Template talk:Pipe

About this template

This template is used to insert the character | with its easier-to-remember PostScript name Pipe instead of its difficult-to-remember Unicode number. In case the character can be inserted without using the Unicode number or PostScript name, the template is used to insert the character when it conflicts with the mark-up language of the wiki.

This template can be used for inserting an International Phonetic Alphabet symbol, or a non-IPA symbol in an allophonic rule.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 2004-12-29T22:45Z (talk • contribs) 20:41, 25 July 2005

Not working in my browsers

Is there any specific reason why this template is using the ǀ "ǀ", instead of the more compatible | "|" ? I tried in all three of my browsers (Firefox 2, IE 5.5 and Opera 9), and none of them can render the ǀ. Well, Opera renders a very fat pipe instead, but that is what it renders for any character that it doesn't know how to render. (And yes, I use a fairly old Windows, but there are many users out there with old computers.)

--David Göthberg (talk) 09:52, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

I have changed it to use the more compatible |.

--David Göthberg (talk) 06:38, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

{{!}} and {{pipe}} is/was not the same thing

SMcCandlish: You redirected this {{pipe}} template to {{!}} with the edit comment: "Duplicate functionality, and this version has had too many problems reported, also deprecated in the "See also"s of some other templates."

It was not duplicate functionality. {{pipe}} supplied a pipe character that did not interfere with MediaWiki template syntax. Thus now that you changed it to redirect to {{!}} you broke the old usage of {{pipe}}. However as you also kind of pointed out the naming is probably confusing and causes mix-ups with {{!}}, so it might be better to get rid of this template's old functionality. (There are better separators than pipes that people can use.)

So I suggest either you revert yourself so this template gets its old functionality. Or you should fix the remaining cases that used {{pipe}}, since they are now broken. (And don't forget to do something about the usage instructions at Wikipedia:WikiProject Xbox#Note.) I'll leave it to you to decide which way to fix this.

--David Göthberg (talk) 12:46, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank goodness for WP:BRD! I'm self-rv'ing right now. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 12:57, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Haha. But as I stated above, we perhaps should fix the remaining cases and then redirect this template to {{!}} since this template probably mostly causes confusion.

And then we can instead add some documentation over at {{!}} telling how to do when one wants an actual "|" that does not interfere with template code. That is, to use the code "|". Oh, I just checked, we already have that explanation over at {{!}}. Good.

--David Göthberg (talk) 13:12, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

I'll defer to you on this; you seem to have a much clearer idea what the exception cases are. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 00:10, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I have put it on my to-do list. The "what links here" for this template shows that it is only a handful of cases.

--David Göthberg (talk) 12:20, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

I just remembered why there are no redirects at all to {{!}}. Since the {{!}} is used in so many places it would cost a lot of server load if people instead started using a redirect to it. Because of that reason all redirects to {{!}} was deleted long ago. Thus I strongly advice against redirecting {{pipe}} to it. And before anyone says "we should not worry about performance": Well, when a template is used on 3 million pages, then we do need to worry about performance. It is the most transcluded template on Wikipedia.

--David Göthberg (talk) 07:21, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Requested move

This section was moved here from Wikipedia:Requested moves#Incomplete and contested proposals.

• Template:! → Template:Pipe — The name of the template is "Pipe". The exclamation mark that is used in the current template name suggests that it has something do with easily inserting an exclamation mark in a page. The only reason why the template name uses an exclamation mark is due to a software limitation of the wiki as a template using the pipe character in the title (or Template:|) isn't allowed. As such, Template:! should just be a shortcut to Template:Pipe. — Lightsup55 ( T | C ) 19:04, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment it could mean pipe... if you think bangpaths. 70.55.203.112 (talk) 04:43, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose - Lightsup55 and the other editors involved in this have not understood that these are two different templates with very different functionality. They can not be merged straight off, since that will break templates that use them. {{!}} is used on more than 3 million pages, so please don't damage that template. {{pipe}} is only used in a handful of templates, but if/when it should be redirected to {{!}} those templates first have to be edited so they don't break. --David Göthberg (talk) 05:49, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose: David is correct (as I learned the hard way when I tried to merge them without investigating the matter first!). — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 09:10, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

End of section that was moved here from Wikipedia:Requested moves#Incomplete and contested proposals.

See previous section for explanation why {{pipe}} should not be redirected to {{!}}.

--David Göthberg (talk) 01:00, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 6 December 2016

Please add {{subst:tfm|!|type=tiny}} to the top of this template as it has been nominated for merging Pppery 00:07, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Partly done: This would potentially have a drastic impact on articles that it is used on. I feel it would be less disruptive to noinclude the notice in this instance — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:42, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Dental click?

Please do not use the Unicode ǀ (which produces ǀ) since that does not work in all web browsers. It is also slightly smaller than |.
— Template:Pipe/doc

That's the Unicode character for a dental click. Even if it worked in all web browsers, it should never be used as a pipe – its semantics are completely different. Why is it even mentioned here? I don't see how it's relevant to the template. jlwoodwa (talk) 17:43, 20 August 2024 (UTC)