Editing Eurovision Wiki:Help desk (section)

== template - added with fields out of order (how serious a sin) ==

Just wondering where on the list of Wikipedia sins is the following.
Template:foo123 has 2 required fields: params A1 and A2, and 6 optional fields, params B1 through B6. A user is adding uses of the template in appropriate places, but adding them with the parameter=value in the order B6=val, B3=val, A2=val, B1=val, A1=val.
Is this
*A) Ignore, the template is being used appropriately.
*B) Comment to user, but order is their choice
*C) Comment to user, but appropriate to put into correct order even though the edit doesn't change what a wikipedia user does
*D) Comment to user, and if the don't change the chaotic order, ask for 3O.
*E) Warn the user, and if they continue bring to WP:ANI.
*F) (perhaps along with one of A-E) get someone to write a bot which will do edits to reorder the parameters)
(Note, this is something that both I've seen and I've done, so I'm more curious as to how it occurs to others).[[User:Naraht|Naraht]] ([[User talk:Naraht|talk]]) 15:31, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

:Hello, @[[User:Naraht|Naraht]]. 
:I would say it's A. [[User:ColinFine|ColinFine]] ([[User talk:ColinFine|talk]]) 15:51, 18 March 2026 (UTC)
:If the user is still doing it then post a diff. Maybe it causes enough annoyance for later editors to be worth politely suggesting a change but it depends on the template and parameters. [[User:PrimeHunter|PrimeHunter]] ([[User talk:PrimeHunter|talk]]) 17:24, 18 March 2026 (UTC)
::This is sort of for self reflection. I'm currently transforming about 400 references out of either cite web, cite book or just in the general look of cite book. It is sometimes easier to do the date param first because of the way that the existing reference is displayed (and I know everything before the date is provided by the new template. However it is not a required field, so I'm worried as much about myself as for others. See https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Phi_Delta_Psi&diff=prev&oldid=1344151487 for an example.[[User:Naraht|Naraht]] ([[User talk:Naraht|talk]]) 17:31, 18 March 2026 (UTC)
:::If the template is working as intended, then ignore it. {{tl|cite newspaper}} works whichever order you list the parameters in. I suspect that the vast majority of templates are like this. [[User:Mjroots|Mjroots]] ([[User talk:Mjroots|talk]]) 17:33, 18 March 2026 (UTC)
::::@[[User:Naraht|Naraht]] You'll drive yourself nuts if you do anything other than (A) on templates like {{tl|chembox}}. [[User:Michael D. Turnbull|Mike Turnbull]] ([[User talk:Michael D. Turnbull|talk]]) 18:30, 18 March 2026 (UTC)
:::::Named parameters can be written in any order. Your diff is for {{tl|Cite Almanac FS}} which has no good reason to enforce a specific order. For some templates a poor order can be annoying. Your "B6=val, B3=val, A2=val, B1=val, A1=val" with numbers in the parameter names sounded like a potentially annoying case but maybe it was misleading example names. [[User:PrimeHunter|PrimeHunter]] ([[User talk:PrimeHunter|talk]]) 18:33, 18 March 2026 (UTC)
::::::I was just making up parameter names to separate required from non-required, and I guess it is worse if the templates have a clear ABC1, ABC2, ABC3, ABC4, etc. order (like listing cite book editors 1-6 in a screwy order and having cite journal editor1-first half the template away from editor1-last). And the {{tl|Cite Almanac FS}} example is an edit that I did. [[User:Naraht|Naraht]] ([[User talk:Naraht|talk]]) 18:44, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

So not too bad a sin, though on some templates, certain "misorder" can be more annoying. (And D, E, &F are completely off the table)[[User:Naraht|Naraht]] ([[User talk:Naraht|talk]]) 18:44, 18 March 2026 (UTC)