in the above example, total page views for the main page over 100 days?

BTW, if you like graphs, please see something I've been working on File:Size of English Wikipedia (1000 vol).svg Smallbones_(smalltalk) 04:33, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

For what it is worth, I ran into the same problem just now; I think a default header would be a good idea. —Luis (talk) 14:06, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Also incorporating centering (since I'm using it in a talk page under the other header templates) and a suggestion from @Fuzheado::

Page views for this article over the last 30 days
Detailed traffic statistics

Note that this hardcodes the article name in the bottom link, so anyone who wants to copy it would have to fix that. (Or maybe make this part of the template?) —Luis (talk) 15:36, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Broken?

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T133495

@Yurik: This is now broken for me on Talk:All Writs Act and Talk:Mossack Fonseca. Any idea why? —Luis (talk) 03:38, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Really? I thought it's something local, just on our wiki. It brokes every day or two for two weeks. A nulledit usually helps. IKhitron (talk) 12:35, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Tracking in T133495. Something is weird inside the parser :( --Yurik (talk) 13:49, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Kudos

Kudos to Yurik, and others who helped, for this nifty new facility. Thank you! EEng 19:38, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

• I agree with EEng that this tool is quite handy and would also like to thank Yurik for providing it. I've been setting up page view graphs on talk pages for articles that I happen to visit. Unfortunately someone is now systematically removing these. Here's some recent examples:

1. Robert Gibbon Johnson
2. Evening Snow on the Heater
3. Rat Rock
4. Hertha Marks Ayrton
5. Rudyard Lake
6. 2016 celebrity death cluster
7. GN-z11

and so on. I'm still getting the hang of using this tool effectively so it would be good to develop some guidelines. Do we have any other examples of existing experiments and usage, please? Andrew D. (talk) 19:20, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Once there's a consensus for this to be added to talk pages, it should just be added as part of the talk page template. In the meantime, it's better for you to stop doing it ad hoc and often without explanation, and usually in the wrong place (because there's no explanation). I'm sure you understand that. (And yes, you are still "getting the hang of using this tool effectively", i.e. you are using it ineffectively and without community consensus). The Rambling Man (talk) 19:38, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Internationalisation

Is there a way to have translated month names and formatted numbers for each language (dots instead of commas should be for some languages)? --Obsuser (talk) 09:24, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Smoothing

It appears the data is being smoothed in some way. I hate to pile on with feature requests, but can there please be a way to parameterize or defeat this?

Also (and here I go with the piling on) it would be super-wonderful to put multiple articles on a single graph -- though this leads to all kind of design questions. Thanks again for providing this facility.

EEng 19:48, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Regarding multiple articles, there is also (using the same base API), the PageViews tool at WMFLabs. --Izno (talk) 20:08, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

But I mean multiple articles on one graph, which can be embedded e.g. on a Talk page. EEng 03:16, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Right, my point was that in the meantime (until such a time as this functionality can be provided by the module, if indeed it is possible), you can provide a link to the tool at Labs, which can graph multiple articles at the same time. --Izno (talk) 17:38, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

• OK thanks. And the smoothing? EEng 22:40, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Ping! EEng 07:42, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Template title

Shouldn't this be at Template:Graph:PageViews, like the MediaWiki one? It is also consistent with other MW templates, like Template:Graph:Weather monthly history. I don't see a reason for why this was moved. Pinging Yurik, the author. Thanks, Laurdecl ^talk 00:34, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

The nomenclature "Template:X:Y" is not particularly normal for most wikis; I am not entirely sure why Yurik thinks those are good names, but that's his prerogative. The others here should probably be renamed as well. --Izno (talk) 12:17, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

I just tried to keep the same types of templates together, using a fake subnamespace "graph". Of course we could use categories instead, and rename all of them - no strong feeling on this one, however the community thinks is best. --Yurik (talk) 20:38, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

I think that we should keep them WP:CONSISTENT, so move this under Graph:, but I'm not opposed to other formats. Laurdecl ^talk 06:05, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Add to all talk pages?

It's really a great, informative template. Would it be feasible to add it to all talk pages in some manner?

Or to the talk page header template with said getting added to all talk pages (or in that case: for what reason should there be exceptions?).

--Fixuture (talk) 14:17, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

I'm going to guess (though I have no way of quantifying this) that there'd be significant performance effects. EEng 14:25, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

Agree, oppose, no need at all, the history of the page provides links to such information. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:07, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

• Oppose. There's already a more advanced tool for this in the History section of the article. Wikipedia is not a contest. Softlavender (talk) 04:10, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose. As per reasons above, plus, though it is indeed great and informative, there's already too much general mess. ch (talk) 04:37, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
• Support - It is a great tool to assess the importance of an article. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 05:33, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

@Softlavender:But it's a page feature very well hidden. Until you mentioned it I didn't know about it. Thinker78 (talk) 02:30, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Axes disappear after color inversion

I use color inversion software with my browser since it's a lot easier (for long periods) to read white on black than black on white (plus it uses less power). The background of the graph gets inverted to black, but the axes and the axes labels are not affected, so they effectively disappear. Is there another way of drawing them so that they are included in the inversion? If not, can they be made some shade of grey, or some other color, that appears nicely on both white and black backgrounds?   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  15:23, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

I just read the code comments; x-posted at MW Template talk:Graph:PageViews. Will watch there.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  15:28, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

• If your axes have been disappearing the obvious suspects are firemen and lumberjacks. EEng 16:09, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

• Actually, I was wondering why the band stopped playing...   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  16:18, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

I'm not too proud to admit I don't know what you're talking about. EEng 17:34, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Some people have different axes to grind.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  17:57, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

 Done (for completeness).   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  22:41, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Dutch

How can I do this on the Dutch section of wikipedia? I can't find a way to do it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SjoerdvDonk (talk • contribs) 08:24, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Graphs have disappeared

If anyone is coming here to ask about why some graphs provided by this template have disappeared (showing a "broken/missing image" icon instead), I don't know the answer to that question, but I know the solution. Just purge the cache on each page where you see the problem, and the graph(s) should reappear on that page. To purge the cache "manually", you can append the string ?action=purge to the end of the URL and hit Enter — or &action=purge if the URL already contains a query string prefaced by ?. There are also some gadgets that provide a purge option through the interface. - dcljr (talk) 18:30, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Reverse curve in pageviews graph

Has anybody come across a reverse curve and loop in a pageviews graph before? This is in the {{annual readership}} at Talk:Martin Hellinger, but please discuss at mw:Template talk:Graph:PageViews#Reverse curve. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 08:14, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Template Improvements

EEng, Andrew Davidson, JohnBlackburne, Blethering Scot, Davey2116, dcljr

Embracing the fact that these templates are going to stay, can we discuss some improvements? I think the following items would make this template more useful and legible:

1. Expand the width of the graph from 400 to 800 (or even 1000). The was this graph displays, it creates a lot of dead space in the template shell. 400px for a years worth of data also makes it hard to tell the variations from week to week or day to day. I tested expanding the width in preview mode, and it seems to make it much more legible.
2. Can we link to the WMF Labs Page View tool in a footnote of the template, so that people who are interested can view more in-depth data?
3. Is there a reason we have two templates? Is there anyway to merge {{Graph:PageViews}} into {{Annual readership}}? I am not amazing with template editing, so I really am curious as to why we need two.
4. Can we agree on some guidelines for adding this template to a talk page? Even though there was a lot of support for this template, I think there is still a lot of opposition to its mass addition to articles. Clarification on the documentation page would make it easier to determine when and how this template should be utilized.
5. If it isn't already, can we make it autocollapsed?

Based on all the previous discussions, I wanted to get some consensus before editing the templates myself. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 20:48, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

• The history of this matter is that {{Graph:PageViews}} came first, being created by User:Yurik using a new API. I then started using this, adding extra formatting so that it would fit neatly onto a talk page. For an early example, see Talk:David Nott. I experimented with various versions until settling on the one which I then created {{annual readership}} for. I have presented this at WMF training sessions and it seems to have caught on so that others now use it regularly. IMO, its main virtue is that it encapsulates a sensible format in an easy-to-remember form. Others have made amendments and it is open for further suggestions. Andrew D. (talk) 21:07, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

  Thanks Andrew Davidson. I made the width change. Let me know what you think, and feel free to revert if necessary.

  Is there a way to merge these two into each other so we don't have competing templates doing the same job? It would seem that {{Annual readership}} could easily absorb {{Graph:PageViews}}. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:02, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

  But {{Graph:PageViews}} is the more general template. It woudn't make sense to "absorb" a more general template into a more specific one. Do you mean the other way around (i.e., add parameters to {G:PV} to enable everything {Ar} does)? - dcljr (talk) 03:36, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

  Sure, whichever way is best is fine with me. I just think having two templates is duplicative. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 14:53, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

  The general template is part of the MediaWiki and seems intended to be a generic tool. See mw:Template:Graph:PageViews. The other template is a specific wrapper for talk pages on the English wiki. It's similar to the relationship of {{find}} and {{FSS}}. It is not unusual for templates to be developed in a modular hierarchy -- the infoboxes are done like this. Andrew D. (talk) 18:27, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

  I don't think we need to merge the templates in either direction. - dcljr (talk) 21:26, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

• Hmm I recently noticed that it's now larger than other standard talk page templates (and unlike them, exceeds a 1024 width window which is still common even on HD screens to have multiple columns of readable text). I presume that this is recent and as a result of above-discussed width change. It's not a huge problem, but it looks strange. Thanks, —PaleoNeonate – 11:18, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

  I'm not sure if MOS:RESOL applies. —PaleoNeonate – 14:26, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

  Hmm and MOS:LAYIM —PaleoNeonate – 14:27, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

800 pix is too wide as default

While it's true that the default width can be overwritten with the width parameter, that can lead to a problem of edit-warring between Wikipedians using different width browser windows. An example (not quite edit-warring, but 1 revert) is this edit removing a width override, by a user who presumably has a window much wider than 800 px + the width of other elements of the layout (left bar and so on). That user interpreted my choice of 200px as hardwiring. My window right now is 1176x552 and 800px sticks out to the right of the normal infobox. Template:WikiProjectBannerShell does not appear to have a hardwired default width.

How about trying the same technique as WikiProjectBannerShell? Something like

class="tmbox tmbox-notice wpbs mbox-inside mw-collapsible "

or

class="mbox-image"

or

class="mbox-text"

in the table or td html tag? I'm not sure which applies. The idea is presumably to use .css files - allowing the user (or browser settings or logged-in Wikipedian settings) to choose the overall style. Boud (talk) 20:06, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

The "Sandbox"

Can someone create a sandbox for this article?? — Punetor i Rregullt5 (talk) 06:22, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

@Punetor i Rregullt5: You don't say which article: but in any case, articles don't normally have sandboxes. Use the WP:SANDBOX for editing tests. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 15:14, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Oh sorry. I mean for this template. Thank you! — Punetor i Rregullt5 (talk) 15:23, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

You can do this yourself. On the main template page, click the View source tab, Then click anywhere in the greyed-out editing box, press Ctrl+A to select all and then Ctrl+C to copy to your clipboard. Return to the main template page, and at the bottom of the green box headed "Template documentation" there is a smaller green box, beginning "The above documentation ...". The second line of this begins "Editors can experiment in this template's sandbox" and includes a (create) link. Click that, press Ctrl+A to select all and then Ctrl+V to paste from your clipboard. Then enter an edit summary like "create sandbox as copy of live template" and save. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:51, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Width recommendation for use embedded in Template:Info

I'm sympathetic to previous complaints about too-wide defaults (e.g., here), and feel the same wasy. In addition, the PageViews Graph template is often embedded inside {{info}}, simply in order to add a caption. The default width leads to ugly, wide renderings that mess up Talk-page header appearance such as those at Talk:Richard Feynman, Talk:Gulf War, Talk:Provisional Irish Republican Army, Talk:The Troubles, and even worse renderings when more than one graph is stacked up, such as at Talk:Power (physics), or at Talk:Fake news (rev 905729993) before the latter was fixed (here).

The recommendation for use with {{Info}} in Talk page headers, is to use |width=565 inside the template. Here's an example of using two graphs stacked vertically inside an {{Info}} template, with a collapse template added to save vertical height:

This code can be adapted for proper width rendering without horizontal scrollbars, and economical vertical height. An example showing the pageview graphs with proper width in context, can be seen at Talk:Fake news. Mathglot (talk) 09:52, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

It still looks larger than other templates at Talk:Fake_News, but is an improvement. I still think the template should by default be the right size (as it previously used to be). —PaleoNeonate – 07:19, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Hide axes and labels option (Template-protected edit request on 29 October 2019)

Please consider adding options for not showing axes and labels (perhaps separately, as |x-axis=, |y-axis=, |x-labels= and |y-labels=). Guarapiranga (talk) 10:26, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

That's generally a bad practice not to describe your labels. What is the proposed use case? --Izno (talk) 15:30, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

If you open any page with many charts (say, of stock prices), you'll see charts without labels all over. Otherwise it's just too busy. MS Excel calls them sparklines. Here's a possible use. Guarapiranga (talk) 23:31, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

One of the first things you learn in STEM-related classes is to always label your axes (sometimes shouted, along with units). However, this does have some use in an informal setting only, and definitely not in mainspace. If implemented, then as a safety feature, axes+labels should be forced when in mainspace/project space/anywhere else deemed appropriate. Or, more safely, this feature could be made to only function in userspace.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  00:21, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

This template is used in mainspace by… no one. Guarapiranga (talk) 06:50, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Oops, I mistook this for Template:Graph:Chart. The philosophy is the same, though. Either force show for mainspace talk /project space/talk/anywhere else deemed appropriate, or, more safely, only function in userspace.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  12:51, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

I've no problem with it, but sounds like to me you're confusing tools with tenets, Tom.Reding (i.e. technical restrictions with policy restrictions). Either way, I was just looking to use it in my user page. Guarapiranga (talk) 14:22, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, that's not persuasive for me. One of the things you see on talk pages is new editors who may not otherwise understand they're reading or reviewing (hence the purpose of axes). I'm a solid decline/no consensus for this change, even in user space. --Izno (talk) 14:19, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Sensationalism

Wikipedia Talk pages are not a forum for general discussion about the topic.

It's rather telling how this template is being plastered onto talk pages corresponding to controversial subjects, or at least subjects and persons that editors with a certain agenda would like to be regarded as controversial. I'm not sure how selectively applying templates with the intention of disrupting or sensationalizing a particular article is not within violation of Wiki policy. Because it's on the talk page and not the main article? Disruptive and off-topic content gets deleted from talk pages just as well. 75.63.209.97 (talk) 15:06, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Collapsed IP rant with no intent to improve the Template, per WP:NOTFORUM. Mathglot (talk) 23:00, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

No bots param?

Is there a way to suppress views by bots, or could that be added as a new optional param? I am working on a new Draft created late on Thursday in Draft space, and by Saturday it had 150 page views. This seems unlikely wrt to human editors. See page views graph here. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 23:56, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Graph broken

Anyone know why the graph isn't displaying as of yesterday (hopefully it's not just me)? I don't see a recent edit, and suspect it's an edit to one of its dependencies, or some deeper change.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  14:22, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Uhhh, working now...weird.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  14:31, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Purge the page cache by clicking on the bold-face UTC time display on the upper right of the page in question. — Quicksilver (Hydrargyrum)^{T @} 20:56, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

That kinda assumes that Tom.Reding has "^(S) Add a clock to the personal toolbar that displays the current time in UTC and provides a link to purge the current page (documentation)" enabled at Preferences → Gadgets. If not, see WP:PURGE. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:11, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

@Tom.Reding: is it still working for you? The graph just shows the missing icon for me. Jonpatterns (talk) 12:05, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

@Jonpatterns: it was displaying for me yesterday, but isn't now. Per WP:PURGE, I sent a purge request via https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Tom.Reding&action=purge, which didn't work, so then I null edited the page, which also didn't work. So there seems to be some large issue at play here.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  13:53, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

And in the time it took me to write that, it displayed...so...purge lag?   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  13:55, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

I haven't edited the module in a while, but I now recall having to wait abnormally long for changes to appear in both the sandbox and the live versions. Before realizing that, debugging was quite frustrating.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  13:59, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Graphs now showing on this page, but not Talk:Social_Credit_System. I've purged that page - so may it will be fixed after a certain lag. Jonpatterns (talk) 18:27, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

• I'm noticing this happening more often on many pages now. A purge doesn't fix the problem immediately so I'll experiment and investigate further. Andrew🐉(talk) 23:01, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

• It's still broken at Talk:Peace Revolution, Andrew Davidson.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 14:23, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Broken again

It seems that every graph provided by this template is broken at the moment. Here's what you see when you try to "view image" in a browser (FF 80.0.1, to be specific) on the first broken image in this template's documentation, for example:

type	"https://mediawiki.org/wiki/HyperSwitch/errors/unknown_error"
method	"get"
detail	"info/mwapi-error"
uri	"/en.wikipedia.org/v1/page/graph/png/Template%3AGraph%3APageViews/0/c7a7145f6732327ed16fdd23180066f0c46cd7ff.png"

That URI doesn't seem to be valid (by which I mean it gives a 404 error). - dcljr (talk) 00:42, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Aaaand the graphs are back now. - dcljr (talk) 03:00, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Aaaaaaaaaannnd not working for me at the moment. Jason Quinn (talk) 12:11, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

Page purge worked for me. - dcljr (talk) 04:10, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Definitely broken for the last few weeks - just get a spinning wheel. - Ahunt (talk) 23:23, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

@Ahunt: Broken currently? Where, for example? - dcljr (talk) 10:26, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

I have been putting this graph template on every talk page of every article I create, which is about one per day. They usually take a few days from creation of a new article to start working, but ones from a month or two that were working have stopped, just get the endlessly spinning wheel. One example from December is Talk:Brick_(keelboat). They all look like this example now. - Ahunt (talk) 13:49, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

 Works for me --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 17:43, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Still not working here for me - just an endlessly spinning wheel. Could this be a browser-related issue? I am using Firefox 85.0 (current). - Ahunt (talk) 18:09, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Based on the above comments I did some trouble shooting and discovered that the issue is the uBlock Origin extension I have running on Firefox. It seems that, even in its most basic operation, it blocks loading of the graph. Do you know where the graph is loaded from? - Ahunt (talk) 21:23, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

I have a feeling that the graph is drawn client-side, using your browser's JavaScript. You could ask at mw:Template talk:Graph:PageViews. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:09, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

That would be odd, as I am not blocking JavaScript! - Ahunt (talk) 23:11, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

800px now too wide?

This graph is now covering up the right hand sidebar when viewed on desktop (at least on my desktop), on the new Wikipedia default skin.

The template was widened from 400px to 800px in 2018 to make it easier to read. Should that change be rolled back? Belbury (talk) 09:45, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

This has long been too wide, but in most cases it is now being replaced with Template:Annual readership which is a much better graph anyway. - Ahunt (talk) 13:55, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Good one, I'll join in with the replacement as needed.

Looks like {{Annual Readership}} is embedding this graph template at 570px width. Should we make that the same default here, for pages which are still embedding the graph within a regular {{notice}} template? Belbury (talk) 15:08, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Personally I am just replacing this template with Template:Annual readership as I find them! - Ahunt (talk) 15:26, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Using a 570px default will fix the width issues on the talk pages we haven't found yet, though, and cause no harm, right? I've noticed a couple of them since the new Wikipedia skin came in. Belbury (talk) 15:36, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

I have no objections if you want to do that. - Ahunt (talk) 15:38, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 14 April 2023

Per the thread directly above, change width|800 to width|570 so that the graphs don't spill over into the right-hand menu on desktop. Belbury (talk) 15:51, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

 Completed. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^{put'er there} 18:02, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! - Ahunt (talk) 18:09, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

my pleasure! Paine  18:16, 14 April 2023 (UTC)