Knowledge (XXG)

talk:Templates for discussion/Archive 14 - Knowledge (XXG)

Source šŸ“

1668:
category off of the userbox's MFD. To accomplish that, a little note could be added on CFD (much like how WikiProjects are notified when one of the articles or cats they maintain comes up for discussion). This would be recommended and a courtesy, but lack of such notice would not be a "technicality" that should result in a deletion decision being nullified. Similarly, a linking message could be added to TFD if desired, just to let folks know that the discussion is going on. I'm thinking some kind of nightly bot run could note any new userbox MFDs and post the two link messages to CFD and TFD. That way, no additional effort is required on the part of the submitter. That leaves us with one place to go for all userbox discussions, and yet those who primarily only monitor CFD/TFD will be notified
1518:
nominations but can't remember the last time I participated at TfD. Whether a particular userbox is in the template namespace or user namespace is often a matter of chance and splitting discussions between two venues isn't the best idea. I know that it means that different template space items get discussed at two different venues (so, Technical 13, there's no need to make that comment after my contribution, we've got that message now and repeating your point isn't going to make it any more convincing), but in the absence of any evidence that this is actually causing a problem I don't see any reason to change. Incidentally, has notice of this proposed change been given to WP:MFD, as it ought to have been? I can't see anything at
889:
change because that's the way its always been done. Where that comment becomes relevant is that we seem to be expending a lot of energy on an issue that we frankly shouldn't even have. That this discussion is arguing over userboxes, most of which are crap anyway and should be deleted outright with appropriate malice, is just par for the course in Wiki. All my point really is though is that we ought to make this process as easy and painless as possible. Things in template space should go to RFD, things in Category space should go to CFD, articles to AFD and every thing else to MFD. I just think splitting templates into three or more directions is madness and there must be an easier way.
1707:
should be discussed where the rest of the userboxes are discussed. A common test in TfD is, "What practical need does the encyclopedia have for this template?" The answer to this question for many userboxes is weak. Userboxes that help developers of userscripts, event coordinators, or others, may stay, but many would need userfication or deletion. I think "templates" in project or user space should rarely be discussed at TfD. MfD provides a venue for non-encyclopedic "templates" and other pages in gray areas. If we ever decided to move userboxes out of Template: space, it may work to discuss anything in template space at TfD, but for now, this exception seems to be needed.
1663:
are still userboxes. I think it is that very difference that tends to upset (or outright piss off) editors around here. Templates do serious, useful, and/or helpful stuff. Userboxes are fun, silly, informative, inane, and/or offensive. They have a lot in common, but since their purpose is fundamentally different, they need to be judged by different criteria. MFD is for the miscellaneous stuff on the wiki, and that's certainly what userboxes are. I do not see the need to discuss related categories in CFD
31: 141:. For months, and longer prior to my absence, I boycotted {{tl}cite bcgnis}} and have used the old-standard square-bracket-URL-space-title-square bracket URL refs. And will continue to do so, as it's faster and easier than bothering with templates. But the existing ones, which are legion in perhaps thousands of usages over several hundreds of articles, are obsolete and must be reparsed.....there are simple too many to do by hand.` 1793:. Nobody questioned this rule for several years. There seems to be no mass confusion of editors not having read/not able to follow it: only the occasional editor, who just learns to roll with it. And then suddenly, a wild RfC appears! Without any other discussion beforehand. Why? Because it "doesn't seem or feel correct" for one editor. 904:
back when, stub templates and categories had to be nominated separately at TfD and CfD - this was not practical as very often each would defer the answer to the other or occasionally come up with contradictory results, this lead to the combining of associated templates and categories into one nomination at one venue. A single
860:
other dumb shit. If people want to have one that says something actually useful like they speak X language, can program in x language or that they are a male or female for the sake of clarity that's fine. But most of the rest of the are just a waste of bytes on the server and should be done away with IMO.
1955:- They are asking for education. When I first became involved in TFD, it took me a few weeks of reading through discussions before I figured out some of this stuff. Contradictions and long arguments don't make it easy. The notices pull in people who may not have much time to research this before !voting. 1869:
What I would like to see is a clear, simple explanation for the ordinary person of what happens at TfD closure. Not an admin's how-to-do-it but something fleshed out from "when an admin closes a TfD, what they will do is X and Y, and will give a bot the task of doing Z. You need not worry about doing
1706:
I think that we need TfD to deal with the generally more serious templates meant to be used in article space, and MfD to specialize in the difficult work of sorting out the grayer areas of user/project space. I really don't think most userboxes belong in Template space, but since they are there, they
1042:
The only "explicit" reason to do it is because at some point in the past someone wrote it into a rule. If there is a valid reason that was done, then bring that out and lets discuss that. I would also add that if it was a "very very very long and foul-tempered grudging consensus" then was it really a
903:
Not everything in Template space should go to TfD, no matter how much you think it would reduce confusion. Template-space redirects are fundamentally redirects, not templates, so they should be discussed at RfD (which handles redirects in all namespaces) not TfD, leaving TfD to discuss templates. Way
480:
I think at least one user or project can easily be notified. I know I'm in the minority here, but checking watchlists for deletion notifications isn't very practical for those who have the killer combo of (a) irregular editing patterns and (b) major contributions to thousands of pages and an interest
433:
Is there any reason why notification of relevant users shouldn't be a compulsory element of process? Involving the people who know the initial reason for developing template is surely essential for this kind of discussion. I can't see how making this optional is of any benefit to the discussions that
1282:
It should be noted that either way we are not keeping things together. On one side we are keeping userboxes together and on the other we are separateing 3 different types of templates into different places. Some go to TFD, some go to MFD and some go to CFD. Do you have any idea how confusing that is
859:
Just to add a parting though to all of this here is another nugget of my personal feelings on Userboxes. I believe they are non encyclopedic crap and 99% of the should be deleted. Where not here to create and post userboxes about how we like spongebob squarepants or we think Madonna is a fox or some
444:
I currently use watchlists, myself, but prefer being notified. On the other hand, it is sometimes difficult to search out who to notify, and the template is tagged for many to see. Maybe notifying at least one user or project that contributed most significantly in recent time would be a good policy?
1662:
Just because something looks like a duck (has a duck bill), walks like a duck (webbed feet), and acts like a duck (lays an egg) does not automatically make it a duck (i.e. a platypus). Userboxes use inclusion, template syntax, and show up on a page just like a template, but at their very core, they
888:
Actually I would be fine with them all being discussed at TFD, but I think having templates being submitted in three different venues is confusing for anyone. I'm not surprised that people are resistent to change around here but it surprises me how many have presented the argument that we shouldn't
659:
article, which was moved following the subject's coming out as transgender, then moved back, then frozen for 30 days. I think that casual readers should be made aware that the article's title is currently in dispute, rather than presenting on the surface an endorsement of the status quo ante. Thank
506:
As long as the creator isn't banned, there is really no excuse for not notifying them. Particularly on older pages, the major contributors and relevant wikiprojects should be notified as well. In the case of templates and images the talk pages of where they are used should be notified as well. It's
2785:
I have sent Plastikspork a question about it. The discussion gives no clues, as no reason for the suggestion is given there except that the template is not used in many articles, which isn't a sufficient reason in my book. Even if the discussion was six months ago, noone has done anything about it
1764:
Obviously people who a) love userboxes, and b) people who hate having stinking userboxes cluttering up three different discussion categories.Ā :-) It's a worthwhile discussion if something positive comes out of it. However, if we let snarky and rude comments derail the discussion, then it will have
1667:
the category is used in more ways or by more things than a single (or batch of related) userboxen. So, if a cat and a ubx are intimately and exclusively related (monogamous?), then MFD is all that is needed. However, anyone who notices that a category has other purposes should be able to split the
1451:
For the record, I am in favour of the status quo. Changes like that need a better justification than that the current rule set "doesn't seem or feel correct" for some particular editor. It just so happened that MfD evolved to hold discussions about userspace content, while TfD deals with templates
1267:
All userboxes should be discussed at the same place to keep results consistent. MfD makes the most sense IMO as it deals with those types of problems more often (where TfD is largely focused on article space as far as I can tell). And yes, as Technical 13 points out, it would be nice of have all
933:
Yes, I think so. But the bolded question seems deliberate. Would this keep userspace userboxes as MfD? I wouldn't like that at all; all userboxes should be discussed in the same deletion venue, regardless the namespace in which they're hosted. As userboxes are templates that can reside in template
826:
I concur. We are overcomplicating the process by submitting templates for deletion/discussion to three or more different places. Its policies andn processes like this that make it difficult for newby's and casual editors to participate in the project. We need to keep things simple, Templates go to
198:
where URL parsing has to be changed wholesale. Bivouac is also no longer an authoritative source for various reasons and on many things, including fake "official" names and deletions of ranges and their replacement by prominence regions; I know this from my experiences as Senior Geographer there
1911:
Yes! I have noticed that many objection come from editors who do not understand that, in most cases, the template in question will be replaced by a generic or similar template and any significant missing parameters will be included in the conversion process. This can also unbalance the debate in
1517:
I agree with Hobit's comment that "All userboxes should be discussed at the same place to keep results consistent." This is because those who participate in MfD discussions are not always going to be the people who participate in (or close) TfD discussions - for example, I discuss and close MfD
1535:
The problem is that you wouldn't take your car to a pizza shop to have the brakes fixed, you would take it to a garage; on the same note, templates should be taken to the forum with the most people that understand how templates work. Taking them to a "general" forum like MfD results in mostly
133:. This needs more than a change of template name, as the parsed content of the linked items as structured now yields 404 errors due to restructuring of BC Govt URLs. My comment there about the cumbersomeness of the "cite FOO" templates stands; BCGNIS and related templates were requested to 1865:
I am aware that part of a TfD closure involves ensuring minimum fallout - for instance, closure as "merge" means that the merged-to template needs to recognise all the parameters of, and provide all the functions of, the merged-from template - but that does not seem to be common knowledge.
1297:
I'm a big fan of keeping things easy for new users. But how many new users are there that are messing with templates? I'd think keeping userbox results consistent is more important. Is my intuition wrong and are there lots of new users playing with templates and getting involved in TfD?
265:
You are right and those anonymous editors are out of line. Those images serve no useful purpose in identifying the subject matter. If somebody were to add those to Toronto or Montreal navboxes I might hesitate, but not in this case. Images should not just be inserted randomly - anywhere.
199:
before coming to Knowledge (XXG) when I left it, and protracted discussions with the siteowner about his creation/imposition of fake/made-up names, which have impacted googlemaps and other sites and should not have. No further comment about that, I'm not sure where to take that, perhaps
1312:
And a good way to make sure that continues is to keep the process complicated where we send templates to 3 different venues. Its better to submit userboxes to 2 different venues based on where the box resides than on the presumption that a template really isn't a template.
1844:
there are people who appear to be !voting "keep" purely because the TfD notice upsets page formatting. It also concerns me that several others are under the impression that if the TfD closes as anything other than "keep", then one or more of the following will occur:
507:
more than just politeness, it's basic fairness to ensure that the deletion discussion has access to all the facts. I have thousands of pages on my watchlist and so its very easy to miss some things, particularly when my recent attention has been on other areas.
1482:
There is no practical difference between a userbox in template space and a userbox in user space, so they should all be nominated at the same venue. Whether that is MFD of TFD is of less relevance, but I'm not aware of any problems with the status quo.
178:"Bivouac Mountaineering Directory. I note that there are various reasons for this, largely I'd guess because it's not just about Canadian mountains and mountaineering anymore. As far as I know, the URLs have stayed the same, which is not the case for 908:
was too busy so it was split into the component parts we have today. Just because it's been done the present way for a long time doesn't mean we should automatically continue to do it that way, but its worth finding out why the current way was chosen.
1647:
Per Iridescent and Bencherlite. It has long been established that the content of a template, not the fact that it is a template, determines where it is discussed. And a discussion before starting this RfC may have avoided the need for it altogether.
780:
especially in over seven and a half years, I think it is worth discussing again. Userboxes are templates and if they are in Template: space, than nominating them as anything other than a template doesn't seem or feel correct. So, the question is:
1701:, whether in Template: or another space. Hybrid pages may even be designed to be both linked and transcluded, though there is probably a better way. People will make all kinds, and many of these will need discussion, afterwards. 1268:
templates at the same place too, but the reasons for deletion for userboxen (templates or not) is generally quite different than the reason for deleting templates in general, but much closer to standard MfD discussions.
2285:, leaving it as is for use in File space, with the deletion notice still on the page. I think I will file an edit request to remove the deletion notice and replace it with a more appropriate one, if possible... 1363: 1210:
as well. These are all technical entities, and despite them not being in the Template: namespace, they are still defined as templates and as such should be reviewed with all of the other templates. We have
2820:. If there are parameters which are missing from the more generic template, then propose adding more on the talk page for the generic template. I, personally, don't see what the problem is here. Thanks! 171: 403: 1578:
Any evidence for your assertion that those deciding the fate of userbox templates at MfD do not understand how templates work or are making decisions based on improper criteria? No, thought not.
2119:,) should we include a link to search in previous discussions, along with the (edit|talk|history|links|logs|delete) links? It would be more convenient than copy/pasting into the TfD search box. 2567:, but the relist got reverted by someone involved in the discussion. Only two people have responded to the TfD so far, so I feel that relisting this TfD is more than reasonable. Thoughts? -- 648: 2177: 2165: 2029: 1841: 539:
notifying the creator of the template seems fairly pointless, e.g. if they haven't edited for several years. Having said that, whenever I nominate something for deletion, I always notify
2281:
in the holding cell. The resolution was to keep the template for File space, but not use it elsewhere. There was no real consensus on what the template should contain. It was eventually
1420:
from making a change. Why is there no link to a recent discussion in the nomination? Per the excellent "who gives a shit" analysis below, an RfC should not be called over such nonsense.
934:
space, I do think as a matter of common sense that they should be discussed in TfD. But if the proposal is to separate userboxes based on where they're hosted, I'll instead say a strong
2751: 2470: 2250: 600: 2857: 2419: 2960:(or whatever it is called), and he stopped doing it. Dealing with notifications is pretty low level requirement I think, so I doubt people will worry about it much. AllĀ theĀ best: 1934:
until someone wants to do the work involved. Those nominating should also be aware that they may need to comeback after the discussion and do some work to implement the result. --
373: 2887:
the notice has now been wrapped inside some noinclude tags, so it shouldn't appear in any articles. but, in case you are interested, the notice was appearing due to the fact that
1603:
exist is evidence because if people weren't deciding things based on whether or no they like it or whether or not it worked, then those policies would have never been written as "
557:
Yeah, I went with "You generally should notify the creator of template" too try to address that. I'm not thrilled with the wording, but I'd trying to get to "generally required"
97: 89: 84: 72: 67: 59: 771: 430:
to notify the creator and main contributors of the template that you are nominating the template". I propose that this step be made mandatory to begin a deletion discussion.
620:
If this is an RfC, I support this if it can be technically achieved without great labor (I'm fairly sure it can, although the Twinkle people need to do a little adjusting).
1931: 1672:, but it keeps those areas tidy. Does that sound like a reasonable accommodation? It's a change, but, I think, a gentle one that makes things easier and less confusing. ā€” 1061:
This allows for a more uniform treatment, since they may be in either userspace or templatespace. and, there is really no reason to change something that isn't broken.
2087: 2728:? One club can have many teams, like men's and women's teams, youth teams for different ages etc. One sports club can also have teams in many different sports. 1239:
system... Articles, Categories, Files, Redirect, and Templates should all be discussed at their respective venues regardless of which namespace they are in.
1548:
Do I like it? Those are very bad reason to keep or delete things on Knowledge (XXG)... There are essays and policies advising against these things such as
841:
I hadn't thought of that, but yes, I agree. Having to nominate Userbox templates in template space not as templates but instead as miscellany probably is
137:
citations, not slow them down with irrelevant fields. Any new BC Names template does not need nor is it useful to impose code decisions on such templates
1536:"votes" for the wrong reason. If the people deciding the fate of these templates do not understand how templates work and what they are doing, there are 2293:, unless someone makes a typo in the transclusion or something. Anyway, I assume any templates in limbo will eventually be found, one way or another... 1786: 1174:
and we don't discuss userspace templates at TfD either. the distinction here is that userboxes are different, since they are not used in articlespace.
47: 17: 1366:). No compelling reason to change, very compelling reasons not to change per iridescent. If there is confusion add a line of documentation somewhere.-- 952:
All userboxes are templates regardless of the namespace thy reside in, and should be dealt with at TfD. They should indeed all go to the same place.
1448:
Well, exactly. This whole time nobody cared enough to propose a change. Because if there were a newer discussion, I believe you would surely find it.
2754:; bear in mind that the discussion was six months ago, but if you disagree with its outcome, you could take it up with the closing admin, which was 1001:
not to be treated as templates, per a very very very long and foul-tempered grudging consensus. Read the discussions around, and pages linked from,
2863:
A link at the page "Template:Rellink" purporting to go to "this template's entry at templates for discussion" points to the same irrelevant page.
2473:. it looks like there was a bot actively fixing these after the TfD closed, but the bot is probably no longer running (or is just less active). 319: 1697:
is confusing, in a way. Template: space can be used for content, technically, though this is usually discouraged. Any page may be intended for
1765:
been a waste of time for those of us who make the effort to post a meaningful response to a question that, in good faith, was well intended. ā€”
601:
Knowledge (XXG) talk:Categories for discussion/Archive 2012#Add requirement that Projects be notified when associated categories are discussed
2564: 2181: 2169: 2033: 2022: 1890: 1882: 1878: 1157: 1145: 1855:
there will be no automatic process for updating articles and people will be expected to fix each article individually, without assistance;
1021: 1002: 246:
Where can I find direction on when and when not to include images within templates? My revert of the addition of images to a template has
1119:
And I would agree that if they exist in Userspace they should be sent to MFD. But if its a template, it should be treated as a template.
392: 356: 2330:
is officially in limbo and have the being deleted tag removed and/or have some namespace detection added to restrict it to file space.
2873: 2765: 571:
I think that's a good compromise - it's stronger than "it is considered polite" but doesn't mandate a potentially pointless activity.
2142:
The TfD comment I just made isn't transcluding . I'd be grateful if someone competent (ie not me!) could check what I did. Thanks. --
1596: 1553: 2274: 1562:
Templates should not be nominated if they can be fixed by normal editing. Instead, you should edit the template to fix its problems.
1005:. Treating them as templates may seem intuitive, but it would reopen a can of worms which is nailed tightly shut for good reason.Ā ā€“ 644: 637: 2620:. Could someone with the authority now delete them and any related sub templates, doc pages, talk pages, redirects, etc.? Thanks. 874:
While that's certain a valid opinion, I'm struggling to see how it is relevant to whether they should be discussed at TfD or MfD?
2086:
There is currently a discussion as to whether deprecated or orphaned templates should qualify for speedy deletion. Here it is:
2881: 1149: 1735: 1153: 1102: 765:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
2378:'s namespace detection and improve it before we make the request. I'm correcting some of the article space transclusions. 1993: 1831:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
286: 2610: 2600: 1017: 2852:ā€¹Ā The template below (Rellink) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus.ā€ŗ 2814: 2804: 2725: 2590: 521:
FYI, I made the change a couple of hours ago based on this discussion. Feel free to revert, but please explain why...
2721: 2532: 2495: 2460: 2386: 2301: 2231:. What's the procedure for dealing with this, and how many others are there which have similarly passed into limbo? -- 2127: 2044: 1963: 1715: 1318: 1288: 1193: 1124: 1048: 894: 865: 832: 453: 445:
I also think it would be good to include a search of the template name, using the project page search, for reference.
2263:, which has since been recreated as a redirect. (That redirect seems against the consensus to me.) The closer placed 1978:
Can someone here handle this? I am unfamiliar with the logistics of listing a merger here at templates. Thank you.
1592: 1549: 1817: 696: 38: 2937:? Or barring that, are there ping templates introduced since the echo notification change which have been to TfD? 1434:
I did link to the most recent discussion I could find, it just so happens it was over seven and a half years ago.
704: 2965: 651:, what article hatnote would best be used instead? This question arises with regards to the current state of the 130: 2946: 2916: 2829: 2795: 2780: 2737: 2710: 2654: 2629: 2576: 2536: 2499: 2482: 2464: 2414: 2390: 2339: 2305: 2243: 2200: 2151: 2131: 2099: 2073: 2048: 2008: 1986: 1967: 1943: 1921: 1905: 1821: 1803: 1781: 1759: 1744: 1719: 1688: 1657: 1634: 1616: 1586: 1573: 1530: 1510: 1492: 1473: 1443: 1429: 1401: 1375: 1351: 1322: 1307: 1292: 1277: 1252: 1197: 1183: 1169: 1128: 1114: 1096: 1070: 1052: 1037: 1011: 979: 961: 947: 918: 898: 883: 869: 854: 836: 821: 753: 729: 688: 669: 629: 615: 580: 566: 552: 530: 516: 501: 485: 475: 457: 438: 415: 396: 360: 331: 313: 298: 275: 259: 235: 216: 150: 2095: 271: 2066: 1388:
makes much more sense. If it is a template, regardless of namespace, it should be nominated and discussed at
2800:
I checked the source of the deleted template, and it was indeed redundant. If you have a problem with using
676: 2877: 1243:
things that aren't defined as an Article, Category, File, Redirect, or Template should be discussed at MfD.
434:
take place (if the creator's reasoning is not a good one, then this will not negatively affect an outcome).
388: 352: 309: 294: 1188:
So its better to send templates to three different venues than to send userboxes to 2? How is that easier?
665: 207:
of the template and its structure/title as the "CME"/"Canadian Mountain Encyclopedia" title is now defunct.
2824: 2759: 2282: 2278: 2218: 1997: 1612: 1569: 1506: 1463: 1439: 1397: 1347: 1314: 1284: 1248: 1189: 1165: 1120: 1092: 1044: 1033: 957: 890: 861: 850: 828: 817: 625: 482: 435: 2673:
through tfm2. I added part of the functionality to tfm2. I think the guide should be updated in Step 2's
2487:
I had forgotten it was a part of that. So there's at least two deletions. It probably could use salting.
2514:
edit request. Plasticspork and Sporkbot took care of the remaining transclusions and deleted and salted
1813: 1582: 1526: 1101:
I would guess that over half of the userboxes are not in template space after many were moved after the
712: 164: 1519: 543:- usually the creator (unless they haven't edited for a very long time) and any relevant WikiProjects. 2669:
you can propose multiple templates for merger in step 1, but then step 2 doesn't actually support the
661: 2962: 2004: 1858:
one template will simply be replaced by another with no regard for parameters, causing much breakage;
1653: 1371: 827:
TFD, Categories to CFD, etc. Not this Template for deletion confusion trifecta we have going on now.
576: 548: 203:
if not simply the talkpages at WikiProject Mountains and related wikiprojects. My issue here is the
192: 120: 2166:
Knowledge (XXG):Templates for discussion/Log/2014 February 19#Template:Infobox county cricket ground
2955: 2791: 2776: 2733: 2375: 2239: 2196: 2091: 1939: 1901: 1776: 1683: 1630: 1488: 914: 879: 725: 611: 512: 267: 2030:
Knowledge (XXG):Templates_for_discussion/Log/2013_November_18#Template:Characters_in_Twelfth_Night
376:
has a number of nominations which seem overdue for closure. Has it perhaps dropped off the radar?
2912: 2706: 2650: 2572: 2518: 2478: 2436: 2426: 2410: 2399: 2335: 2314: 2257: 2113: 1799: 1740: 1469: 1425: 1179: 1110: 1066: 684: 411: 379: 343: 327: 305: 290: 231: 212: 146: 2952:
I doubt if we are creating more instructions yet. I know people got unhappy with Kumioko using
2228: 2185: 1886: 1794: 1604: 1456:
opinion, but it seems some others' who spoke here too. What I like to call the "metaspace" (see
1381: 1024:) has no bearing on how we should do things here. Can you show me how they do not fit into the 842: 2452:, either. When they are gone, I'll submit the edit request, unless someone else does it first. 2942: 2867: 2845: 2821: 2755: 2557: 2147: 2018: 1608: 1565: 1502: 1466:, userboxes are a waste of resources. We ought not to have (the vast majority of) them at all. 1435: 1393: 1343: 1244: 1161: 1088: 1029: 953: 846: 813: 621: 2349: 1731: 791: 2901: 1755: 1622: 1579: 1523: 1043:
consensus? By that statement it seems more like people got tired of talking about it to me.
2224: 1893:
concerning "subst and delete", but that's very scanty and does not cover other outcomes. --
1874: 1790: 1600: 1557: 1498: 1385: 1359: 1331: 1236: 1232: 1228: 1224: 1220: 1216: 1212: 1207: 905: 799: 795: 784: 775: 746: 337: 2639: 2625: 2529: 2492: 2457: 2383: 2298: 2124: 2041: 2000: 1960: 1917: 1712: 1649: 1367: 1303: 1273: 1006: 656: 652: 572: 562: 544: 526: 497: 471: 450: 255: 182: 110: 2028:
It's already listed under Template:Characters in Twelfth Night, or here's a direct link:
223: 200: 1334:
is for templates... Userboxes are templates. Userspace templates are templates... They
966:
Thanks for clarifying. Then yes, I think this is a sensible change, notwithstanding the
250:, and I don't want to consider furthering this without first doing my homework. Cheers, 2787: 2769: 2752:
Knowledge (XXG):Templates for discussion/Log/2013 October 1#Template:Infobox bandy club
2745: 2729: 2363: 2232: 2189: 2173: 1935: 1894: 1766: 1673: 1626: 1484: 910: 875: 718: 604: 508: 160:
Unlike CfDs, where there is a CfR option, I see nothing here for renaming a template.
1849:
the transcluding pages will be left with nothing where the deleted templates had been;
1452:
actually relevant to the encyclopƦdic mission. A quite sensible division, not in just
2931: 2908: 2891: 2702: 2681: 2646: 2568: 2474: 2406: 2367: 2331: 1979: 1421: 1203: 1175: 1133: 1106: 1062: 975: 943: 750: 680: 407: 323: 227: 208: 142: 1457: 2938: 2691: 2159: 2143: 1912:
favour of retaining a redundant template simply because of this misunderstanding.
649:
Knowledge (XXG):Templates_for_discussion/Log/2012_September_11#Template:Movenotice
2508: 2446: 2371: 2356: 2324: 2267: 2212: 1751: 46:
If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the
2927:
Is there guidance on what is and isn't appropriate for a "ping" template, e.g.
2621: 2526: 2489: 2454: 2380: 2295: 2121: 2038: 1957: 1913: 1709: 1299: 1269: 558: 522: 493: 467: 447: 251: 2786:
yet, which also seems to point at that it wasn't such a good idea after all.
2422:
I've already started replacing it, for consistency, and will continue. When
738:
RfC: Should Userbox templates in Template: space be nominated at TfD or MfD
1621:
The "I like it" and "I don't like it" pages existed before userboxes did.
1016:
This is the English Knowledge (XXG) and not the German Knowledge (XXG).
971: 939: 170:
currently yields "Canadian Mountain Encyclopedia" but as you will see by
2251:
Knowledge (XXG):Templates for discussion/Log/2013 August 18#Template:En
1105:
was implemented. all userboxes should be discussed in the same venue.
770:
The last time I could find this as being discussed in the archives was
2088:
Knowledge (XXG) talk:Criteria for speedy deletion#Deprecated templates
1930:
If it's not a keep or a quick delete then it's going to end up in the
1412:
until recommended otherwise by a series of discussions which start by
1075:
How is nominating Templates that are in the Template: namespace as
2432:
is gone from article space, I could try the same thing I did with
1812:
I would like to join the cadre of people who give very few shits.
1416:
and progress until there is some indication that there might be a
745:
There is a clear consensus, that userboxes should be nominated at
426:
In the third step for nominating a template for deletion it says "
1836:
Clarifying the closure process for all outcomes other than "keep"
1497:
They are all templates by definition and should be nominated at
404:
Knowledge (XXG):Administrators' noticeboard/Requests for closure
1083:? Templates in the template namespace should be discussed on 1025: 787: 25: 2178:
Knowledge (XXG):Templates for discussion/Log/2014 February 19
2065:. Looks like an bot error. Perhaps there are more instances? 535:
I don't plan to revert your edit, but I would point out that
304:
Is there such a thing as a Template tech help corner? Please
1842:
Knowledge (XXG):Templates for discussion/Log/2013 November 7
1879:
Knowledge (XXG):Templates for discussion#Listing a template
812:
This just seems like where these nominations belong to me.
2858:
Knowledge (XXG):Templates for discussion/Log/2014 April 24
2290:
The templates marked as being deleted should be listed at
492:
For all XfDs notification of creator should be required.
374:
Knowledge (XXG):Templates for discussion/Log/2013 July 13
2442:. There aren't that many article space transclusions of 2405:
as well, which was also deleted at TfD, then recreated.
422:
Make notifying significant editors of deletion mandatory
2352:, and Lfdder helped get the deletion notice changed on 2345: 2291: 2062: 282:
Template mislinking to wiktionary not wikipedia article
247: 2868:
Warren Cuccurullo#1980ā€“1986: The Missing Persons years
2856:
Clicking the link "templates for discussion" leads to
2846:
Warren Cuccurullo#1980ā€“1986: The Missing Persons years
2701:
since what the guide said to do before didn't work. --
1625:
would need to exist wherever userboxes are discussed.
1384:
is not the answer, having all templates nominated at
2374:, or anyone else interested, feel free to look over 2249:
Interesting history: This template was discussed at
466:
Yes. If you care about something, watch out for it.
1891:
Knowledge (XXG):Templates for discussion#Discussion
1883:
Knowledge (XXG):Templates for discussion#Discussion
1544:Does it work? Does it do what it says it will do? 1142:
all templates should be discussed in the same venue
1138:
all userboxes should be discussed in the same venue
287:
Template_talk:Infobox_Chinese#Technical_help_needed
2870:does not contain any reference to any "rellink". 2687:. Also, I changed the guide's recommendation for 2860:but there is no mention there of this template. 1736:a project-wide discussion over such a triviality 224:Knowledge (XXG):RM#Requesting a single page move 1206:, User: space templates should be discussed at 647:was deprecated per the archived discussion at 222:you can always use the procedures outlined in 156:how to propose/mandate a Rename of a template? 18:Knowledge (XXG) talk:Templates for discussion 8: 2677:to mention using the new title parameter of 1797:: this is blowing things out of proportion. 1540:two criteria they can base their opinion on 776: 2032:(but it doesn't have the instructions from 320:Knowledge (XXG) talk:WikiProject Templates 2036:, which you should know before replying) 2182:Knowledge (XXG):Templates for discussion 2170:Knowledge (XXG):Templates for discussion 2034:Knowledge (XXG):Templates for discussion 2023:Knowledge (XXG):Templates for discussion 2320:should be deleted and salted, and yes, 2698: 2164:Presumably you mean that your edit to 1358:Keep the status quo which seems to be 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 1873:This explanation should be placed on 7: 2395:nice. we should do something about 1994:Template:Characters in Twelfth Night 1408:Like all things in Knowledge (XXG), 1144:", and since there is a venue named 761:The following discussion is closed. 2273:into the holding cell. It was then 2105:Search link in nomination templates 2079:Template deletion discussion at CSD 2021:. Wrong noticeboard. Please see 139:made by people who do not use them 24: 1852:the TfD notice will be permanent; 1889:. We do have a small note under 1827:The discussion above is closed. 1202:I entirely agree with you there 1026:definition of what a template is 29: 2661:Multiple templates to be merged 2172:. You can either wait for the 2134:11:44, 20 February 2014 (UTC) 1822:06:44, 27 September 2013 (UTC) 1750:Honestly, who gives a shit? ā€” 1720:04:09, 14 September 2013 (UTC) 980:23:51, 20 September 2013 (UTC) 962:20:37, 20 September 2013 (UTC) 948:18:46, 20 September 2013 (UTC) 730:17:42, 18 September 2013 (UTC) 689:17:10, 18 September 2013 (UTC) 670:16:12, 18 September 2013 (UTC) 581:07:01, 10 September 2013 (UTC) 1: 2655:18:06, 28 February 2014 (UTC) 2630:17:43, 28 February 2014 (UTC) 2577:21:09, 26 February 2014 (UTC) 2537:07:28, 23 February 2014 (UTC) 2500:17:51, 21 February 2014 (UTC) 2483:17:16, 21 February 2014 (UTC) 2465:16:57, 21 February 2014 (UTC) 2415:14:28, 21 February 2014 (UTC) 2391:09:36, 21 February 2014 (UTC) 2340:15:49, 20 February 2014 (UTC) 2306:11:38, 20 February 2014 (UTC) 2283:removed from the holding cell 2227:, presumably it should be in 2201:20:52, 20 February 2014 (UTC) 2152:15:45, 20 February 2014 (UTC) 2132:09:26, 20 February 2014 (UTC) 2100:15:28, 27 December 2013 (UTC) 2074:04:40, 24 December 2013 (UTC) 2049:23:28, 26 November 2013 (UTC) 2009:04:57, 12 November 2013 (UTC) 1987:06:38, 25 November 2013 (UTC) 1968:01:11, 16 November 2013 (UTC) 1944:00:09, 16 November 2013 (UTC) 1922:16:43, 15 November 2013 (UTC) 1906:14:36, 15 November 2013 (UTC) 1804:07:55, 6 September 2013 (UTC) 1782:07:23, 6 September 2013 (UTC) 1760:22:21, 4 September 2013 (UTC) 1745:21:10, 4 September 2013 (UTC) 1689:07:20, 6 September 2013 (UTC) 1658:01:49, 6 September 2013 (UTC) 1635:18:18, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 1617:18:05, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 1607:" would have discouraged it. 1587:17:44, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 1574:17:26, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 1531:16:11, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 1511:14:56, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 1493:11:31, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 1474:20:38, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 1460:) has already grown too big. 1444:14:56, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 1430:07:28, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 1402:14:56, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 1376:07:01, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 1352:14:56, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 1323:10:45, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 1308:04:54, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 1293:03:37, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 1278:03:26, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 1253:14:36, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 1198:10:45, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 1184:23:48, 4 September 2013 (UTC) 1170:23:44, 4 September 2013 (UTC) 1156:, the proper venue should be 1129:23:13, 4 September 2013 (UTC) 1115:23:05, 4 September 2013 (UTC) 1097:23:02, 4 September 2013 (UTC) 1071:21:27, 4 September 2013 (UTC) 1053:13:23, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 1038:23:02, 4 September 2013 (UTC) 1012:21:10, 4 September 2013 (UTC) 919:14:45, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 899:13:20, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 884:11:34, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 870:23:54, 4 September 2013 (UTC) 855:23:39, 4 September 2013 (UTC) 837:23:11, 4 September 2013 (UTC) 822:20:51, 4 September 2013 (UTC) 630:13:59, 7 September 2013 (UTC) 616:15:22, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 567:05:30, 7 September 2013 (UTC) 553:08:17, 6 September 2013 (UTC) 531:16:47, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 517:11:28, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 502:11:08, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 2866:In any case, the section at 2726:Template:Infobox sports team 2244:11:48, 17 January 2014 (UTC) 1730:I shall be brief and blunt: 754:17:54, 12 October 2013 (UTC) 2839: 2722:Template:Infobox bandy club 2223:but is no longer listed at 1861:functionality will be lost. 1158:WP:Templates for Discussion 1150:WP:Userboxes for Discussion 1148:and there is not one named 1146:WP:Templates for Discussion 106:more than a TfR needed for 2988: 2917:19:13, 24 April 2014 (UTC) 2882:17:52, 24 April 2014 (UTC) 2781:23:10, 31 March 2014 (UTC) 2738:15:09, 31 March 2014 (UTC) 2711:21:34, 30 March 2014 (UTC) 2611:Infobox SPT subway station 2601:Infobox Oslo Metro station 2586:I have carefully replaced 2582:Station templates replaced 2109:In nomination templates, ( 2083:Attention template folks: 1136:on the flip side of your " 1022:WP:German userbox solution 1003:WP:German userbox solution 990:Support Nominations at MfD 807:Support Nominations at TfD 486:20:29, 9 August 2013 (UTC) 476:13:53, 5 August 2013 (UTC) 458:04:22, 5 August 2013 (UTC) 439:20:34, 4 August 2013 (UTC) 416:23:05, 9 August 2013 (UTC) 397:21:27, 9 August 2013 (UTC) 361:21:32, 9 August 2013 (UTC) 289:. Can anyone help please? 2971:13:15,Ā 4Ā JuneĀ 2014Ā (UTC). 2830:23:13, 4 April 2014 (UTC) 2796:23:10, 3 April 2014 (UTC) 2591:Infobox Norwegian station 2348:with a notice asking for 1885:, and not hidden away in 1787:The road to hell is paved 1462:And so yes, I agree with 1154:WP:Userboxes for Deletion 276:19:33, 14 June 2013 (UTC) 260:19:09, 14 June 2013 (UTC) 236:18:22, 13 June 2013 (UTC) 217:16:33, 13 June 2013 (UTC) 151:16:24, 13 June 2013 (UTC) 131:Template talk:cite bcgnis 1829:Please do not modify it. 1140:" argument here is the " 763:Please do not modify it. 332:15:29, 9 July 2013 (UTC) 314:06:03, 9 July 2013 (UTC) 299:02:06, 8 July 2013 (UTC) 2947:17:02, 9 May 2014 (UTC) 2840:Something's gone wrong? 2168:isn't (yet) showing at 1974:Merger Request received 1840:It concerns me that at 1795:I shall call it by name 1597:WP:I just don't like it 1554:WP:I just don't like it 1079:uniform when we have a 1077:Miscellany for Deletion 677:Template:Disputed title 636:What to use instead of 428:It is considered polite 2848:, there is a message: 1998:Template:Twelfth Night 1501:for that very reason. 1085:Templates for Deletion 1081:Templates for Deletion 717:depending on circs. -- 2665:The guide says under 2344:I'm trying to CSD G4 2211:I've just found that 42:of past discussions. 1103:WP:Userbox migration 697:cleanup-articletitle 645:Template:Move header 638:Template:Move header 248:itself been reverted 2815:Infobox sports club 2805:Infobox sports team 2675:Multiple templates: 2667:Multiple templates: 2469:the most recent is 2376:Template:En/sandbox 2180:, or you can go to 2061:FYI, I've reverted 1791:assuming good faith 1726:Threaded Discussion 1380:Adding instruction 1018:WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS 705:inappropriate title 242:Images in templates 2616:with the standard 2563:I tried to relist 2090:. Please comment. 764: 2972: 2565:Template:TAPPS_1A 2558:Template:TAPPS_1A 2420:Ah, you're right! 2310:I would say that 2221:|2013 August 18}} 1985: 1780: 1732:who gives a shit? 1699:transclusion only 1687: 1605:if it ain't broke 1593:WP:I just like it 1550:WP:I just like it 1467: 1414:asking a question 762: 174:the site name is 103: 102: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 2979: 2970: 2959: 2936: 2930: 2906: 2900: 2896: 2890: 2819: 2813: 2809: 2803: 2772: 2749: 2700: 2697:(step 1) to use 2696: 2690: 2686: 2680: 2671:discussion title 2644: 2638: 2615: 2609: 2605: 2599: 2595: 2589: 2523: 2517: 2513: 2507: 2504:I submitted the 2451: 2445: 2441: 2435: 2431: 2425: 2404: 2398: 2361: 2355: 2329: 2323: 2319: 2313: 2272: 2266: 2262: 2256: 2235: 2229:the holding cell 2222: 2192: 2163: 2118: 2112: 2070: 1984: 1982: 1897: 1814:Martijn Hoekstra 1802: 1774: 1772: 1769: 1743: 1681: 1679: 1676: 1472: 1461: 1392:for discussion. 1342:for discussion. 1283:for new editors 1009: 794:be nominated at 778: 721: 716: 708: 700: 607: 395: 386: 382: 359: 350: 346: 197: 191: 187: 181: 169: 163: 125: 119: 115: 109: 81: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 2987: 2986: 2982: 2981: 2980: 2978: 2977: 2976: 2953: 2934: 2928: 2925: 2904: 2898: 2894: 2888: 2842: 2827: 2817: 2811: 2807: 2801: 2770: 2743: 2724:be merged into 2718: 2716:A club ā‰  a team 2694: 2688: 2684: 2678: 2663: 2642: 2636: 2618:Infobox station 2613: 2607: 2603: 2597: 2593: 2587: 2584: 2561: 2521: 2515: 2511: 2505: 2449: 2443: 2439: 2433: 2429: 2423: 2402: 2396: 2359: 2353: 2327: 2321: 2317: 2311: 2270: 2264: 2260: 2254: 2233: 2216: 2209: 2190: 2157: 2140: 2116: 2110: 2107: 2081: 2069:Ā«Ā RyÅ«kotsuseiĀ Ā» 2068: 2059: 1980: 1976: 1895: 1838: 1833: 1832: 1798: 1770: 1767: 1739: 1728: 1677: 1674: 1468: 1368:User:Salix alba 1007: 992: 970:of the past. -- 968:Sturm und Drang 809: 792:Template: space 772:January of 2006 767: 758: 757: 756: 740: 719: 710: 702: 694: 657:Chelsea Manning 653:Bradley Manning 641: 605: 424: 384: 378: 377: 371: 348: 342: 341: 284: 244: 195: 189: 185: 179: 167: 161: 158: 127: 123: 117: 113: 107: 77: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 2985: 2983: 2975: 2974: 2973: 2924: 2923:Ping templates 2921: 2920: 2919: 2854: 2853: 2841: 2838: 2837: 2836: 2835: 2834: 2833: 2832: 2825: 2717: 2714: 2662: 2659: 2658: 2657: 2583: 2580: 2560: 2555: 2554: 2553: 2552: 2551: 2550: 2549: 2548: 2547: 2546: 2545: 2544: 2543: 2542: 2541: 2540: 2539: 2535: 2498: 2463: 2389: 2304: 2287: 2286: 2279:marked as such 2208: 2205: 2204: 2203: 2139: 2136: 2130: 2106: 2103: 2092:Ego White Tray 2080: 2077: 2058: 2055: 2054: 2053: 2052: 2051: 2047: 2026: 2012: 2011: 1975: 1972: 1971: 1970: 1966: 1949: 1948: 1947: 1946: 1925: 1924: 1863: 1862: 1859: 1856: 1853: 1850: 1837: 1834: 1826: 1825: 1824: 1810: 1809: 1808: 1807: 1806: 1727: 1724: 1723: 1722: 1718: 1703: 1702: 1691: 1660: 1645: 1644: 1643: 1642: 1641: 1640: 1639: 1638: 1637: 1623:TP:TFD#REASONS 1601:WP:TFD#REASONS 1591:The fact that 1558:WP:TFD#REASONS 1515: 1514: 1513: 1480: 1479: 1478: 1477: 1476: 1449: 1406: 1405: 1404: 1356: 1355: 1354: 1329: 1328: 1327: 1326: 1325: 1265: 1264: 1263: 1262: 1261: 1260: 1259: 1258: 1257: 1256: 1255: 1200: 1131: 1059: 1058: 1057: 1056: 1055: 991: 988: 987: 986: 985: 984: 983: 982: 931: 930: 929: 928: 927: 926: 925: 924: 923: 922: 921: 824: 808: 805: 768: 759: 744: 743: 742: 741: 739: 736: 735: 734: 733: 732: 640: 634: 633: 632: 618: 596: 595: 594: 593: 592: 591: 590: 589: 588: 587: 586: 585: 584: 583: 490: 489: 488: 481:in many more. 461: 460: 456: 423: 420: 419: 418: 370: 367: 366: 365: 364: 363: 334: 283: 280: 279: 278: 268:Secondarywaltz 243: 240: 239: 238: 157: 154: 126: 104: 101: 100: 95: 92: 87: 82: 75: 70: 65: 62: 52: 51: 34: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 2984: 2968: 2967: 2964: 2957: 2951: 2950: 2949: 2948: 2944: 2940: 2933: 2922: 2918: 2914: 2910: 2903: 2893: 2886: 2885: 2884: 2883: 2879: 2875: 2871: 2869: 2864: 2861: 2859: 2851: 2850: 2849: 2847: 2831: 2828: 2823: 2816: 2806: 2799: 2798: 2797: 2793: 2789: 2784: 2783: 2782: 2778: 2774: 2767: 2764: 2761: 2757: 2753: 2747: 2742: 2741: 2740: 2739: 2735: 2731: 2727: 2723: 2715: 2713: 2712: 2708: 2704: 2693: 2683: 2676: 2672: 2668: 2660: 2656: 2652: 2648: 2641: 2634: 2633: 2632: 2631: 2627: 2623: 2619: 2612: 2602: 2592: 2581: 2579: 2578: 2574: 2570: 2566: 2559: 2556: 2538: 2534: 2531: 2528: 2525: 2520: 2510: 2503: 2502: 2501: 2497: 2494: 2491: 2488: 2486: 2485: 2484: 2480: 2476: 2472: 2468: 2467: 2466: 2462: 2459: 2456: 2453: 2448: 2438: 2428: 2421: 2418: 2417: 2416: 2412: 2408: 2401: 2394: 2393: 2392: 2388: 2385: 2382: 2379: 2377: 2373: 2369: 2365: 2358: 2351: 2347: 2343: 2342: 2341: 2337: 2333: 2326: 2316: 2309: 2308: 2307: 2303: 2300: 2297: 2294: 2292: 2289: 2288: 2284: 2280: 2276: 2269: 2259: 2253:, along with 2252: 2248: 2247: 2246: 2245: 2241: 2237: 2230: 2226: 2220: 2219:being deleted 2214: 2206: 2202: 2198: 2194: 2187: 2183: 2179: 2175: 2171: 2167: 2161: 2156: 2155: 2154: 2153: 2149: 2145: 2137: 2135: 2133: 2129: 2126: 2123: 2120: 2115: 2104: 2102: 2101: 2097: 2093: 2089: 2084: 2078: 2076: 2075: 2072: 2071: 2064: 2056: 2050: 2046: 2043: 2040: 2037: 2035: 2031: 2027: 2024: 2020: 2016: 2015: 2014: 2013: 2010: 2006: 2002: 1999: 1995: 1991: 1990: 1989: 1988: 1983: 1973: 1969: 1965: 1962: 1959: 1956: 1954: 1951: 1950: 1945: 1941: 1937: 1933: 1929: 1928: 1927: 1926: 1923: 1919: 1915: 1910: 1909: 1908: 1907: 1903: 1899: 1892: 1888: 1884: 1880: 1876: 1871: 1867: 1860: 1857: 1854: 1851: 1848: 1847: 1846: 1843: 1835: 1830: 1823: 1819: 1815: 1811: 1805: 1801: 1796: 1792: 1788: 1785: 1784: 1783: 1778: 1773: 1763: 1762: 1761: 1757: 1753: 1749: 1748: 1747: 1746: 1742: 1737: 1733: 1725: 1721: 1717: 1714: 1711: 1708: 1705: 1704: 1700: 1696: 1692: 1690: 1685: 1680: 1671: 1666: 1661: 1659: 1655: 1651: 1646: 1636: 1632: 1628: 1624: 1620: 1619: 1618: 1614: 1610: 1606: 1602: 1598: 1594: 1590: 1589: 1588: 1585: 1584: 1581: 1577: 1576: 1575: 1571: 1567: 1563: 1559: 1555: 1551: 1547: 1543: 1539: 1534: 1533: 1532: 1529: 1528: 1525: 1521: 1516: 1512: 1508: 1504: 1500: 1496: 1495: 1494: 1490: 1486: 1481: 1475: 1471: 1465: 1459: 1458:metapedianism 1455: 1450: 1447: 1446: 1445: 1441: 1437: 1433: 1432: 1431: 1427: 1423: 1419: 1415: 1411: 1407: 1403: 1399: 1395: 1391: 1387: 1383: 1379: 1378: 1377: 1373: 1369: 1365: 1361: 1357: 1353: 1349: 1345: 1341: 1337: 1333: 1330: 1324: 1320: 1316: 1311: 1310: 1309: 1305: 1301: 1296: 1295: 1294: 1290: 1286: 1281: 1280: 1279: 1275: 1271: 1266: 1254: 1250: 1246: 1242: 1238: 1234: 1230: 1226: 1222: 1218: 1214: 1209: 1205: 1201: 1199: 1195: 1191: 1187: 1186: 1185: 1181: 1177: 1173: 1172: 1171: 1167: 1163: 1159: 1155: 1151: 1147: 1143: 1139: 1135: 1132: 1130: 1126: 1122: 1118: 1117: 1116: 1112: 1108: 1104: 1100: 1099: 1098: 1094: 1090: 1086: 1082: 1078: 1074: 1073: 1072: 1068: 1064: 1060: 1054: 1050: 1046: 1041: 1040: 1039: 1035: 1031: 1027: 1023: 1019: 1015: 1014: 1013: 1010: 1004: 1000: 999: 994: 993: 989: 981: 977: 973: 969: 965: 964: 963: 959: 955: 951: 950: 949: 945: 941: 937: 932: 920: 916: 912: 907: 902: 901: 900: 896: 892: 887: 886: 885: 881: 877: 873: 872: 871: 867: 863: 858: 857: 856: 852: 848: 844: 840: 839: 838: 834: 830: 825: 823: 819: 815: 811: 810: 806: 804: 803: 801: 797: 793: 789: 786: 779: 773: 766: 755: 752: 748: 737: 731: 727: 723: 714: 706: 698: 692: 691: 690: 686: 682: 678: 674: 673: 672: 671: 667: 663: 658: 654: 650: 646: 639: 635: 631: 627: 623: 619: 617: 613: 609: 602: 598: 597: 582: 578: 574: 570: 569: 568: 564: 560: 556: 555: 554: 550: 546: 542: 538: 534: 533: 532: 528: 524: 520: 519: 518: 514: 510: 505: 504: 503: 499: 495: 491: 487: 484: 479: 478: 477: 473: 469: 465: 464: 463: 462: 459: 455: 452: 449: 446: 443: 442: 441: 440: 437: 431: 429: 421: 417: 413: 409: 405: 401: 400: 399: 398: 394: 390: 385:Pigsonthewing 381: 375: 368: 362: 358: 354: 349:Pigsonthewing 345: 339: 335: 333: 329: 325: 321: 317: 316: 315: 311: 307: 306:In ictu oculi 303: 302: 301: 300: 296: 292: 291:In ictu oculi 288: 281: 277: 273: 269: 264: 263: 262: 261: 257: 253: 249: 241: 237: 233: 229: 225: 221: 220: 219: 218: 214: 210: 206: 202: 194: 184: 177: 173: 166: 155: 153: 152: 148: 144: 140: 136: 132: 122: 112: 105: 99: 96: 93: 91: 88: 86: 83: 80: 76: 74: 71: 69: 66: 63: 61: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 2961: 2926: 2874:86.128.2.151 2872: 2865: 2862: 2855: 2843: 2822:Plastikspork 2762: 2756:Plastikspork 2719: 2674: 2670: 2666: 2664: 2635:tagged with 2617: 2585: 2562: 2210: 2207:TFM in limbo 2141: 2138:Transcluding 2108: 2085: 2082: 2067: 2060: 1977: 1952: 1932:Holding cell 1872: 1868: 1864: 1839: 1828: 1729: 1698: 1694: 1670:just in case 1669: 1664: 1609:Technical 13 1583: 1566:Technical 13 1561: 1545: 1541: 1537: 1527: 1503:Technical 13 1453: 1436:Technical 13 1417: 1413: 1409: 1394:Technical 13 1389: 1344:Technical 13 1339: 1335: 1245:Technical 13 1240: 1162:Technical 13 1141: 1137: 1089:Technical 13 1084: 1080: 1076: 1030:Technical 13 997: 996: 967: 954:Technical 13 935: 847:Technical 13 814:Technical 13 782: 769: 760: 642: 622:Technical 13 540: 536: 432: 427: 425: 393:Andy's edits 389:Talk to Andy 380:Andy Mabbett 372: 369:July 13 page 357:Andy's edits 353:Talk to Andy 344:Andy Mabbett 285: 245: 204: 175: 165:cite bivouac 159: 138: 134: 128: 78: 43: 37: 2810:, then use 2750:Please see 2720:Why should 2213:Template:En 2176:to process 1870:anything". 1580:Bencherlite 1524:Bencherlite 1338:fall under 662:Startswithj 193:cite bcgnis 121:cite bcgnis 36:This is an 2966:Farmbrough 2956:Group ping 2057:Bot error? 2001:Dwanyewest 1877:, between 1734:Why start 1650:Carcharoth 1410:status quo 1008:iridescent 998:explicitly 995:These are 774:and since 573:DH85868993 545:DH85868993 98:ArchiveĀ 20 90:ArchiveĀ 16 85:ArchiveĀ 15 79:ArchiveĀ 14 73:ArchiveĀ 13 68:ArchiveĀ 12 60:ArchiveĀ 10 2788:Bandy boy 2746:Bandy boy 2730:Bandy boy 2699:|heading= 2364:Redrose64 2174:job queue 2114:Tfd links 1936:WOSlinker 1693:The name 1627:Thryduulf 1485:Thryduulf 1390:Templates 1340:Templates 911:Thryduulf 876:Thryduulf 788:templates 713:POV-title 693:That, or 675:probably 599:See also 537:sometimes 509:Thryduulf 2909:Frietjes 2766:contribs 2703:Odie5533 2647:Frietjes 2569:Jax 0677 2475:Frietjes 2407:Frietjes 2368:Frietjes 2332:Frietjes 2275:disputed 2186:WP:PURGE 2019:Not Done 2017:Reply: * 1981:GenQuest 1887:WP:TFDAI 1695:template 1422:Johnuniq 1382:WP:CREEP 1204:Frietjes 1176:Frietjes 1134:Frietjes 1107:Frietjes 1063:Frietjes 843:WP:CREEP 751:Armbrust 681:Frietjes 408:Frietjes 324:Frietjes 228:Frietjes 209:Skookum1 205:renaming 172:googling 143:Skookum1 135:speed up 2939:Protonk 2902:rellink 2350:WP:SALT 2160:Dweller 2144:Dweller 1992:[Merge 1953:Support 1464:Kumioko 1418:benefit 1336:clearly 1315:Kumioko 1285:Kumioko 1235:in the 1190:Kumioko 1121:Kumioko 1045:Kumioko 891:Kumioko 862:Kumioko 829:Kumioko 785:Userbox 783:Should 541:someone 39:archive 2773:rose64 2640:db-xfd 2372:Lfdder 2236:rose64 2225:WP:TFM 2215:bears 2193:rose64 2188:it. -- 1898:rose64 1875:WP:TFD 1777:ā€œTalkā€ 1752:Lfdder 1684:ā€œTalkā€ 1665:unless 1599:, and 1556:, and 1520:WT:MFD 1499:WP:TfD 1386:WP:TfD 1364:a list 1360:WP:MFD 1332:WP:TfD 1237:WP:XfD 1233:WP:MfD 1231:, and 1229:WP:TfD 1225:WP:RfD 1221:WP:FfD 1217:WP:CfD 1213:WP:AfD 1208:WP:TfD 906:WP:VfD 722:rose64 608:rose64 338:WP:VPT 183:bcgnis 111:bcgnis 2897:uses 2768:). -- 2622:Sw2nd 1914:Sw2nd 1789:with 1771:scrlt 1678:scrlt 1362:(see 1300:Hobit 1270:Hobit 1020:(ie. 660:you, 559:Hobit 523:Hobit 494:Hobit 468:Sw2nd 252:Hwy43 201:WP:RS 16:< 2963:Rich 2943:talk 2932:Ping 2913:talk 2892:main 2878:talk 2792:talk 2777:talk 2760:talk 2734:talk 2707:talk 2682:tfm2 2651:talk 2626:talk 2606:and 2573:talk 2479:talk 2471:here 2411:talk 2346:{Ar} 2336:talk 2277:and 2240:talk 2197:talk 2184:and 2148:talk 2096:talk 2063:this 2025:...] 2005:talk 1940:talk 1918:talk 1902:talk 1881:and 1818:talk 1800:KeĻ†r 1768:Will 1756:talk 1741:KeĻ†r 1675:Will 1654:talk 1631:talk 1613:talk 1570:talk 1564:"). 1538:only 1507:talk 1489:talk 1470:KeĻ†r 1440:talk 1426:talk 1398:talk 1372:talk 1348:talk 1319:talk 1304:talk 1289:talk 1274:talk 1249:talk 1241:Only 1194:talk 1180:talk 1166:talk 1125:talk 1111:talk 1093:talk 1067:talk 1049:talk 1034:talk 976:talk 958:talk 944:talk 938:. -- 915:talk 895:talk 880:talk 866:talk 851:talk 845:... 833:talk 818:talk 726:talk 685:talk 666:talk 626:talk 612:talk 603:. -- 577:talk 563:talk 549:talk 527:talk 513:talk 498:talk 472:talk 412:talk 402:try 328:talk 318:try 310:talk 295:talk 272:talk 256:talk 232:talk 213:talk 188:and 147:talk 129:See 116:and 2844:At 2771:Red 2692:tfm 2530:-XT 2527:ā€”PC 2493:-XT 2490:ā€”PC 2458:-XT 2455:ā€”PC 2384:-XT 2381:ā€”PC 2299:-XT 2296:ā€”PC 2234:Red 2191:Red 2125:-XT 2122:ā€”PC 2042:-XT 2039:ā€”PC 1996:to 1961:-XT 1958:-PC 1896:Red 1713:-XT 1710:-PC 1546:{B} 1542:{A} 1374:): 1152:OR 1028:? 972:BDD 940:BDD 800:MfD 798:or 796:TfD 790:in 777:CCC 747:MFD 720:Red 643:If 606:Red 483:SFB 451:-XT 448:-PC 436:SFB 387:); 351:); 336:Or 176:now 2969:, 2958:}} 2954:{{ 2945:) 2935:}} 2929:{{ 2915:) 2907:. 2905:}} 2899:{{ 2895:}} 2889:{{ 2880:) 2826:ā€•Å’ 2818:}} 2812:{{ 2808:}} 2802:{{ 2794:) 2779:) 2736:) 2709:) 2695:}} 2689:{{ 2685:}} 2679:{{ 2653:) 2645:. 2643:}} 2637:{{ 2628:) 2614:}} 2608:{{ 2604:}} 2598:{{ 2596:, 2594:}} 2588:{{ 2575:) 2524:. 2522:}} 2519:de 2516:{{ 2512:}} 2509:en 2506:{{ 2481:) 2450:}} 2447:en 2444:{{ 2440:}} 2437:ar 2434:{{ 2430:}} 2427:de 2424:{{ 2413:) 2403:}} 2400:de 2397:{{ 2370:, 2366:, 2362:. 2360:}} 2357:En 2354:{{ 2338:) 2328:}} 2325:en 2322:{{ 2318:}} 2315:ar 2312:{{ 2271:}} 2268:en 2265:{{ 2261:}} 2258:ar 2255:{{ 2242:) 2217:{{ 2199:) 2150:) 2117:}} 2111:{{ 2098:) 2007:) 1942:) 1920:) 1904:) 1820:) 1775:( 1758:) 1738:? 1682:( 1656:) 1633:) 1615:) 1595:, 1572:) 1560:(" 1552:, 1522:. 1509:) 1491:) 1454:my 1442:) 1428:) 1400:) 1350:) 1321:) 1306:) 1291:) 1276:) 1251:) 1227:, 1223:, 1219:, 1215:, 1196:) 1182:) 1168:) 1160:. 1127:) 1113:) 1095:) 1087:. 1069:) 1051:) 1036:) 978:) 960:) 946:) 936:no 917:) 897:) 882:) 868:) 853:) 835:) 820:) 749:. 728:) 715:}} 711:{{ 709:, 707:}} 703:{{ 701:, 699:}} 695:{{ 687:) 679:. 668:) 628:) 614:) 579:) 565:) 551:) 529:) 515:) 500:) 474:) 414:) 406:. 391:; 355:; 340:. 330:) 322:. 312:) 297:) 274:) 258:) 234:) 226:. 215:) 196:}} 190:{{ 186:}} 180:{{ 168:}} 162:{{ 149:) 124:}} 118:{{ 114:}} 108:{{ 94:ā†’ 64:ā† 2941:( 2911:( 2876:( 2790:( 2775:( 2763:Ā· 2758:( 2748:: 2744:@ 2732:( 2705:( 2649:( 2624:( 2571:( 2533:+ 2496:+ 2477:( 2461:+ 2409:( 2387:+ 2334:( 2302:+ 2238:( 2195:( 2162:: 2158:@ 2146:( 2128:+ 2094:( 2045:+ 2003:( 1964:+ 1938:( 1916:( 1900:( 1816:( 1779:) 1754:( 1716:+ 1686:) 1652:( 1629:( 1611:( 1568:( 1505:( 1487:( 1438:( 1424:( 1396:( 1370:( 1346:( 1317:( 1302:( 1287:( 1272:( 1247:( 1192:( 1178:( 1164:( 1123:( 1109:( 1091:( 1065:( 1047:( 1032:( 974:( 956:( 942:( 913:( 893:( 878:( 864:( 849:( 831:( 816:( 802:? 724:( 683:( 664:( 655:/ 624:( 610:( 575:( 561:( 547:( 525:( 511:( 496:( 470:( 454:+ 410:( 383:( 347:( 326:( 308:( 293:( 270:( 254:( 230:( 211:( 145:( 50:.

Index

Knowledge (XXG) talk:Templates for discussion
archive
current talk page
ArchiveĀ 10
ArchiveĀ 12
ArchiveĀ 13
ArchiveĀ 14
ArchiveĀ 15
ArchiveĀ 16
ArchiveĀ 20
bcgnis
cite bcgnis
Template talk:cite bcgnis
Skookum1
talk
16:24, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
cite bivouac
googling
bcgnis
cite bcgnis
WP:RS
Skookum1
talk
16:33, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
Knowledge (XXG):RM#Requesting a single page move
Frietjes
talk
18:22, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
itself been reverted
Hwy43

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

ā†‘