Template talk:Db-meta

Text for administrators

Hi!

Could someone use class="sysop-show" in an element containing all admin-specific messages? (For more info, see MediaWiki_talk:Common.css#Non-inline_sysop-show). Helder 13:02, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Like this? Anomie⚔ 13:47, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Yep! I think that is it. Helder 14:36, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Done Anomie⚔ 18:00, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

I find the removal of "last edited by Example" for non-admins very inconvenient, as I use it constantly to see if SDPatrolBot readded a tag, or whether the page creator is still working on the page or not. Could someone move the ending < /span> from the end to right before This page was last edited...? →Στc. 08:58, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Done Anomie⚔ 11:39, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Contradiction/ambiguity with {{Db-t3}} criteria

The {{Db-t3}} template is written "[...]any useful fashion, and which satisfies one of the following conditions: It is a substantial duplication[...], or It is a hardcoded instance[...]" (italics added). However, the CSD criteria states "Templates that are not employed in any useful fashion, i.e., orphaned, deprecated, substantial duplications of another template, or hardcoded instances" (italics added). The current template increases the threshold for speedy deletion by stating that substantial duplication and/or being a hardcoded instance is also necessary for speedy deletion. To use a test case, an orphaned template that does not have substantial duplication to and is not a hardcoded instance of another template can be deleted speedily according to the CSD criteria. However, the same orphaned template can't be deleted speedily according to the template because it neither has substantial duplication, nor is it a hardcoded instance.

I believe the template should be rewritten thus:

This template may meet Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion as a template that is not being employed in any useful fashion, and which satisfies one of the following conditions:

• It is orphaned, or
• It is deprecated, or
• It is a substantial duplication of the template {{[[Template:|]]}}, or
• It is a hardcoded instance of template {{[[Template:|]]}}, where the same functionality could be provided by that other template.

–Temporal User (Talk) 12:05, 3 December 2011 (UTC) (Edited: 10:41, 7 December 2011 (UTC))

Not categorising transclusions

The {{db-t3}} template currently has 15 transclusions in Template space, but those pages are not appearing in any of the CSD categories. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:15, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

I've tracked it down to |page=Foo which has the HTML comment "CIRCUMVENT BLACKLIST" after it. Not sure why that is necessary but it wasn't a problem until an editor stopped categorising in non-template space. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:31, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

I have applied a temporary fix, and will now contact Happy-melon who added the page=Foo to see if this is necessary. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:36, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry, it was so long ago; I have no idea why that code was employed (or even what the relevant templates looked like at the time). Happy‑melon 08:22, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Okay, well I have removed it for now. If there was a reason for it, it should become apparent soon. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:46, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

It looks like the code was to avoid Template:Category handler/blacklist preventing the CSD category from being added. Anomie⚔ 00:51, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Editprotected for {{db-g4}}

Please replace the following code (at the beginning of a line)

<small>''See this page's {{#if:{{{1|}}}|[[{{{1}}}|AfD]]|

with the code

<small>''See this page's {{#if:{{{1|}}}|[[{{{1}}}|deletion discussion]]|

, since it does not have to exclusively be an AfD that is linked to (could be an RfD log page, etc.) — This, that, and the other (talk) 00:48, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Done Anomie⚔ 04:01, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Time last edited (db-meta)

Frequently I come across speedy deletions with the message "This page was last edited by ... 1 second ago" (or occasionally even "... in 1 seconds time"), i.e. the page hasn't been purged since it was tagged. Yes, it's easy to click the time to purge it, but with a slow connection it does take a few moments. I propose this is changed to (e.g.) "This page was last edited by ... at 07:59 UTC (xx minutes ago)", with the purge link still retained. Purging the page will update the "xx minutes ago", but the time of last editing will be unaltered. If there's consensus for this change, I'm happy to try to work out the necessary code. Any thoughts?  An optimist on the run! 08:03, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Cross-posting to WP:VPR to get better response.  An optimist on the run! 09:42, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

No opposition here or VPR, so I've made the change.  An optimist on the run! 07:56, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Recent change causing problems for anons

As per Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Forced to enter a captcha each time I tag something for speedy deletion, This recent change to this template appears to have had the side effect of requiring anonymous editors to enter a CAPTCHA when tagging an article with a speedy deletion template. Is there some means of changing the added external link so that this side effect no longer occurs? --Allen3 ^talk 23:46, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

You should contact a sysadmin (Brion VIBBER perhaps) to add an inter-wiki link so that "[http://www.bing.com/search?q={{urlencode:{{PAGENAME}}}} web]" can be replaced with "[[bingsearch:{{urlencode:{{PAGENAME}}}}|web]]" or something simular. – Allen4names 00:05, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

As a temporary measure, I've reverted the addition of the Bing link. It can be restored when the sysadmin change described above takes place.  An optimist on the run! 09:54, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

You don't need a sysadmin, just a Meta administrator, who would edit the interwiki map. Graham87 10:38, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

A request had been added to add entries for both Bing and Yahoo! (no sense leaving out another large and well-known search engine while we are going through the process). --Allen3 ^talk 11:13, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you guys for dealing with this issue. 69.59.200.77 (talk) 00:33, 25 January 2012 (UTC)