Template talk:Old DRV
(Redirected from Template talk:Olddelrev)
Latest comment: 2 years ago by Rotideypoc41352 in topic Requested move 4 April 2022
 | The contents of the Template:Olddrvfull page were merged into Template:Old DRV. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
 | On 4 April 2022, it was proposed that this page be moved from Template:Olddelrev to Template:Old DRV. The result of the discussion was moved. |
Requested move 4 April 2022
edit- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: moved. Per {{u|Trialpears}}'s note below, given that no one has objected in more than three weeks, I will not wait to move this to a more consistent and clearer name. (non-admin closure) Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 15:38, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
Template:Olddelrev → Template:Old DRV – The new title is more clear on what the template is for, and is consistent with other templates such as {{Old XfD multi}}. 🐶 EpicPupper (he/him | talk) 21:46, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
- Please see the note I left at Template talk:Delrev#Requested move 4 April 2022. Thanks! —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • C • L) 16:39, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
- Based on this search, there's one script that uses this template and that is twinkle where it prevents users from placing a prod if it's present. If this is moved before that line is updated you will be able to use twinkle to place a prod on about 100 pages that use this template through redirects. I can write a patch for twinkle, but see no reason to wait until the next release before moving as this is a very minor thing. There could possibly be bots that use this template, but that isn't possible to check in a reasonable way and then they would most likely not that on the page using {{bot use warning}}.
- Also worth noting that I support this proposal. --Trialpears (talk) 13:46, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Courtesy pinging Trialpears since I goofed the first time. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 15:48, 25 April 2022 (UTC)