Template talk:B

Formatting

How about inserting the comments as suggested by the banner meta itself, i.e. as follows:

| b1 <!--Referencing & citations--> = <yes/no>
| b2 <!--Coverage & accuracy    --> = <yes/no>
| b3 <!--Structure              --> = <yes/no>
| b4 <!--Grammar & style        --> = <yes/no>
| b5 <!--Supporting materials   --> = <yes/no>
| b6 <!--Accessibility          --> = <yes/no>

Comments could also be optional, activated by a template parameter. GregorB (talk) 10:51, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Done. Good idea. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 00:01, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! GregorB (talk) 09:01, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Notice

Template was always substituted and is no longer needed. So replaced with a bolding template. —  BrandonALF   ^{(talk) (Please ping me)} 01:22, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

To repeat what I said at User talk:BrandonALF: {{B}} has nothing to do with boldfacing. I've restored the proper template code and documentation. Wikipedia does not have templates as wrappers for basic HTML elements that are re-implemented in '''wikimarkup'''; attempts to create them have repeatedly been deleted at WP:TFD; even {{span}} and {{div}} were deleted. We only have template wrappers for non-wikimarkup elements, and mostly only those used in semantic markup: {{em}}, {{strong}}, {{code}}, {{var}}, {{kbd}}, {{samp}}. PS: The fact that {{B}} is intended to be substituted is irrelevant. Many templates are, and will even throw an error if you don't do it.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  05:44, 8 July 2018 (UTC)