Template talk:Db-meta

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Template talk:Db-event)
Jump to: navigation, search

Do we need db-p1?[edit]

Moved to Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion#Do we need db-p1?

Bug in db-move?[edit]

I used {{db-move}} at the top of Miguel A. Catalán:

{{db-move|Miguel Ángel Catalán|Article misnamed ''and'' more commonly known with middle initial only; see note left for me at [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Largoplazo&oldid=590791730#Miguel_.C3.81ngel_Catal.C3.A1n] and note the change made to the person's full name at the beginning of the article}}

The template correctly displayed the name of the article to be moved after the deletion, but instead of displaying the reason for the request, the template displayed "Error: reason for move missing". After I put an explicit "2=" in front of the reason, it worked. Why was it broken without the "2="? —Largo Plazo (talk) 10:19, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Because of the = in the URL, it thought the parameter name you was specifying was "Article misnamed and more commonly known with middle initial only; see note left for me at [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title".--Launchballer 10:39, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
Oh, I should have noticed that! Thanks. —Largo Plazo (talk) 12:01, 15 January 2014 (UTC)


Is there any way to change this template so that it accepts the tag reason= as well as rationale=? It's not logical to me why only "rationale" is accepted. Thanks! Red Slash 18:09, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

  • This is a meta template that should only be used by other templates and not used directly. I don't see the benefit of adding another redundant parameter. Please explain the use case. Technical 13 (talk) 19:11, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Since all the talk pages for the db- templates redirect here, it's very possible that Red Slash actually was referring to a directly-used-on-pages template rather than this meta template. Is that the case? Happymelon 23:00, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Yes indeed I was (I was thinking about g6, for what it's worth). The use case is just that the word "rationale" is unnatural when the word "reason" exists. Is it technically difficult to have two different prompts for the same function? Red Slash 02:29, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
  • {{Db-g6}} already supports |rationale= and |wording= - you want |reason= added to that as well? Three different names for the same parameter seems a bit much to me, but I suppose. Done Technical 13 (talk) 03:54, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
  • You are the best. Red Slash 01:10, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Could {{db-u1}} and friends warn when used outside userspace?[edit]

I noticed when I was looking at {{db-u1}} that it seems not to have noticed that, being in the Template: namespace, not User:, it certainly doesn't qualify under CSD Uanything. It Would Be Nice™ if {{db-u1}}, {{db-u2}}, and {{db-u3}} would emit some sort of warning when used in the wrong namespace. —SamB (talk) 22:30, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

What about cases where User:A makes a template at User:A/template and then decides to move it to Template:User:A but realizes that is inappropriate and doesn't want the stupid thing anyways. So they navigate to User:A/template where they originally created to place {{Db-u1}} there and get the entire history deleted because they don't understand how namespaces work. They don't realize that they have been redirected and are placing it in the wrong namespace. Now, User:A is the only one who has ever touched this template and created it in their userspace, so why is U1 inappropriate? Technical 13 (talk) 22:55, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
WP:U1 is inappropriate because it is defined as applying only to user pages. Once it is moved, it stops being a user page. Full stop. WP:G7 (or even WP:G6) would fit in this somewhat improbable situation. Keφr 22:50, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
I suppose, although I don't know an admin that would refuse to delete in this situation. I'll add it in the next few days if no-one beats me to it. — {{U|Technical 13}} (tec) 23:18, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
The same problem exists with other namespace-restricted templates. Tag an article with {{db-f1}}, for example. The template doesn't complain. The only odd thing is the wording: "This article may meet Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion as an unused image [...]". --Stefan2 (talk) 21:32, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

File:Bukit Panjang Plaza.png[edit]

Perhaps someone could explain this? The file is tagged with {{db-delete}}, but for some reason the file isn't categorised in Category:Candidates for speedy deletion. Something seems wrong with the template code here. If people can tag pages with speedy deletion templates without the pages showing up in the speedy deletion category, this could potentially mean that lots of problematic files remain undiscovered by admins who evaluate CSD tags. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:28, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

template:db-delete is a redirect to {{db-meta}}, and since the latter is only intended for use within templates like {{db-g1}}, it follows that " Do not attempt to use this template directly on articles. For a generic speedy deletion template, see {{db}}" also applies to {{db-delete}} --Redrose64 (talk) 22:41, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
I think that it would be a good idea to categorise pages in Category:Candidates for speedy deletion even if {{db-meta}} is misused. Otherwise, speedy deletion candidates risk remaining unverified forever because someone doesn't understand how to use the template. --Stefan2 (talk) 23:00, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
That would put all of these pages into the category. Not all of them are misuses of {{db-meta}}; for example, there is a legitimate transclusion in Template:Db-f2, and that template must not be speedy-deleted. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:11, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for noticing. Perhaps we need to go through Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:db-meta every couple of weeks to make sure we evaluate the mistagged pages. I'll go and check all uses of {{db-delete}} now. —Kusma (t·c) 14:00, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
I have taken care of all pages using {{db-delete}} and deleted that template redirect, as it is confusing that it is not a template to be used for deletion nominations. Better for it not to exist so people look up the correct templates. —Kusma (t·c) 14:10, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 16 April 2014[edit] (talk) 09:20, 16 April 2014 (UTC) The article A Way to Explore the Soul by Scientific Experimentation, by Ram Naresh Singh is a scholarly article dealing with the concepts of soul in various philosophies. In addition, it looks in to the properties of soul and proposes a model for soul which could be tested by designing a suitable experiment in future. Kindly restore the article on the Wikipedia site. Thanking you, Yours sincerely, Ram Naresh Singh, M.Sc., Ph.D., Retired Professor e.mail; nareshkusum@yahoo.com

Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: this is the talk page for discussing improvements to the template {{Db-meta}}. Please make your request at the talk page for the article concerned. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 09:45, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
Also, if you would like to restore a deleted article, first please ask the administrator that deleted it if they would be willing to consider. If that does not work, you can try asking at deletion review. However, please bear in mind that articles that do not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines are routinely deleted. See here for a quick explanation of the notability guidelines. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 09:48, 16 April 2014 (UTC)