Template talk:BOTREQ

This page is the within the scope of WikiProject Edit requests, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's edit request process and reduce the number of edit requests in the edit request queue.Edit requestsWikipedia:WikiProject Edit requestsTemplate:WikiProject Edit requestsEdit requests articles

comments by 75.208.255.0[edit]

I've deleted BOTREQ from Category:Image with comment templates. 75.208.255.0 (talk) 21:34, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

notdone?[edit]

N Not done "Request not completed."

Under what circumstances would this be used? Surely in most if not all cases, one of the statuses that is more specific should be used instead. — Smjg (talk) 20:16, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Probably when a request wasn't done for some more specific status doesn't exist. For example, there's currently no status for "consensus is that this should not actually be done". Anomie ⚔ 21:38, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Substitution[edit]

The TFD was closed as no consensus Primefac (talk) 01:07, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion 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.

Canned-response templates are generally substituted, with the exception of templates for venues that don't have a permanent archive (RfPP, AIV). WP:BOTREQ is archived, so its template should be substituted for consistency reasons. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 03:37, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Make subst-only per nom --DannyS712 (talk) 03:41, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've advertised this at Wikipedia:Bots/Noticeboard and Wikipedia talk:Bot requests. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 03:42, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

We don't typically make templates with files in them subst-only. --Izno (talk) 04:02, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Izno: Yes we do: Template:HD's subtemplates, and Template:ESp and its ilk are all subst-only despite containing files. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 04:03, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

<moved from TfD> {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 00:42, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a specific problem that would be fixed by making this subst only? It seems like a net-negative IMO. Legoktm (talk) 20:03, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Seems in line with all the other reply and message templates to keep archive history consistent. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 20:58, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Listed at TfD. * Pppery * _survives 00:37, 26 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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.