Template talk:Always substitute

Icon

The templates {{May be substituted}} and {{Never substitute}} now use and as icons. Likewise, this template can switch to , like {{Formula semper substituenda}} does on Latin Wikipedia. --Grufo (talk) 22:44, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

I am not inclined to do so; those images are almost impossible to read and I have undone them. Please gain consensus to use these new images. Primefac (talk) 14:15, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

I don't know if that counts, but at least @TheGoodAndHolyLord: had thanked me for this edit. Hoping to bring improvements, now I have also slightly edited the three images on Wikimedia Commons. --Grufo (talk) 14:13, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

Request: More alerting?

Hello,

I hope the template editors watching this talk page don’t mind my request that this template be made more alerting. Perhaps the colors brighter like red?

The reason being that new editors wishing to use templates that require substituting may not pick up on the notice or disregard it — as I did many time and am only just realizing the importance of substitution.

I, myself, am still a very new editor on Wikipedia and I figured I would share insight on that. It took me a while to realize and I would’ve definitely noticed a lot sooner if the notice had been bolder/louder.

I have an example on a WikiLove template that I made here!

Respectfully,
4theloveofallthings (talk) 05:34, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

For anyone interested in something like I described, I have created a bolder/absolutely impossible to miss alternative/compliment to this template: Template:Substitute alert

4theloveofallthings (talk) 13:34, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Not too many page watchers, might want to cross-post to WT:WPT. If your suggestion is to replace this template with your new one, I am a firm no. Primefac (talk) 13:56, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

My next mission is to make a notice warning of unsolicited votes as if I had asked. I clearly stated that I am not a template editor but something more noticeable would prevent a lot of confusion amongst new editors. A lot of times, I find the seniority on Wikipedia to be very frat-like and probably a solid contributor to the dying interest amongst new editors.

Seeing Wikipedia borderline beg for donations (I do, of course) breaks my heart, but there’s absolutely no consideration for editors trying to understand the format and the rules.

I have got a lot of it covered, but I found the concept/requirement for substitution very under-discussed and on the pages for templates requiring it any new editor is absolutely going to miss this fantastically plain and unextraordinary template. When the entire functionality of the template relies on it, you’d think the insight from someone who literally went months having no idea why my templates were switching the username to the pages latest editor rather than remaining the editor who posted the template. I searched all over and I was having an extremely hard time finding the answer, and I have been coding for a decent amount of time.. and the source code of Wikipedia is relatively straight-forward.. but when it comes to templates.. it’s like nobody cares to even explain or try to resolve the matter.

If you need evidence of that, look no further than your own response to me simply making a suggestion.

No, my template is extreme for a reason. I was hoping someone could find middle ground. Thank you for your input, Primefac. You really saved the day. 4theloveofallthings (talk) 15:09, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Apologies. That was a bit uncalled for. I have just been very frustrated by the community on here. It’s crazy to me that nobody really cares to help. 4theloveofallthings (talk) 15:29, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Please slow your roll. I appreciate your energy and enthusiasm, but it is often best to find out how and why things are done a certain way before jumping in with both feet and trying to shake up the system. The templates that you have created thus far are visually obnoxious and not in keeping with the encyclopedic style that has been developed over a couple of decades here. I have tidied up a bunch of syntax errors in your new templates and documentation. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:47, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

I am absolutely willing to have a conversation about substitution and how to make it more obvious to new editors that substitution is often required. Personally I have the opinion that if {{subst only}} is used, it should always have |auto=yes enabled - in other words, if the template should always be substituted, then we should have a bot do so if the user does not. For one reason or another I cannot ever get consensus to implement this. Maybe I'll try again now that you've brought this issue up.

For the record, my initial reply was intended to increase participation in your initial discussion. My second sentence was simply to indicate that I did not think your proposed solution was tenable. Primefac (talk) 07:14, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Primefac, Thank you for replying so level-headed to my absolutely nasty reply. It’s telling of your character and I admire that.

I apologize. Thank you for considering my voice. 4theloveofallthings (talk) 13:31, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

Sure. That's fine. I don't think it'd be bad. SWinxy (talk) 19:14, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

yesnomaybe=never should not place templates in Category:Wikipedia substituted templates

Courtesy ping to Harryboyles from Template_talk:WikiProject_Politics#Why is this template in Category:Wikipedia substituted templates?.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  13:59, 18 February 2024 (UTC)