Template talk:Old XfD multi

(Redirected from Template talk:Old AfD multi)
Latest comment: 2 months ago by Andrybak in topic Edit request 6 August 2024

Proposal

edit

I believe that the template wiki link should be changed from "This template was previously nominated for deletion. The result of the discussion was keep." to "This template was previously nominated for deletion. The result of the discussion was keep." The phrase, 'nominated for deletion' refers closer to the process than simply 'deletion'. 'deletion' has ambiguity, because it could link to the XfD discussion or the actual process. This change wouldn't inhibit usability and would increase clarity. (See also MOS:LINKCLARITY, MOS:EASTEREGG) — Mcguy15 (talk, contribs) 12:22, 8 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Added edit request template, unsure if this change would be controversial. If it is, please feel free to remove the edit request and discuss. — Mcguy15 (talk, contribs) 17:00, 8 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

For the specific description: X to Y Line 368:

'This %s was nominated for [[Wikipedia:Deletion policy|deletion]] or considered for [[Wikipedia:Deletion policy#Merging|merging]].',

to

'This %s was [[Wikipedia:Deletion policy|nominated for deletion]] or considered for [[Wikipedia:Deletion policy#Merging|merging]].',

Line 375, 380, 386 from

'This %s was previously nominated for deletion.',

to

'This %s was previously nominated for deletion.',
Happy Editing--IAmChaos 06:49, 12 April 2022 (UTC)Reply
I would expect a link saying "nominated for deletion" to lead me to a deletion discussion, not to Wikipedia:Deletion policy. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 07:33, 13 April 2022 (UTC)Reply
  Not done. I'm with Tamzin here. If the link contained "nominated", I'd expect it to lead to the nomination, while I would expect just "deletion" to lead to a page on deletion in general. As such, I've declined the edit request. If you gain consensus for this change, you can open another one. Tol (talk | contribs) @ 01:30, 14 April 2022 (UTC)Reply
@Tamzin: I don't personally have that implication, but I certainly agree with you, and I've realized the proposed version is not clear enough. I still think the original is unclear, though, since "deletion" could be the policy or the discussion, so I'd like to try to change it. Any better ideas? — Mcguy15 (talk, contribs) 03:10, 14 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Add a little bit of something

edit

I am not an expert on Lua, but I would like to request adding the words "multiple times." after "This <type of page> was nominated for deletion". Toadette (Let's discuss together!) 11:45, 31 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

This seems redundant and unnecessary to me. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:55, 1 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Use Category:Pages with templates in the wrong namespace

edit

I've occasionally seen this put on articles rather than their talk pages. It could be worth it to use {{talk other}} to automatically put the page in Category:Pages with templates in the wrong namespace when that happens. jlwoodwa (talk) 18:07, 22 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Edit request 6 August 2024

edit

Please remove line 251 of Module:Old XfD multi.

At the #top of this page, we have a transclusion of {{Old XfD multi}}. This template uses {{tmbox}} as its container, and within the container, the module generates a <table /> element with a hardcoded background color. This color specification causes compatibility issues with dark mode, so it needs to be removed to allow the table to inherit the background color of its parent tmbox. Thanks! Dragoniez (talk) 11:42, 6 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Done in Special:Diff/1239025895. —⁠andrybak (talk) 23:21, 6 August 2024 (UTC)Reply