Template talk:Ffd notice

Main article: Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion

How to use

{{subst:idw|Image:Image name}}

Substituting this will prevent it being broken when it is substituted. Alphax ^τεχ 08:06, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

Note: you do not have to sign with four tildes (~~~~) because the template does it for you. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:41, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

When to use

Idw stands for "Image deletion warning".

Whenever an image is listed on Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion, this template should be placed on the uploader's user talk page. It is used like this: if the name of the image is 123.gif, then {{idw|123.gif}} should be included. Remember not to include the "Image:" before the image name. It has been decided that using {{idw|Image:Image.gif}} provides consistancy and ease of use - no longer does one need to remove the namespace when copy/pasting from the image page name. Alphax ^τεχ 08:06, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

If you think this template can be improved, you're probably right. Be bold. – Quadell ^{(talk) (sleuth)} 16:07, Mar 9, 2005 (UTC)

Excellent idea. - Omegatron 16:34, Mar 29, 2005 (UTC)

Variants

When the image is listed for being an unverified orphan, Template:idw-uo should be used instead. When the image is listed on Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images, Template:idw-pui should be used. And when the image is listed on Wikipedia:Copyright problems, Template:idw-cp should be used.

Section editing

You should get rid of the section header in the template; it screws up section editing on pages the template is used on. Clicking the section edit link directs one to editing the template, which is most annoying. Lupo 20:16, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I'm advocating people use subst:idw when adding it, to avoid that problem. Superm401 | Talk 04:33, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)

Following is a discussion which User:Burgundavia and myself had about the use of the entire image name as the parameter.

{{idw-pui}} (reply →)

Hi Burgundavia, I noticed you've changed Template:Idw-pui to have a very light background, and to include the full image name (with namespace) as parameter. While these are possibly good things (and I can see the benefit of the parameter change), {{idw-pui}} is now out-of-synch with {{idw-uo}} and {{idw-cp}}. Should the other two be changed, or this one changed back? Please reply to this section. Thanks, Alphax ^τεχ 08:08, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

• I would change the other two to the same style. I changed them to make them less garish, as they already stick out, and to make copying easier, as I generally do lots of images at once, and thus copy the image file name to several places, including there and list for addition to the PUI page. Burgundavia (✈ take a flight?) 08:14, May 11, 2005 (UTC)
  • Fine. I'll do {{idw}} as well. Alphax ^τεχ 08:44, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

And that is why I have changed it back. Alphax ^τεχ 4 July 2005 05:51 (UTC)

Deletion nomination

This template was nominated for deletion at WP:TFD. The consensus was to keep it. See Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/Not deleted/August 2005. dbenbenn | talk 20:06, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

Commons

I just made {{idw-commons}}. --SPUI (talk) 22:21, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

It's been three months... and no one has used it! --WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:36, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

What's the point? If a user on the Commons uploads an image, and it gets listed at Commons:Commons:Deletion requests, the nominator is supposed to use Commons:Template:Idw on the Commons user's talk page. dbenbenn | talk 01:53, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

If that's the case, then... --WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:08, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Idw-commons

Template:Idw-commons has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion#Template:Idw-commons. Thank you. --WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:08, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Sorry

For the recent "vandalism" of the IDW template. For some reason, when I hit edit on a user talk page, it redirected me to the template. CQJ 06:40, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

removed obnoxious html

An older version of this template included a border and a background colour. I've removed them to make this comment on people's talk pages the same as normal comments on people's talk pages. Contributions using this template are no more special than non-template contributions of wikipedians, and so they no not deserve highlighted status on my talk page. Gronky 14:25, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Double signatures

This template adds a ~~~~ signature; however, the instructions (at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion#Listing images and media for deletion) indicate that a signature also be used outside of the template. The result is that a signature is added twice. I noticed in the recent history that Remember the dot removed this, then Howcheng reverted this edits with the message "usage is consistent with other image notification templates". I think that it is silly that a template should embed a signature, and if it is indeed "consistent with other image notification templates", then they should all be updated to remove this signature, since I don't see any reason why this should happen. +mt 22:58, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Opt out

There is only an option to opt out of bot messages. Not all image deletion warnings are left by bots, so I have removed that offer. Superm401 - Talk 05:16, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Template talk:Cfd-notify which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 22:45, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Template talk:Afd notice which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 02:45, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Double signatures?

This seems to be producing double signatures when notifying about nominating a file for deletion, this template seems to include a signature, but Twinkle already appends one, and I don't think other message templates include the signature. I only think <includeonly>~~</includeonly>~~ needs to be removed, but I don't want to break anything. Dylsss^{(talk contribs)} 20:57, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Date

Similar to other templates like {{Template:Rfd notice}}, please add a |days= or |age= parameter in the event we are trying to use this template for a discussion that is not dated today. Thank you. InfiniteNexus (talk) 23:36, 3 September 2023 (UTC)