Template talk:Long comment

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Long comment template.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Silly template

Wouldn't be better to ask the devs for some way to omit (from Special:Shortpages) those which belong to a certain category such as "Disambiguation"? — CharlotteWebb 22:35, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Having this appear on dab pages is silly. Is this the work of a bot? And what purpose does tracking short pages have, in comparison to the existing stub system? No pointer to discussions, etc. leaves people confused. Ham Pastrami (talk) 01:40, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree it was just added to a dab page of 5,939 bytes![1] How short is short? -- PBS (talk) 21:34, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Short disambiguation pages are often in need of help, help which they get from editors looking through Short pages. —Centrx→talk • 22:10, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Purpose of this template

Still not getting it. I'm inclined to drag it to TFD to die. (Esp. as it's being used on pages like Hack—how is that a short page?) Anybody care? --MZMcBride (talk) 18:58, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's supposed to be used on very short pages that most likely won't be expanded in the near future, like tiny two-member dabs and redirects to Wiktionary that don't need to clog up the list. Somebody seems to have taken it upon themselves to put it in just about every disambiguation page, which is wrong. Don't delete it just because it's being misused by one person. Harrumph. --Closedmouth (talk) 04:21, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All right, then. I ran a query for page titles and page lengths. The results are available here. Are you volunteering to clean up this mess? :-) --MZMcBride (talk) 05:10, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I've got shit else to do at the moment. --Closedmouth (talk) 05:32, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Minor fixes

{{editprotected}} Couple of problems in the text - prevent it from being listed instead of prevent it being listed, and Template:Long comment instead of Template:Longcomment. Logan _Talk ^{Contributions} 07:00, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:43, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Logan _Talk ^{Contributions} 21:40, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Inclusion in WP:ORDER

I have posted at Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Layout#Template:Long_comment_placement to request that the placement of {{subst:long comment}} / {{short pages monitor}} be put into WP:ORDER. Thanks Rjwilmsi 20:49, 22 January 2013‎ (UTC)[reply]

Bot request for approval

I have an open bot request for a bot which will automatically manage the "long comment / short pages" system. See Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Bot1058 5, and feel free to comment either here or there. Thanks, wbm1058 (talk) 03:09, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

See also the fairly recent discussion at User talk:Sam Sailor/Archive 21 § Question about short pages monitor – wbm1058 (talk) 11:34, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template-protected edit request on 9 March 2019

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

To my mind, in "Please do not remove the monitor template without removing the comment as well", for the sake of unambiguity, it should rather read "... removing this comment ...".--Hildeoc (talk) 20:37, 9 March 2019 (UTC) Hildeoc (talk) 20:37, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:44, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Usage on pages that don't appear on ShortPages

Is there a way we can possibly clear the long comment from pages that wouldn't otherwise appear on ShortPages, i.e. tagged disambiguation pages (specifically those with a footer that generate the disambiguation editnotice) and redirects? It appears to be such a waste of an edit to tag such pages with a long comment when they don't actually appear there. it's also become a waste of time for me as I've recently started clearing these pages using this search.

Also pinging Wbm1058 to this discussion as the developer of Bot1058, the latter of which was programmed to remove long comment from pages over 600 bytes as part of Task 5. I'm not sure if a task can be programmed into Bot1058 to do exactly this. Jalen Folf (talk) 02:12, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, great idea, JalenFolf – it looks like the majority of tagged pages in this category are disambiguations. The solution lies in tweaking {{short pages monitor}} to flag these, and then the bot to edit them. Interestingly enough, I just noticed the comment Template talk:Short pages monitor#Add by default to DAB pages? was added a day after I last edited that template! I don't recall seeing that before. – wbm1058 (talk) 03:54, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The reason all those pages are tagged is that (1) up until January 2016 it was necessary and (2) word that this was no longer needed after 01/2016 was not widely advertised. wbm1058 (talk) 04:11, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

BRFA filed – I haven't found a way to flag these by tweaking {{short pages monitor}}, but as there are so many of them, I just wrote a new PHP program to walk through the entire Category:Monitored short pages and remove the dabs. wbm1058 (talk) 15:15, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Wbm1058: Does this mean that we should no longer be tagging short dabs with the long comment boilerplate? I rarely add it manually but tools such as Dabfix add it automatically. Certes (talk) 18:56, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Certes, Yes. It's only still needed on things like set indexes, surname lists and Wiktionary redirects. I just left a note at User talk:Dispenser/Dabfix#Disambiguation pages no longer need short-page monitoring, as I only became aware of this after my bot was approved. Not a single one of my 50 test edits was reverted. wbm1058 (talk) 19:04, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]