Wikipedia talk:Template messages/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Where are these templates?

I don't see the templates listing related information in other mediawiki projects in the list; such as this one

Wikimedia Commons has media related to:
Sorry. I found most of them, but not commons. I added it to the appropriate page.--kenb215 01:15, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)

I'm not seeing the custom messages

I'm not seeing the messages, though there appears to be spaces for them. Using Internet Explorer, if that helps. Dunc_Harris|☺ 16:29, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Does case matter?

Does case matter in {{msg:stub}} vs {{msg:Stub}}? greenmountainboy (talk) 18:59, 3 Jan 2004 (UTC)

It doesn't, see User:Dori/Sandbox Dori | Talk 19:13, Jan 3, 2004 (UTC)

msg:vfd -vs- subst:vfd

Two items:

  • Is there a difference between {{msg:vfd}} and {{subst:vfd}} (and similar)?
MSG displays the text when you view it, but only shows {{msg:vfd}} when you edit it. SUBST is the same as having pasted in the text, so it shows in the edit window too. There are also other effects due to this distinction (i.e. one is that interwiki links don't show up unless you do a subst). Dori | Talk 20:38, Feb 16, 2004 (UTC)
There are some reasons for using {{subst:vfd}}, not {{msg:vfd}} , at Wikipedia talk:Boilerplate text. Angela. 19:35, Feb 17, 2004 (UTC)

msg:mature proposal

  • I'd like to suggest we adopt a "maturity rating" policy. That is, I think we should have a new message {{msg:mature}} that says something like:
While all of Wikipedia's articles are held to the highest encyclopedic standards, we understand that some individuals may choose not to view articles with mature (sexual) content. If you are under the age of majority or age of consent in your country, please obtain parental permission prior to viewing this article.
I think this would help us resolve some of the concerns we often hear regarding porn and sexual content on the Wikipedia. zandperl 20:34, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
I am not sure I like this. Besides, by the time they see the warning, they are likely to have seen the article. Dori | Talk 20:38, Feb 16, 2004 (UTC)
We have 2 disclaimer links on every page already, which prevents the need for additional ones in the article. Angela. 19:35, Feb 17, 2004 (UTC)
I sincerely hope that there is no pornographic material on Wikipedia! As for sexual content, I sincerely hope that none of it is abusive or anything. The only material we have on sex is purely informational, and such material is not dangerous for children to see. — Timwi 21:43, 28 Feb 2004 (UTC)

How to ...

Hi! I didn't find instruction on how to edit or update custom messages, e.g. {{msg:Table_Sort_Algorithms}} . This one is not even listed on Wikipedia:MediaWiki custom messages. Could please somebody explain, or point to the exact chapter of the FAQ ? Gamma 21:22, 2004 Feb 22 (UTC)

goto http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:MediaWiki_custom_messages for instructions on creating and editing.--Ryan524 22:33, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)
I think - am well nigh positice - you could just edit Template:Table Sort Algorithms. I'm afraid I cannot provide a FAQ reference at the moment. -Itai 12:56, 28 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Split this up

We seriously need to split this page into sub-pages and possibly sub-sub-pages. We can't seriously include all of these —> MediaWiki talk:Län <— on this single page :-) — Any volunteers? — Timwi 15:22, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Those are silly, though... including the normal one will result in the 'current page' link being a bolded non-link --Random832 01:23, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Calendars

I don't have time to list them on this page right now, but I have created calendars for every month.

If somebody beats me to adding these to this page, then I wouldn't mind at all. --mav 03:32, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Hi. Pretty neat idea; thanks for doing it. However, I have to admit I don't really like the layout you chose for your calendar. May I draw your attention to MediaWiki talk:JanuaryCalendar? — Timwi 21:12, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Autotoc doesn't seem to work

Anybody know why the autotoc doesn't work on this page? There doesn't appear a __NOTOC__ anywhere that I can see. Somebody started a manual TOC, but nobody's keeping it up to date. --Lexor|Talk 11:01, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)

There is a __NOTOC__ inside {{msg:compactTOC}}. -- Timwi 19:45, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Ah, I see. Well, perhaps we could a {{subst:compactTOC}} for the purposes of this particular message. I think it's more important to be able to generate to TOC for this page. It seems that the __NOTOC__ should be in the article which includes the msg:compactTOC, rather than in the msg:compactTOC itself. --Lexor|Talk 15:54, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)

msg:stub

Consider:

This article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.

as an expansion for {{msg:stubnote}} I think we need to add some sort of distinguishing style to the standard {{msg:stub}} so that it becomes "meta"-data to an article, and not a part of an article, itself. Bevo 18:24, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I don't like it. It will stand out too much if we do that. Dori | Talk 21:33, Feb 27, 2004 (UTC)
That exact presentation need not be the one that we would use. Is there a variation that would be better, yet be different in style from plaintext? Bevo 22:46, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Lose the background color, that's way too intrusive. --Shallot 23:10, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Since that tag is (hopefully) only temporary for any particular article, then it's my intention in the proposal to make it somewhat "intrusive" so there would be motivation to grow the content beyond the point where it would be needed. But I do recall the annoying little animations that used to show up on partially completed websites with the workers digging holes, and I don't mean to get that "cute", either. Just some effect that makes it obviously "not" a part of the article. Perhaps just bolding it?
This article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.
Bevo 19:20, 28 Feb 2004 (UTC)

What exactly is the purpose of MediaWiki:stubnote? What's wrong with Template:stub?—Eloquence 22:19, Feb 28, 2004 (UTC)

MediaWiki:stubnote should be deleted (I'm not sure how to do that). It was created to experiment with alternative content for {{msg:stub}} . Bevo 01:52, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Now deleted. Angela. 17:40, Mar 2, 2004 (UTC)
Thanks! - Bevo 20:28, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

msg:featured

Is there a msg:featured? If not, I'm thinking along the lines of:

This is a Featured Article, one of the best examples of the Wikipedia community's work. Even so, if you see a way this page can be improved still futher, we invite you to contribute.'

If not, any object to me creating one and putting it on featured articles? I'd also put a note on the featured articles page. --zandperl 05:00, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I object. I believe it was discussed before, and decided against. I believe it was decided instead to tag the talk pages. →Raul654 05:05, Mar 4, 2004 (UTC)
I disagree as well. I would rather not have the stub messages either, but the thing is we need those articles to be improved. The featured ones are supposedly in a decent shape. Dori | Talk 05:06, Mar 4, 2004 (UTC)
I object to having such a thing on the article, but it should go on the top of talk pages. --mav
I agree with mav. Angela. 12:32, Mar 4, 2004 (UTC)
For now, I agree. I'd muh prefer a user-modifiable sidebar that allows for indications of what type an article is being viewed. Is it a 'featured' article? Is the article part of some 'WikiProject'? - UtherSRG 12:41, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)
I second the proposal. I think it would be helpful to know for both readers and editors. As the note would have to be at the top or in the sidebar it'd be a good idea to make it a Preferences option perhaps. Kpjas

Get All Custom Messages?

Is there any pages where I can find all custom messages (tags)? It would be nice if it is automatically generated. --Rrjanbiah 11:34, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Not yet, but there was something on the mailing list about the creation of a [[Special:...]] page to list them them automatically in future. Angela. 12:32, Mar 4, 2004 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:MediaWiki namespace. — Timwi 17:43, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)
The pages linked to from that only list the ones people have chosen to add to them. I think the question was about finding them automatically. I suspect others have been created and not listed there. Angela. 00:48, Mar 5, 2004 (UTC)
Hm. Good point. — Timwi 00:59, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)
I want the same thing. I'm tempted to make a new message, but I want to make sure it doesn't already exist. I guess I'll wait. Is creating a Special: page to automatically list them something that a normal user can do or do we need to get somebody to do it for us? --rs2 17:10, 1 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Special pages are automatically generated by the php software that drives wikipedia. Our developers (Tim Starling, Eloquence, Magnus Manske, and a few others) are the ones who write them. Our developers are (in general) overworked, so we encourage people to become them. However, not many people have the necessary skills. (Even as a computer engineer, I couldn't help because I don't know php). →Raul654 17:14, Apr 1, 2004 (UTC)

subst:ilcomment

Hi, could someone please explain to me what {{subst:ilcomment}} is meant for if it is just empty like at the moment of this writing? (I might have missed something obvious here, sorry if I did...) BTW, is there something wrong with its table item in the present article? (it's lacking borders; I tried to fix it, but wasn't able to.) --Wernher 00:28, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)

{{subst:ilcomment}} is not empty. It contains <!-- Interlanguage links -->. This only shows up in the edit box. The aim is to explain what the interlanguage links are to new users. Angela. 01:02, Mar 15, 2004 (UTC)

Mediawiki:religion

User Jiang has raised a valid point, albeit not in the most constructive way - here is some chat from the talk page of something I was trying out the mediawiki ns for - namely a category topical sidebar scheme. There are three or four others Jiang lovingly (and constructively) listed on WP:VFD. Wikilove, -SV(talk) 10:25, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)

This is a really bad idea. This table will become huge and take up an inordinate amount of space in articles that should be devoted to images and tables that add content to articles and not just serve as a navigational aid. If anything this should be a footer, but the best idea is to just link religion in the lead sentence and have this list in that article. --mav We have a list of religions. Is the msg supposed to duplicate that? --Jiang It doesnt have to be huge - Mav, be consistent at least - with one mediawiki critique, you argue that you would be ok with a footer. In another you argue its a means for foisting POV on people. Now you say its going to be too big - nonsense! In cases where a list would be too big, refer to general concepts! Whats so frickin hard to understand about that! -SV(talk) 10:25, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)~

Why is so hard to understand that these boxes are only useful for navigation and categorization at the expense of pushing valid image and table content down on a page? At least footers do not have that problem with them. That is why I am not against them (not really for them either - I just think they are mostly harmless). I've also made a number of different statements about different MediaWiki seriesbox pages. Some would be OK as footers, some would not. What we need is a category system that can put series tables in the sidebar that already exists on every page. Also, as I mentioned above, mixing metadata with content is very bad database design. --mav
So, Mav your critique is a design one -- one which Ive already dealt with somewhat on some of the articles, and I agree that pics and other stuff should be prominent. But simply having a left-right option for these would solve the problem in special cases, and theres nothing wrong with putting it lower. GTG-SV(talk) 19:20, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)\

The issue is irrelevant here since the question is not whether to make these mediawiki pages, but whether these tables should be made at all. If these tables are to be kept, we will almost certainly use the mediawiki namespace for them, so let's go to Wikipedia talk:Topics, Wikipedia talk:Article series, and Wikipedia talk:Page footers to discuss what kind of sidebars we want to make. --Jiang 10:44, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)


The madness has got to stop :-)

The sheer variety in colour, placement, use of tables, divs, italics etc etc has got to stop. There are discussions going on at least four talk pages (I am guilty of being involved in them too) about how to present metadata in articles. Whatever we decide, there should at least be some consistency between msgs: Is this the place to get the choice right? Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 19:34, 19 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Metadata should not be presented in articles. That is what talk pages are for. --mav 21:08, 19 Mar 2004 (UTC)
I agree... but look at all the messages on this custom message page... vfd, stub, cleanup, inuse, accuracy dispute, inclusion dispute, npov dispute, current event,... this is metadata to my mind ... but it isn't often on the talk page. Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 21:20, 19 Mar 2004 (UTC)
It is data on meta, but not all of it is metadata. Stub, Vfd etc. are part of the article data itself, only the topic groupers are real metadata. — Jor (Talk) 17:01, 20 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Those examples are not supposed to be permanent parts of the article. --mav


Completely lost

I can never find the original text of "msg"s. Where can I find the original text of msg:vfdfrontmatter? RickK 23:16, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I believe you can locate them at [[1]]--Ryan524 23:20, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)
The original interface messages are at Template:All messages. Custom messages are either at Wikipedia:MediaWiki custom messages or Wikipedia:MediaWiki custom elements. However, don't go learning where they are now as it's all about to change when MediaWiki 1.3 goes live as the interface and custom messages will be split into different namespaces (MediaWiki and Template). Angela. 23:31, Apr 25, 2004 (UTC)
So there's no way it can be changed? RickK 03:45, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Just go to the edit page and find what is typed there (msg:VfD frontmatter) and replace the msg with "MediaWiki:". To edit it, go to Template:VfD frontmatter. Tuf-Kat 04:39, Apr 26, 2004 (UTC)
Thnak you!!! RickK 22:52, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I give up

I've spent about ten minutes trying to find the template/MW message for the box that appears when you create a page (something something newpagetext/newedit text or something). I give up. Where is it? Dysprosia 23:27, 9 Jun 2004 (UTC)

MediaWiki:Newarticletext, listed in Wikipedia:MediaWiki interface messages.--Patrick 20:18, 10 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Of course, the text beside it doesn't reflect it's content ;) Thanks Patrick. Dysprosia 22:10, 10 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Bug in compactTOC2 (or in MediaWiki)

Although the code for compactTOC2 contains __NOTOC__, another TOC is generated in the respective pages (see for example the articles Topology glossary and Order theory glossary, the latter of which currently uses an additional __NOTOC__ as a workaround). Obviously there are two possible reasons and fixes:

  • The __NOTOC__ should not go into the curly brackets in the compactTOC2-Source. After all adding another __NOTOC__ on the affected pages helps. In this case, somebody please change the protected source of compactTOC2.
  • The __NOTOC__ is allowed to be at the given position, but MediaWiki fails to parse it correctly. In this case fix MediaWiki. Anyway changing compactTOC2 as a first workaround would be a good thing.

Thanks. --Markus Krötzsch 16:38, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Help please

I have recieved a concern regarding Nagarjuna and templates on my user talk. I know absolutely nothing about templates, but the error he showed me looked fairly bad. I am listing this here as well as wikipedia:cleanup Cheers, Sam [Spade] 18:49, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

{{guy}} and {{girl}} (True or false??)

True or false: we need {{guy}} and {{girl}} reading the following texts:

  • "I'm a guy, in case you want to know what pronouns to use to refer to me."
  • "I'm a girl, in case you want to know what pronouns to use to refer to me."

as messages to put in Wikipedia User pages so people will know what pronouns to use. 66.245.23.108 00:24, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Hmmm... I don't think we need a template for this -- people can usually manage to say somthing that gives it away -- and they can just tell people if they want to.... Thanks, BCorr|Брайен 00:47, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Doesn't really seem like something we need. It wouldn't be that difficult for a user to write up a small description for the same end if they wanted it to be known. Oberiko 00:51, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)
The proposer asked me to be specific on my user page, so I honestly mean that they could just write "I'm a guy, in case you want to know what pronouns to use to refer to me." if they want to -- the template is more complicated than is needed for this. Templates tend to be more of a shorthand for something that a user will use repeatedly, rather than something that a few users might just use once. Thanks again, BCorr|Брайен 01:01, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)
I don't think it's really necessary either. - Omegatron 01:02, Jul 13, 2004 (UTC)
Count me as someone who finds it unnecessary, also. Some Wikipedians will wish to preserve their anonymity, and others (specifically, non-registered Wikipedians) are only identified by IP address (such as 66.245.23.108!) If a user wants to make their sex known, a little scribble on their user page it all it takes. If not, use he/she. --Ardonik 01:12, Jul 13, 2004 (UTC)
Actually, some people don't want to adhere to either pronouns (such as genderqueer or otherwise), unless you want to create a third message for gender-neutral pronouns Dysprosia 01:06, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)
What is this third message?? 66.245.23.108 01:09, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Templates should go on the talk page

Wikipedia:Template messages#Article namespace is now sugesting that messages like Template:Attention should be on the article, not on the talk page. I disagree with this for the reasons already given at #msg:featured and various other places. Is there any reason this should not be changed to specify the message must go on the talk page only? Angela. 14:55, Aug 8, 2004 (UTC)

Say what?

This notice at the bottom of the page is, uh, somewhat convoluted, to say the least:

Note: this article is a member of several categories merely because templates above are intended to include articles they are in in those categories.

I think I understand what it's trying to say, but will someone who knows they understand please rewrite it? - dcljr 06:59, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)

The notice has been changed. Thanks, Siroxo. - dcljr 17:50, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Wikimedia

I suggest create all this templates for all the Wikimedia Projects. I.e. the disambiguation message is usefull in Wiktionary too. So, this templates would belong to Wikimedia, rather than to only Wikipedia.

Talk on this page

I propose taking all the talk links out of the tables so we can simplify it. If someone wanted to discuss the template, they can do so by following the link to the template and discussing the template there. If no one can give good reason to keep the talk links on the page, I will remove them.--Will2k 15:26, Aug 18, 2004 (UTC)

The talk links are needed so you can check Special:Recentchangeslinked/Wikipedia:Template messages rather than having to keep every template on your watchlist. Angela. 22:33, Aug 18, 2004 (UTC)

More intuitive template code

Although I like the briefness of the template code, and although it is not that difficult to find out how to add a template within the "Editing help" or the like, I would think that if the code [[Template:<template name>]] were usable instead or in addition, it might help people realize that they could go to edit the Template with that page name in the URL (or know that by using the code they would be making a link which they could follow to their own template), just as is the case for Category pages. It is not that big of a deal, but I think it would have taken me less time to figure out how to find the existing templates (or add my own) had it used this code instead. Brettz9 (talk) 22:57, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Unlock the templates

Every locked template must be unprotected. It is unwiki to keep these protected indefinitely. Many contain errors which cannot be changed. --ηImage:Venus symbol (blue).gifυωρ 18:23, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Locked templates have an open discussion page do they not? In that case, you can propose changes there.--Will2k 20:17, Sep 8, 2004 (UTC)
Nobody ever reads those pages, because nobody expects the templates to ever change. That is no solution. Most every other page has an open discussion page, but we do not expect users to discuss every edit there until an admin feels like making the change. That's unwiki. Let users be bold. --ηImage:Venus symbol (blue).gifυωρ 23:27, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Well, then we need to fix the "nobody reads those pages" part first. I can certainly see why someone wants templates that reach thousands of pages at once to be protected, they're obviously a much more likely target of vandalism than other pages. And regarding the "nobody reads those pages" part, I just started watching several protected template pages yesterday (I became an admin a little bit ago) and fixed some things in one today after reading user comments about it. --Joy [shallot] 03:42, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Perhaps the admins need a special page which allows them to see if any changes were made to the talk pages of any of the protected articles, templates, etc. —Mike 03:51, Sep 9, 2004 (UTC)
Please refer to protected pages considered harmful for the sitewide policy regarding page protection. --ηImage:Venus symbol (blue).gifυωρ 23:41, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)
The vast majority of templates are not protected. Do you have examples of any that are protected which would need to be edited without discussion first? Angela. 17:36, Sep 12, 2004 (UTC)
Since the vast majority are not protected, no templates should be protected except temporarily.
As an example, the category specified by Template:PD had lacked a sort order, so all images using this template appeared in the category under the "I" heading (for "Image:"). --ηImage:Venus symbol (blue).gifυωρ 20:12, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Weird category

What is "NaodW29-item455bc7f56892561 stubs" ? Rhymeless 06:06, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Hehehe, that's bug 60 on MediaZilla. If the bug is fixed, this will be a category specified by a template parameter. --[[User:Eequor|ηImage:Venus symbol (blue).gifυωρ]] 11:26, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Templates in signatures

Is there any reason why adding {{subst:User:Anárion/sig}} to my signature does not expand the template until the next edit of the page? [[User:Anárion|Åℕάℛℹℴη]] 19:36, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)

This is either a bug or a "feature" of the MediaWiki software. I'd suggest filing a report at BugZilla, if it hasn't been done already? • Benc • 22:36, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Mediawiki demands an e-mail address before it will allow me to log bugs. I do not wish to give one. {Heliophile} 07:42, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
It's because ~~~~ is a kind of subst: within itself. When you type ~~~~, MediaWiki inserts what is in your preferences, which is {{subst:whatever}]. The next time the page is edited, the {{subst:whatever}} is expanded. — El Chico! Talk 11:51, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)

<<feature>> template

I can't seem to find this template anywhere, browsed the "all message" list, nothing. I was thinking it would be nice to have a template for featured pictures as well, for placement under full-size images. -- Solitude 07:41, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Do you mean Template:Featured? {Ⓐℕάℛℹℴɴ} 07:53, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Ah right, yes. But it does not seem to be included on any Template list. Basically I'm wondering how I should go about adding a template for featured pictures. I found the meta on templates, let's see now... -- Solitude 11:30, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

duplicate categories

Several categories (e.g. "Templates for deletion") are listed twice at the bottom of the page. Fpahl 11:10, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)

One of those is from Template:Tfd itself, the other is from Template:Bmoviebandit1 which is TFD'd. Goplat 15:09, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Does that mean it'll stay that way? Fpahl 15:29, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
It will until {{Bmoviebandit1}} is deleted or kept. Sorry. — El Chico! Talk 15:50, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Merging articles

While the information of two (duplicate) articles is being merged into one, it is likely that people unknowingly continue to contribute to both articles. The merge process is then complicated even further, as the information has to be moved from one article into the other one.

In order to avoid this, I thought the following message might be a solution:

This article is in the process of being merged into (article name), and may be outdated.

Comments? If you think this template message should be added, should be modified, or not added at all, please let me know.--Logariasmo 00:32, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)

  • Template:Inuse could be used for the same purpose, although I still think a template as described above would be a good idea, since it is more specific. [[User:JoshG|Josh | Talk]] 01:33, Oct 9, 2004 (UTC)
I have added the template (with minor changes). I will be waiting for more comments before I make any additional changes.--Logariasmo 03:59, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Looks good to me. [[User:JoshG|Josh | Talk]] 18:31, Oct 9, 2004 (UTC)

Seperation of templates

Wow! They've all gone! (Ok, they're here) My questions: will this autoupdate? Will it make things easier? What do people think? odes anyone ever view this talk page? -- Alphax (talk) 05:12, Oct 21, 2004 (UTC)

Honesty time here: very unhelpful (the refactoring, not the All link). Now, when I need to look up a template message, instead of heading for the page where I know it is, I have to guess at which one of twenty subpages contains it. -- Antaeus Feldspar 17:53, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Profanity

Should there be a template message that clearly indicates or includes profane, offensive, or vulgar language or topics? E.g. motherfucker. - KeithTyler 23:22, Nov 3, 2004 (UTC)

My initial reaction is "Yes, that would be useful", but it raises the question of whose standards should be used to determine offensiveness or vulgarity. Some would take offense to the idea, and would start labelling all religious articles as offensive since pretty much all religions contradict each other and/or are offended by being contradicted. So, I think it's a good idea, but it would cause problems so is best avoided. The Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse article contains Template:Morbid_warning, so there is at least one. — PhilHibbs | talk 12:47, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:List of templates

American vs. British English

Hi there! Can anybody tell me if there is a template anywhere that deals with linguistic unilateralism, i.e. when there is only one language mentioned, while the issued matter has different names in american and british english? TIA :) -- Daniel FR 22:21, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Cleanup time!

General, Issues, Disputes, Maintenance, and Deletion subpages overlap a bit. Not that the same templates appear on more than one, but, well, let's see what's on each list:

  • GENERAL
    • It is requested this article be expanded.
  • ISSUES
    • Article needs attention.
    • Article needs cleanup.
    • Article needs ISBN.
    • Article has limimted geographic scope.
    • Needs merging.
    • Images requested.
    • Article should be split into articles accessible from a dab page.
    • Needs translation from....
    • Ugly math.
  • DISPUTES
    • Pov
    • Nonencyclopedic, bound for deletion.
  • MAINTENANCE
    • Not English.
    • Move to another wiki.
    • Copyvio.
    • Category needs attention.
  • DELETION
    • Csd
    • Vfd

Some things on some of those lists are so similar to things on other of those lists! —msh210 03:07, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Changing the EnderThings template

I'm trying to change the EnderThings template, as shown below:

v • d • e
Orson Scott Card's Ender's Game series
Books · Short stories · Characters · Concepts

so that the last link (for Stark) links directly to Stark (Ender's Game), instead of the Stark disambiguation page as it currently does. Can someone explain to me how to do this (or do it themselves?)

Bbhtryoink 03:52, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Too confusing to add

Will someone please, during their cleanup process, add these two templates: {{gcheck}}, {{grammar check}}

Thanks! -- AllyUnion (talk) 20:50, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I've added both templates to Article issues and disputes. RM 21:54, Dec 22, 2004 (UTC)