Template talk:Ln

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

Comparison[edit]

See the Lcs, Lps, Lts, and Tlx talk pages for a comparison of the output of some similar templates. -- Omniplex 19:59, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Monospaced[edit]

New trick, using monospaced <tt>(</tt> etc. results in better readable output for "(", "|", ")" adjacent to links. -- Omniplex 18:22, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

No &middot; magic in {{Lx}} please, it's converted to UTF-8 by the server not working on old browsers, see Doctl. And the example here should reflect what Lx actually does. -- Omniplex 18:44, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Fields[edit]

At the moment {{lx}} offers edit, talk, links, history, and watch. I never needed watch, maybe because I've "add to watchlist" in my preferences. Do you use this link in practice? Otherwise I'd like to replace watch by log, something like this:
[{{fullurl:Special:Log|page={{FULLPAGENAMEE}}}} log]
Here's a test log link for Template:! (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs), what do you think? -- Omniplex 15:36, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

I use watch from time to time, but also want log (the reason I just came here), so I'm trying to add it now.
--William Allen Simpson 21:22, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Great, AzaToth replaced "watch" by "logs", much more interesting. -- Omniplex 06:23, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

fullurl[edit]

Locke saw a problem with it, fullurl doesn't work with e.g. spaces in the query string, in the log-case page=what ever fails. -- Omniplex 02:36, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Heck, I saw a problem with it, and tried various remedies.
--William Allen Simpson 11:02, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
Aye, this is also a problem with {{sockpuppet}} I believe (and {{vandal}}). Both of those, IIRC, take a second parameter (the underscored name); one is used for purely cosmetic purposes, the other used to make the log link. So, for example:
{{vandal|Locke Cole|Locke_Cole}}
Which generates:
Locke Cole (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
If you omit the optional second parameter, however, you end up with this:
Locke Cole (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
William made a post to Wikitech-l asking about this (to which I've replied), see here. We could kludge up {{lx}} as was done with the vandal and sockpuppet templates, but I believe we should push for magic words to URL encode/decode strings. It would be cleaner/simpler in the long run. —Locke Coletc 03:05, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
Follow-up, I've entered a bug at bugzilla:5720. I'm starting to think it might be better if this were "fixed" by URL encoding the each parameter rather than introducing more magic words. —Locke Coletc 03:25, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

{{localurl: almost does what's needed, six characters "/wiki/" too much (and yes, I tested all simple tricks with dots to get rid of it, but that failed as it should - potential security hole). Query strings in URLs are almost free form, anything goes, "=" and "&" are implementaton details, no standard. But "#", space, control, ">", and a few others can be never part of a query string, that's RFC 3986 / STD 66. If fullurl "sees" a space it cannot accept it. -- Omniplex 22:51, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

I haven't tested localurl, but it should operate the same as fullurl. The entire content of the fullurl is the query part, and it handles spaces appropriately to the left of the first pipe, and then continues processing until the closing braces, but doesn't translate the spaces to underscores. This is a a bug, and further discussion on fixing it should continue at bugzilla:5720, with more detailed descriptive discussion on the mailing list.
--William Allen Simpson 10:57, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
Just a note, there is now a {{urlencode:}} magic word. {{urlencode:blah blah + % blah}} produces: blah+blah+%2B+%25+blah (and for direct page links, wikicode treats + the same as _. --> edit this page ) --Splarka (rant) 09:13, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Limit[edit]

Is there a reason the limit is set to 999, can it be set higher? - LA @ 20:09, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Justifying my edit[edit]

I say a what links here was between the talk and the history page. This was very disorienting compared to the standard format so I moved it and it looks like I got the code right. Now links is after history. I don't know how touchy people are with this template since it is on all the Afds now (and I think this is a very useful thing), but I think my change improved it. Anomo 02:19, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Any opposition to my/someone adding a "Delete" link to this or the "la" template?[edit]

Now that it is being used in AfDs it would help closing admins as they could delete clear consensus articles directly from the page. Thoughts?  Glen  11:35, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

It would be fine, but it should be the very last link (rightmost) since most people are not admins and it would get in the way if it was before links that non admins could use. Anomo 22:11, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
There shouldn't be a delete button on it. Even if the discussion is unanimous, the minimum thing the admin should check is if the AfD tag is up on the article. But I propose switching edit and discuss buttons so that they match the order of the tags on top of each page. ~ trialsanderrors 00:11, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
Although {{Newdelrev}} now uses a separate parenthesis for Special:Undelete. I wonder if we can integrate this here with an #ifexist statement. ~ trialsanderrors 07:38, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

class=lx[edit]

I added "class=lx" to Template:lx for use in scripts. I realize this isn't currently defined in the stylesheet, but it allows a lot of script functionality. Any objections? Quarl (talk) 2007-01-01 22:09Z

No objection, thought you only had made a tyop, thou I wonder what scripts would need/use it. AzaToth 22:48, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. (One script that uses it is xfdclose.js which adds a bunch of buttons for closing AFDs.) Quarl (talk) 2007-01-01 23:00Z

Template:Search[edit]

Since most AfDs are about whether there is enough WP:RS material, I think we should add the search template (wp gwp g bwp b | eb 1911 co gct sw) as part of Template:Ln or revise Template:Ln to include search strings. I added the search template to Michael Bilsborough AfD to give an example of what a revised Template:Ln may look like. We also could revise the search string to look in more or different places. -- Jreferee (Talk) 16:00, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

The Ln-templates are used much more than just for afd:s, so it would be a not so good idea. Perhaps better then to adapt {{afd2}} with {{search}}AzaToth 16:10, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. I'll post my idea over at afd2. Jreferee (Talk) 19:54, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Edit protection request[edit]

{{editprotected}} Please update {{/doc}} with {{documentation}}. Per Wikipedia:Template documentation/List Thankyou.-- αŁʰƏЩ @ 05:51, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't see a /doc to replace, here. :) – Luna Santin (talk) 08:39, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
This template wasn't actually protected :D! But I've moved the documentation above to a /doc subpage and used {{documentation}}. Happymelon 10:24, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
YesY Done. Matthewedwards didn't notice that the talk page was redirected, he meant {{Lx}}. --David Göthberg (talk) 20:15, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

{{editprotected}}

Please add <noinclude>{{template doc}}</noinclude> to {{La}}. Thanks. Smith609 Talk 13:39, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Done Happymelon 14:37, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

redirect=no[edit]

Could this function be added as a switch or default behaviour (for article and talk page)? __meco (talk) 14:04, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

I agree that this should be the default behaviour. I may go about doing this when I find the time, if nobody has objected by then. BigNate37(T) 15:35, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

{{edit protected}}

Okay, nobody has objected to this change. I have made appropriate changes in sandbox versions of the templates involved, and I have tested them at Template:Lx/testcases. This diff has the necessary changes to Template:Lx. After (and only after) that change is made, these two changes will remove the superfluous colon that appears as a result of new lx. I can fix Template:Ln myself, but Template:Lf is fully protected too, so that one needs to be done as well. Once the responding admin is confident that my changes are correct, here's a simpler rundown of what I want changed:

  1. At Template:Lx, replace [[{{{1}}}{{{2}}}]] with [{{fullurl:{{{1}}}{{{2}}}|redirect=no}} {{{1}}}{{{2}}}]
  2. Then and only then,
    • At Template:Lf, remove the first colon only from 1=:File:
    • At Template:Ln, remove the first colon only from 1=:{{ucfirst:{{{1}}}}}:

Once that is done, you can purge and view the Ln page to ensure the example usages aren't broken. I will also update the documentation to note that these templates may now be used for redirects. BigNate37(T) 03:19, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

All done. The next time I have a template issue, I know who I'm calling on for a fix.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:41, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
Thank you. Don't be so hasty putting me on speed dial though, I have erred. While I set about fixing Template:Pagelinks' extraneous colon problem (it's only semi-protected), can you perform another fix for me please: BigNate37(T) 03:51, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

{{edit protected}}

  • At Template:Lc, remove the first colon only from 1=:Category: and that should be the end of it. BigNate37(T) 04:29, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
Done. I just got back.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:39, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
Excellent, thank you again! BigNate37(T) 04:43, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
My pleasure.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:46, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

I do not feel that redirect=no, as well as the use of {{fullurl}}s for all links, is an improvement. Customization of classes such as a.mw-redirect, and even a finer link sorting is not uncommon, but externally-formatted links disrupt the function of this. I found very handy that appearance of any redirect in my Web interface is distinct from regular pages. Certainly, redirecting on attempt to get the main page link may be quite disturbing, but it is not a major problem because "edit" and "history" links are in place. To warn readers about the redirect is not a difficult task.
Generally, such change in the {{lx}} template used by several other templates, based on a discussion in a talk page of one of these templates, was not a good idea. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 07:42, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

This is the only talk page for the Ln family of templates. The rest redirect here. BigNate37(T) 16:13, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
The usage you describe for modifying link CSS is of most use when viewing the links within an article. When a link is listed via the pagelinks templates, it is the subject of discussion and the value of immediately seeing its status is lessened. All participants in a discussion about a linked page are going to be acutely aware of what is being discussed, so formatting hits are not essential, they merely tip you off moments before everyone else. You are talking about retaining a special-case convenience of marginal value that few editors use to the exclusion of giving a minor convenience (on the order of preventing three extra clicks) to everyone, and I'm not personally convinced that is worth it. Clicking the history or edit links is more hassle than one wrongly coloured link, as the MediaWiki defect that prevents the article tab (when on edit or history view) from including &redirect=no is four years old and counting.
In the time I had to think on your sentiments between last night and now, though, I think there is a solution that could satisfy us both. By adding some extra functionality in {{lx}}, I could create {{lr}} and have it work like for {{pagelinks}} but for redirects, and then we can remove the &redirect=no as the default. BigNate37(T) 16:13, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Documentation transclusion?[edit]

Not exactly sure how it works, but when I go to Template:la, there is no documentation. I think it's trying to transclude from Template:La/doc, but there's nothing in that. It would be nice if there was some documentation on Template:la on how to use {{la}}, like there are here on Template:ln.

If you're wondering why I'm posting this here and not on Template talk:la, it's because that redirects here. -kotra (talk) 03:29, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Fixed. For others who are passing by, let me save you the page view: this has been fixed (for a while now). BigNate37(T) 16:15, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Edit to Template:Lf[edit]

{{editprotected}}

I figured that since the Image: namespace is now File:, this edit to Template:Lf should be done.

On Template:Lf, change:

  • {{lx|1=:Image:|2={{ucfirst:{{{1}}}}}|3=Image talk|4=talk}}<noinclude>[[Category:Internal link templates|Li]]</noinclude>
  • to
  • {{lx|1=:File:|2={{ucfirst:{{{1}}}}}|3=File talk|4=talk}}<noinclude>[[Category:Internal link templates|Lf]]</noinclude>

--Lightsup55 ( T | C ) 19:51, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

This template is not protected. Hersfold (t/a/c) 05:21, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
Template:Ln is NOT protected (as you stated), however, Template:Lf IS protected. I have made the request using {{editprotected}} here with specific instructions to edit Template:Lf because Template talk:Lf redirects to Template talk:Ln.

I even made a change to Template:Editprotected so that when an edit protected request is not directly used on the talk page where the edit is being requested due to the talk page being redirected (i.e. an edit request to Template:Uw-vandalism1 should be done on Template talk:Uw-vandalism1, however, that talk page redirects to Wikipedia talk:Template messages/User talk namespace). --Lightsup55 ( T | C ) 06:56, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
Done The edit to {{lf}} has been made.--Aervanath (talk) 17:49, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Simplification[edit]

Now that the magic word NAMESPACE takes a parameter, a lot of these templates could probably be simplified, no? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:33, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Error for article titles containing =[edit]

Although I realize this arises quite rarely, the current template doesn't appear to work for articles containing a "=" sign, such as P = NP problem. Dcoetzee 09:28, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Works if used like this: {{la|1=P = NP problem}}: P = NP problem (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). GregorB (talk) 14:47, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Or like this: {{la|P {{eq}} NP problem}}: P = NP problem (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). GregorB (talk) 14:49, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

FYI, stats[edit]

FYI, {{stats.grok.se}} has recently been fixed, and it should now be able to provide usage statistics from stats.grok.se for any Wikipedia article. This may be a useful tool to include in future link lists such as {{ln}}. --Zach425 talk/contribs 05:08, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Invalid HTML id[edit]

{{editprotected}} <span id="{{{1}}}"></span> in {{la}} produces invalid HTML if there any character other than [0-9A-Za-z:.], it should be <span id="{{anchorencode:{{{1}}}}}"></span>. — Dispenser 18:24, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:24, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

condensed version[edit]

{{editprotected}} How about a parameter to make all the link titles condensed like this: (e|t|h|l|w|o)?

I think it is better to do that in a separate template, and even then, i'm not sure it is a good idea. It might make it considerably harder to read for people who are not native English readers. —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 10:27, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Could use icons then instead but, considering this is the English language Wikipedia, I don't see that much of a big deal abbreviating English words... —Eekerz (t) 03:06, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Confusion in talk field[edit]

At WP:Help Desk at the moment, there is an entry {{la|User:Sbarie/LogicMonitor}} , but it is being displayed as:

User:Sbarie/LogicMonitor (edit|[[Talk:User:Sbarie/LogicMonitor|talk]]|history|links|watch|logs)

User:Sbarie/LogicMonitor (edit | [[Talk:User:Sbarie/LogicMonitor|talk]] | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

In other words, although the other links are apparently working correctly, the talk page is not being properly linked. Presumably this is because it should be [[User talk:Sbarie/LogicMonitor|talk]] (to give talk) instead of [[Talk:User:Sbarie/LogicMonitor|talk]]? - David Biddulph (talk) 17:43, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Looking at the documentation, should they have used lu instead of la ? {{lu|Sbarie/LogicMonitor}} gives User:Sbarie/LogicMonitor (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) ? - David Biddulph (talk) 17:56, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from LikeLakers2, 18 October 2011 (This is for Template:Lx, not Template:Ln!)[edit]

Add this code at the beginning on Template:Lx (not Template:Ln!) for the anchoring on WP:RFPP:

Code now on Template:Lx/sandbox

That would just make it much easier to get to a section on RFPP from a edit summary link. Feel free to shorten it, as the multiline switch usage is just what I generally use, as it looks much cleaner. LikeLakers2 (talk | Sign my guestbook!) 18:52, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Readded after I removed this request because I realised that the problem I was having was that it was not adding the span tags for the anchor at all, due to the ifeq code I added for this to work only on WP:RFPP. The code intentionally works only on WP:RFPP, as it is the only place where you would see the l* family of templates used a lot. LikeLakers2 (talk | Sign my guestbook!) 19:10, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Note to admins: I have indeed tested this with the ====L4 Heading==== format used on RFPP, and it indeed does work, as shown here. However, make sure the end line of my code and the start of the span tag used for the plainlinks does NOT have even a single line break between them, as it will bork the code and cause the header to not work properly, as shown here.
The template has over 200,000 transclusions, (the majority of which are from Template:la) so if you are not sure about this, but are still willing to add it, please make sure you test the scenario before adding it, so as to try to avoid breaking any of the 200,000 transclusions. LikeLakers2 (talk | Sign my guestbook!) 19:23, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Please make your proposed changes to Template:Lx/sandbox, as I am still trying to work out what you are trying to do here. Thanks — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:46, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Done. I've made a test one for you. I had to use the .7B .7C and .7D characters in the link for it to work, because otherwise it would have transcluded the template. Try it now. LikeLakers2 (talk | Sign my guestbook!) 20:30, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
<LikeLakers2-1> Fluffernutter: How much you wanna bet that the template edit to Template:Lx will cause some downtime?
Just thought I'd share that. LikeLakers2 (talk | Sign my guestbook!) 20:37, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Also, if you need me to make a few more tests for you, let me know. LikeLakers2 (talk | Sign my guestbook!) 20:38, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
I keep forgetting about the ifeq parser. D: LikeLakers2 (talk | Sign my guestbook!) 20:44, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Okay I have looked at your code and scratched my head a bit, and have these comments:
  • I understand that this change is for the benefit of WP:RFPP. In general I do not think it is a good idea to change a meta-template just for the benefit of one page. It may be that this behaviour is undesirable on other uses; or we may be adding a lot of complicated code which will not be of benefit to most uses.
  • You seem to have thought up and ingenious solution to make anchors work on WP:RFPP (and well done), but I suspect there is a much easier and simpler way to do this, for example by changing WP:RFPP rather than this template.
As there are some things to think about and discuss here I have disabled the request for now. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:37, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Posted my suggestion at Wikipedia talk:Requests for page protection#Section links in edit summaries. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:46, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Stub status of templates?[edit]

Something has gone wrong since yesterday afternoon, in that a bunch of templates such as {{Ln}} are now appearing in Category:Stubs for the first time. Could someone sort it out? I'm mystified - the templates haven't been edited recently so it must be something complicated going on here! PamD 07:00, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Fixed. Those colons were all removed when Template:Lx was changed here. That one didn't go back in when the Lx change was reverted, so the link was appearing as [[Category:Stubs]] in the examples of Template:Ln/doc, where it should have been [[:Category:Stubs]]. Thanks for pointing this out. BigNate37(T) 14:28, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Reduce Template:La size[edit]

The article-linker Template:La needs to rewritten as much smaller, to allow pages using {La} to be much larger, as in: Template:La/sandbox2. For months, there have been questions about the page WP:Copyright_problems breaking on the final day-entries, as exceeding the post-expand include-size limit of 2,048,000 bytes (2,000 kb). As suspected earlier, a possible fix is to optimize the heavily-used Template:La, repeated thousands of times to link article names & edit/history/watch, to be much smaller. That would make the size of each day's article links smaller, to allow perhaps 70-80 days to fit in the overall WP:Copyright_problems, so that 25-35 more days could be fully displayed. I have condensed {La} by embedding the markup from Template:Lx and optimizing the combined markup, as in Template:La/sandbox2. The results:

Also, the results have been tested with secure-login, to retain prefix "https:" because we do not want to risk an accidental link to non-secure http-protocol URLs. After updating, then the new, smaller version would make numerous article-maintenance pages almost 2x smaller (60%) and faster to process.
Impact:  Template:La is used in "200,958" pages. After update, the page WP:Copyright_problems (edit) should reformat (or edit-preview) within the limit of the post-expand include size, rather than exceeding the limit as 2048000/2048000 bytes (will stop the message: "Warning: Template include size is too large"). -Wikid77 (talk) 03:25, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done -- WOSlinker (talk) 11:33, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

testcases appearing in Stubs category[edit]

The page Template:Lx/testcases is appearing in Category:Stubs and I can't see how to fix it without risking breaking something. Could someone who understands it please fix it so we can empty the stubs category? Thanks. PamD 08:37, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

It should be fixed now. — Carl (CBM · talk) 13:09, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Edit request from Isdinfo, 24 September 2010[edit]

http://www.indiasexdirectory.info/index.php —Preceding unsigned comment added by Isdinfo (talkcontribs) 07:04, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Technical_13, 26 March 2013[edit]

I'm requesting that Template:Lx (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) and Template:Lu (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) be replaced with Lx/sandbox and Lu/sandbox respectively to allow alternate text to be entered as in Lx/testcases and Lu/testcases. User:Technical 13   ( C • M • Click to learn how to view this signature as intended ) 21:42, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Not done: I've seen people request alternate text for user links templates before (the last time was at {{user-multi}}) but it saw some opposition. I tend to agree, as well - if we are going to list links to a username, I personally would prefer to see the actual username rather than an alias, as aliases could be confusing or even misleading. I don't have anything against actioning this request if there is a consensus to do so among a wider group of editors, however. Two ways you could try and get such a consensus would be to post on a noticeboard (probably WP:VPT) or to start an RfC. VPT is probably the easier and quicker of the two, so I'd start with that first. Best — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 01:42, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
What I am hoping to accomplish is to shorten the link name. For example, if you wanted to list subpages of User:ThisOrThatLongAsHeckUserName/My_Creations/UserBoxes/ in a table format on that page, and one of the subpages was for example User:ThisOrThatLongAsHeckUserName/My_Creations/UserBoxes/Operating_Systems/Microsoft_Windows/Version_8/Without_graphics. Using the template as it currently is results in:
User:ThisOrThatLongAsHeckUserName/My_Creations/UserBoxes/Operating_Systems/Microsoft_Windows/Version_8/Without_graphics (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
What I would prefer to see is:
User:ThisOrThatLongAsHeckUserName/My_Creations/UserBoxes/Operating_Systems/Microsoft_Windows/Version_8/Without_graphics (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Which although is still fairly long, is still much shorter than the full version. I have no issue with re-writing the template to use a boolean argument of perhaps |short= and use the {{#titleparts:}} parser function to know how much of the subpage to abbr into a "." -- Would this be okay instead? There would be no chance of confusion this way. User:Technical 13   ( C • M • Click to learn how to view this signature as intended ) 11:59, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit protected}} template. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:58, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 5 September 2013[edit]

  1. First, I would like to request that the template be modified to use:
<span id="{{anchorencode:{{{1}}}}}"></span><span class="plainlinks nourlexpansion lx">[[{{ucfirst:{{{1|Article}}}}}]] <tt>(</tt>[{{fullurl:{{{1}}}|action=edit}} edit]<tt>&#124;</tt>[[Talk:{{{1}}}|talk]]<tt>&#124;</tt>[{{fullurl:{{{1}}}|action=history}} history]<tt>&#124;</tt>[{{fullurl:{{{1}}}|action=protect}} protect]<tt>&#124;</tt>[{{fullurl:Special:Whatlinkshere/{{{1}}}|limit=999}} links]<tt>&#124;</tt>[{{fullurl:{{{1}}}|action=watch}} watch]<tt>&#124;</tt>[{{fullurl:Special:Log|page={{urlencode:{{{1}}}}}}} logs]<tt>&#124;</tt>[http://stats.grok.se/en/latest90/{{urlencode:{{{1}}}|WIKI}} page views (90d)]<tt>)</tt></span>
Doing this will add a link to check how many page views an article nominated for deletion has which would be of use in determining if Redirect might be more appropriate than Delete if it is a likely search term.


I listed that one first as I expect it to be most likely accepted...
  1. Secondly, I would like to address the length of the string of links available. It is quite a long list and I would like to see a way of making it shorter offered to individuals. I propose wrapping "extra" characters for each link in a classed span that would allow editors to add a little CSS to their Special:MyPage/common.css and have a condensed version. Something to the effect of:
<span id="{{anchorencode:{{{1}}}}}"></span><span class="plainlinks nourlexpansion lx">[[{{ucfirst:{{{1|Article}}}}}]] <tt>(</tt>[{{fullurl:{{{1}}}|action=edit}} e<span class="ln-condensed-link-list">dit</span>]<tt>&#124;</tt>[[Talk:{{{1}}}|t<span class="ln-condensed-link-list">alk</span>]]<tt>&#124;</tt>[{{fullurl:{{{1}}}|action=history}} h<span class="ln-condensed-link-list">istory</span>]<tt>&#124;</tt>[{{fullurl:{{{1}}}|action=protect}} p<span class="ln-condensed-link-list">rotect</span>]<tt>&#124;</tt>[{{fullurl:Special:Whatlinkshere/{{{1}}}|limit=999}} l<span class="ln-condensed-link-list">i</span>nk<span class="ln-condensed-link-list">s</span>]<tt>&#124;</tt>[{{fullurl:{{{1}}}|action=watch}} w<span class="ln-condensed-link-list">atch</span>]<tt>&#124;</tt>[{{fullurl:Special:Log|page={{urlencode:{{{1}}}}}}} l<span class="ln-condensed-link-list">ogs</span>]<tt>&#124;</tt>[http://stats.grok.se/en/latest90/{{urlencode:{{{1}}}|WIKI}} p<span class="ln-condensed-link-list">age&nbsp;</span>v<span class="ln-condensed-link-list">iews (</span>90<span class="ln-condensed-link-list">d)</span>]<tt>)</tt></span>
This specifically would allow users to add the following to their Special:MyPage/common.css:
/* Condense list of links see on XfD pages */
span.ln-condensed-link-list{
    display: none;
}
Doing this would make bullet A below look like bullet B:
  1. Beer (edit|talk|history|protect|links|watch|logs|page views (90d))
  2. Beer (e|t|h|p|lnk|w|l|pv90)
Thanks for your consideration on both of these requests. Technical 13 (talk) 16:54, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Technical 13 (talk) 16:54, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Not done for now: Per WP:TESTCASES, please put your proposed new version into the template's sandbox, and set up some testcases, in order to demonstrate that not only is your proposal beneficial, but that it does not compromise existing usage. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:08, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 9 September 2013[edit]

I just noticed how this template renders on pages with an actual background color (User:Technical 13#Pages I've Created Outside of my User: for example) and the | | sections look horrible. Mr. Stradivarius please set it back to <tt>...</tt> and see how it looks on a colored background... If that doesn't look presentable, perhaps |?

  • Tests
    • <code>(</code> stuff <code>|</code> stuff <code>)</code>
    • ( stuff | stuff )
    • <tt>(</tt> stuff <tt>|</tt> stuff <tt>)</tt>
    • ( stuff | stuff )
    • <small>(</small> stuff <small>|</small> stuff <small>)</small>
    • ( stuff | stuff )
    • ( stuff | stuff )
    • ( stuff | stuff )

Thanks for your attention. Technical 13 (talk) 20:04, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Ah yes, that's not ideal - I've reverted for now. We shouldn't be using <tt>...</tt> tags, though, as they are not valid html 5. Can we get the same effect by using css somehow? — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 21:55, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
Hmm. I've put together a fix with <span>...</span> tags, giving this:
But that looks pretty strange on my system. Will come back to this later. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 22:10, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
  • It might look a little better if the links were bold and had a little padding:
Beer ( e | t | h | p | lnk | w | l | pv90 )
(I used short code in this example for display purposes only) I think it is fine other than that. Technical 13 (talk) 13:56, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
Fair enough. I don't think the long version would look good with bold links, though. Any ideas on how we can have bolding just for the shorter links? — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 14:25, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
  • I must've overlooked your response and I just noticed my links weren't short anymore. What do you think about the unshortened characters always being bold like what is in the /sandbox and /testcases now?
  • Uncollapsed
  • Uncollapsed on background
  • Collapsed
  • Collapsed on background
  • Using sandbox
Thanks, Mr. Stradivarius! Technical 13 (talk) 19:15, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
I don't know, having a mixture of bold and non-bold like that looks pretty ugly to my eyes. I think we should find a way of de-bolding the default version before we enact this. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 21:43, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Okay I'll wrap the whole link section in a named span and remove the individual bolding on the sandbox later or tomorrow. Will depend on baby going to bed. Technical 13 (talk) 22:54, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
  • code added to sandbox from mobile device. looks like someone else added the {{toolbar}} template so that needs to be looked over. Technical 13 (talk) 23:21, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Okay, Mr. Stradivarius, it's ready. None of it is bold by default. Users can Choose to add the following css to bold the whole toolbar or alternatively just the abbreviations (or do whatever they want to either or both). Toolbar has a class of "ln-condensed-link-toolbar", extra characters in links is still class "ln-condensed-link-list" and the left over characters that are used for the abbreviations is class "ln-condensed-link-abbr". They are all span elements (not that it matters much with such descriptive class names). Thanks! Technical 13 (talk) 01:04, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
    Ok, it is now Done. Thanks for your patience! — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 09:30, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Proposal for update of Template:La[edit]

I would like to update Template:La (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) to incorporate the changes I have made to Template:La/sandbox which will make it 40 characters shorter while adding a new link for administrators to go the the &action=delete page for the article. The new "delete" link as well as the existing "protect" link are .sysop-show restricted so they will not be seen by most non-administrators (who can't use them anyways). I'm fully aware of my ability to make such a change directly, but would like to get some consensus before doing so. I would also like this change to mark the start of a 30-60 trial where these new links and formating proving as useful could be used as an argument to incorporate them into Template:Ln (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) for use in all of this series of templates. Thank you (Redrose64Mr. StradivariusWOSlinkerWikid77). Technical 13 (talk) 17:10, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

  • Strong support & use "views". The /sandbox version will use less than half (46%) of the current post-expand include size (limit: 2,000 kb), and since there is little hope of developers increasing the limit, then the /sandbox allows using over 940 {la} per page, versus the current {la} limited to 440 per page (8-character pagenames). In prior article-list pages, the hundreds of repeated {la} links have been a major problem, and so this doubling (2.2x) of capacity, in the /sandbox, might be even more valuable then the sysop-show hidden delete and protect links. The reformat runtime is likewise nearly twice as fast with the /sandbox (will be ~80/second). Also: Consider showing "views" rather than the awkward "page views (90d)" to allow even more instances of {la} per page. Many users will understand how "views" refers to pageviews. -Wikid77 (talk) 06:52, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

  • This looks like something that needs to be fixed in the site's CSS somewhere. What I assume is happening is that the CSS for the table of contents doesn't recognise the sysop-show class. The sysop-show class is defined in MediaWiki:Common.css, but I'm not sure what we would need to change to make the table of contents recognise it. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 04:53, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
  • I'm assuming it has something to do with the way that the mediawiki software makes the table of contents. It seems to parse out span attributes.
<li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-2"><a href="#Jake_Miller_.28rapper.29_.28edit_.7C_talk_.7C_history_.7C_protect_.7C_delete_.7C_links_.7C_watch_.7C_logs_.7C_views.29"><span class="tocnumber">1.1</span> <span class="toctext"><span>Jake Miller (rapper) <span>(<span>e<span>dit</span></span> | <span>t<span>alk</span></span> | <span>h<span>istory</span></span> <span>| <span>p<span>rotect</span></span> | <span>d<span>elete</span></span></span> | <span>l<span>i</span>nk<span>s</span></span> | <span>w<span>atch</span></span> | <span>log<span>s</span></span> | <span>v</span><span>iews</span>)</span></span></span></a></li>
I realize that makes the TOC look a little clunkier, and the only thing I can think of is maybe a line added to Common.js to remove the L* toolbar section from the TOC completely. Any objection to adding that if I figure out what needs to be added? Something like:
$('li.toclevel-2').each(function(){
	$(this).html($(this).html().replace('<span>(<span>e<span>dit</span></span> | <span>t<span>alk</span></span> | <span>h<span>istory</span></span> <span>| <span>p<span>rotect</span></span> | <span>d<span>elete</span></span></span> | <span>l<span>i</span>nk<span>s</span></span> | <span>w<span>atch</span></span> | <span>log<span>s</span></span> | <span>v</span><span>iews</span>)</span>',''));
});
seems to work for me in my sandbox, but if for some reason the template wasn't in a level 2 heading, it would fail. Technical 13 (talk) 06:18, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

New stats tool[edit]

this tool does everything that {{stats.grok.se}} did, and is documented at w:de:Wikipedia:Wiki ViewStats/API. As this template includes a link to the old stats website, I suggest we amend it to use the WMF labs hosted tool. However we also have {{Article links with page views}}, so with the addition of pageviews to this template, there is now quite a bit of overlap between this & that template.

What would be ideal is if we have a new Lua based template like Template:User-multi (based on Module:UserLinks) for page links, where callers can request a subset of available links, which means it can even support many variations easily (statstoday, stats30, stats90, grokstatsse30, etc) to suit various processes. There are quite a few internal link templates which could become options of a generic template; e.g. {{Lag}} only adds a Google search link. {{Rfdm}} has a few specific links, and another one is going to be added due to Template talk:Rfd2#Google link search. In Category:Internal link templates we find other link templates such as {{Link to page and redirects}} which adds a 'redirects' link. John Vandenberg (chat) 00:33, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

The RESTful API mentioned in the above linked API doesnt appear to work. See toollabs:wikiviewstats/de/wikipedia/30/Theodor_Fontane. John Vandenberg (chat) 00:42, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Hey there John! I'm very much interested in the API for this. Any idea when that might be working? I love the layout and have a few suggestions for enhancements further down the road... I'd be happy to make some changes to this template (and any other that is using stats.grok.se). Just give me a list of change "X" to "Y" on "Z" and I'll make sure they all get done. Technical 13 (talk) 01:50, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
    They are accepting feedback over at deWP; e.g. de:Wikipedia_Diskussion:Wiki_ViewStats#RESTful_API. John Vandenberg (chat) 03:49, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
    Sadly, I don't know a word of German. I'm hoping to have an API I can use for User:Technical 13/SandBox/getPageViews.js that will throw back the wikicode to make a comparison table to use in discussions on wiki. Can you possibly ping me when the API is working so I can try it out? Thanks! Technical 13 (talk) 03:58, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

My German isnt much better :P Anyway, as I suggested in my first post here, I have created {{page-multi}}, which uses Module:PageLinks (talk · edit · hist · links · doc · subpages · tests (results)). It doesnt support all the linktypes needed by the 'ln' template, or the others I mentioned, as I want to collaborate with the UserLinks developers before going too much further. John Vandenberg (chat) 12:29, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Display error[edit]

{{Pagelinks}} is used by {{mfd2}}, which caused this mess. So I have implemented it on top of {{page-multi}}. Let me know if there are any problems. (In the process of looking for minor differences, I saw that the documentation uses 'log' whereas the template code is displaying the link name 'logs'). John Vandenberg (chat) 08:47, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

I've found one difference - if the link includes a # anchor, the old {{pagelinks}} would ignore it, whereas page-multi will display it, and the links will include it, but all links work correctly. e.g. [1] John Vandenberg (chat) 08:59, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Templates categorised as Stubs[edit]

22 templates have today appeared in Category:Stubs: a lot with names like "Ln", plus {{pagelinks}}. I can't work out how. The first one {{La}} hasn't itself been edited since November 2013, but presumably something is being transcluded which has been accidentally put into the stubs category. Please could someone who understands the templates fix whatever needs to be fixed. Thanks. PamD 16:23, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Just noticed that it happened before - see above #Stub_status_of_templates? PamD 16:29, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
I'm investigating it now. John Vandenberg (chat) 16:46, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
I am pretty sure that this has fixed it, but it may take a while for the pages to drop out of the category. John Vandenberg (chat) 17:07, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. There are now just Pagelinks plus two others remaining in the stub category. They file, and the others filed, under "C" for some reason. Weird. PamD 23:37, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
They have all disappeared from the category - im not sure why it takes so long, but it is what it is. Thanks for reporting this problem so promptly so it could be fixed before it caused any damage. John Vandenberg (chat) 08:36, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
Yea, but the affected pages were the template page itself (and /doc pages), not the template invocations. I assume the categories of the template are not updated until all template invocations have been re-rendered. i.e. I purged the /doc , and the category was removed from the rendered /doc page, but it still appeared on the category page ~ a day later. I dont understand why the re-rendered template page can't be pulled out of the category. John Vandenberg (chat) 14:37, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Edit request on 3 March 2014 (to {{la}})[edit]

Please change the code [[Talk:{{{1}}}|<span class="ln-condensed-link-abbr">t<span class="ln-condensed-link-list">alk</span></span>]] to [[{{TALKPAGENAME:{{{1}}}}}|<span class="ln-condensed-link-abbr">t<span class="ln-condensed-link-list">alk</span></span>]] so it works for all namespaces. Where this is being used on Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard, the links to the talk pages of the disputed pages are breaking when they're not in mainspace. Cathfolant (talk) 06:10, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

{{la}} should only be used for articles. I have edited the noticeboard page to use {{lu}} instead. -- John of Reading (talk) 08:53, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
Oh ok, sorry. And thanks. Cathfolant (talk) 16:09, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
  • John of Reading/Cathfolant, where Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard may have talk pages of disputed pages in any namespace, I'm not sure that {{La}} or {{Lu}} is appropriate. I'm thinking that either {{Ln}} should be used directly or a new template (maybe {{CoINlinks}} or something should be used to automatically detect the namespace and use the proper links no matter what (even if it is Book:Foo the dispute is about or some such). What do you both think of that? If that is desired, I'll dig more deeply into it and specifics can be discussed. — {{U|Technical 13}} (tec) 19:12, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
John of Reading/Technical 13 - Now wait a minute. {{lu}} appears to be for user links, and the noticeboard was using {{la}} for links to pages - not users - so how can it be replaced with {{lu}}? If {{la}} is for articles and {{lu}} is for users, obviously neither of those is appropriate, no. {{ln}} seems ok, but I wonder if it should use {{TALKPAGENAME}} for shortness and simplicity, though that would break probably all its existing uses. Cathfolant (talk) 20:21, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
Also, there seems to be some sort of thing where people are maybe automatically adding {{la}} with stuff on wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard - don't know how that works; maybe it's in some instructions somewhere? Anyway, whatever is causing people to use {{la}} should probably be fixed too. Cathfolant (talk) 20:25, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
@Cathfolant: {{lu}} is for links to pages in the "User:" namespace, for example User:John of Reading/Sandbox (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs). For links relating to user accounts, there are other templates such as {{User}} or {{Userlinks}}, for example John of Reading (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log).
At Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard the button at the top "create discussion" preloads the edit window with an {{la}} template for the article and a {{userlinks}} template for the user. Unless Technical 13 can work some cleverness, the "la" will sometimes need manual correction if the user creating the report doesn't fix it. -- John of Reading (talk) 21:43, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
Ah, thanks. That preload thing should be fixed, then. Cathfolant (talk) 22:08, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
The page preloading {{la}} is Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard/Template. Any objections to changing it to {{ln}}? Cathfolant (talk) 22:11, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
  • {{Ln}} isn't really "suppose" to be used directly, which is why I'm suggesting that I could build a specific {{CoINlinks}} for the project. I'm in math class at the moment and have three dr. appointments tomorrow and Oracle DB class.... Wednesday I have an all afternoon seminar for Access (it's an online class I'm doing and my study group wants to bang out like 7 weeks of work in an afternoon to get ahead and not worry about it), but I can probably create this by Wednesday morning. — {{U|Technical 13}} (tec) 22:53, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
Sounds good. I hope the doctor appointments and the seminar go well. Cathfolant (talk) 01:48, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Okay, so I'm looking this over... What I'm noticing is that a preload template is used, and currently, it is not possible to pass parameters to preload templates. This is about to change (well... There is a patch in for review to make it so that preload templates can take parameters; see Bugzilla:12853 if you're interested), and as such I'm going to start coding {{CoINlinks}} (you can move it later if you want or create a redirect from {{Coinlinks}}) to be able to take that into consideration. I'm also going to adjust the <input>...</input> section where the "click here" button to create a new report is so that as soon as this new ability is available, it will be used as a default fallback option when someone submits a request without "all" the needed information. I'm also going to consolidate the page and user links into the same template to reduce expansion depth and size as much as I can, as I have seen issues with these things on other boards (expensive parser functions usually are the big one that cause breaking issues, but the other two are often not far behind). Anyway, I'll notify the project once everything is coded and ready to gain a consensus to use the new template and preload. I can send a quick notice with Mass message sender for this purpose. This may take me a couple days as I juggle this project with real life and there is really no rush on parts of it until that patch I mentioned has been merged (which means it will be available within a couple weeks but we'll have a date). — {{U|Technical 13}} (tec) 14:46, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 19 July 2014 {{lx}}[edit]

Please undo the last edit, there was no consensus to remove the separators, and changing them to regular spaces will allow line wrapping, which I oppose. — {{U|Technical 13}} (etc) 15:11, 19 July 2014 (UTC) — {{U|Technical 13}} (etc) 15:11, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

The last functional change to this template was in 2007. Are you sure you have the right template? -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 16:27, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
My bad; the edit request concerned {{lx}}. But I disabled the request, as this seems to need some discussion. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 16:35, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Correct, the template is {{Lx}} and I'm requesting the bold change that breaks the way the template works be reverted and then it can be discussed. — {{U|Technical 13}} (etc) 02:23, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
Please don't cite procedures as reason. Just discuss this with Sardanaphalus. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 07:56, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done I have reverted the change since there was no initial consensus for such a change to a highly visible template. @Saranaphalus: is directed to seek consensus first and have someone else apply the change. —cyberpower ChatOnline 08:02, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
Wow a lot happens when a page doesn't get reloaded. Sorry, for overriding you Edokter.—cyberpower ChatOnline 08:03, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Would the change be acceptable if the spaces were made non-breaking? Sardanaphalus (talk) 08:28, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
    • I wouldn't object, but I think it would be wise to get a wider consensus before changing this highly visible template. — {{U|Technical 13}} (etc) 11:51, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
      • "Being bold" seems the most efficient way to see if there might be a consensus not to do something, so shall I proceed accordingly...? Sardanaphalus (talk) 09:56, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
        • No. I feel WP:BRD should not apply to template protected highly visible templates. Every edit made to those causes an increase in server load as it tries to keep up. As such if we treated template protected pages as articles, it starts to cause a disruption. That's why it's important to make sure the change is supported FIRST then applied. :-)—cyberpower ChatOnline 10:25, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Font in Pagelinks[edit]

The output of {{pagelinks}} differs according to whether it's listing links for a subject page or a talk page:

It's natural that you'd want the second link to differ. But why are different fonts used? --Redrose64 (talk) 23:36, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

I have no idea; why should they differ in the first place? -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 08:41, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
What I mean is that one set of links shows with a proportional font, the other set is monospaced. That is the difference that I am questioning. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:54, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
I know. I question any difference, even the one you find natural. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 19:22, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
By "it's natural that you'd want the second link to differ", I mean that for a set of links relevant to a subject page, one of those links should be the talk page of that subject page (this is the second link generated by {{pagelinks|Template:Pagelinks}}), and for a set of links relevant to a talk page, one of those links should be the subject page of that talk page (this is the second link generated by {{pagelinks|Template talk:Pagelinks}}). The second link says "talk" in the first case, and "subject" in the second. They are different, and correctly so - I don't have a problem with the text. I question the font family. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:37, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
Then we're on the same page. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 21:16, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
Right, I've got it. It was this edit by Technical 13 (talk · contribs). The edit changed the links to monospace font by broadening the scope of the existing monospace markup on parentheses and pipes. The only related discussions that I can find are #Edit request on 9 September 2013 and #Proposal for update of Template:La, which are for {{la}}, not {{lx}}. But why did the parentheses and pipes need to be marked up as monospace at all? The use of monospaced pipes goes back to 17:53, 28 March 2006, and monospaced parentheses to 18:11, 28 March 2006. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:03, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
Simplify it as much as possible, but no more. All the best: Rich Farmbrough00:39, 25 August 2014 (UTC).

Just revisiting this as I noticed the inconsistency of this on WP:MFD. Why is it using monospace for talk pages and only those? It's using a smaller font than the monospace you get with code and together with link colouring is far less readable, while because it's monospaced it takes up more horizontal space than the default font which is normally sized. It would look much better and be much more readable if the fonts all matched, without these unnecessary font and size changes.--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 22:27, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

I changed {{Lx/sandbox}} to use the regular, but smaller font. How does that look? -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 19:39, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
Seems to be working: I've created the above two examples using the sandbox and they're the same except for the font. I assume this fixes it for other namespaces that were using monospace. Is the smaller font how it was before, or what the monospace font was trying to achieve? It looks ok to me but if it's a new change some people might object.
--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 20:50, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
There are other templates in the family that also use monospace, they will all need to be changed. I don't know how it was before, but the smaller font has been used in other templates, so I don't expect much opposition. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 20:59, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
I don't think so either. Probably best to go ahead as it's definitely an improvement then if there are any concerns/complaints address them.--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 23:54, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Redirects to here[edit]

The following 93 pages redirect here

They include not just a whole slew of template, an documentation pages, but also talk pages for sandboxes and test cases. Is this a good idea? All the best: Rich Farmbrough00:38, 25 August 2014 (UTC).

You'll find that many of the redirs for /doc, /sandbox and /testcases were created by AnomieBOT (talk · contribs). This was because newbies were often starting disussions at these formerly-nonexistent talk subpages, thus creating a page with about two watchers, and six months on, wondered why they had no replies. Accordingly, when a template gets a /doc, /sandbox or /testcases created, within a day or so, AnomieBOT creates the corresponding talk page as a redir to the main template's talk page. Anomie (talk · contribs) may have more on that. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:21, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
Ah, what a shame. The no-replies situation is of course important, and one that has been exercising my mind for some time. This is not the solution. All the best: Rich Farmbrough20:08, 31 August 2014 (UTC).
@Rich Farmbrough: Though what was mentioned above may be the case, one of those that you listed was blatantly incorrect: Template talk:Lit (band), given that the main template page does not redirect to any page in the "Ln" family. For that reason, I blanked that redirect. Steel1943 (talk) 15:09, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for that. All the best: Rich Farmbrough16:57, 26 September 2014 (UTC).

Template-protected edit request on 3 October 2014[edit]

It appears that the talk page link in Template:La does not work when the linked page happens to be a talk page. When the given parameter is itself a talk page, the button for talk should not show up. Gparyani (talk) 16:32, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

  • Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: @Gparyani: If you are trying to link an article talk page, the template that should be used is {{Lat}}, not {{La}}. (There are no "fixes" to make since the template is working as designed; please refer to Template:Ln/doc for the chart of templates to use for each specific namespace.) Steel1943 (talk) 17:20, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Template:Lx[edit]

This (the current) sandbox version of Template:Lx replaces the ambiguous-looking vertical-bar/pipe separators with {{{separator|&#32;}}} (i.e. with a definable separator defaulting to a space) and also introduces {{{parensize}}} for use when the parenthesis has more presence than the template link preceding it. Okay to implement and document? Sardanaphalus (talk) 23:07, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

The vertical bar is not ambiguous, it is traditionally used as a link separator. Adding these two options also are option-creep. If anything, we should dump the monospace font and harmonize all lx template presentations, using hlist to format the link . -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 06:25, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
  • The vertical bar is not ambiguous? A capital "I" in a sans-serif font such as Arial jumps to mind; then a lowercase "L"; then... Perhaps its use as a separator is one of those traditions from which it's time to move on.
I'd also prefer no "option-creep", but realize other people may prefer (in this case) a different separator and/or parenthesis size.
I too was wondering why the <code>/monospace font was used here, but perhaps it's to fit certain contexts..?
Sardanaphalus (talk) 16:14, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
Regarding the monospace font, see #Font in Pagelinks above. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:07, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
I saw that section and asked a question there, as yet unanswered. I can see no justification for using monospace text and a number of problems with it.--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 18:12, 18 November 2014 (UTC)