Template talk:Multiple issues/Archive 6

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7

Requesting {{Review}}

It would be great if someone could add that; I'm not good enough with templates! Thanks for all your useful work on this, Drum guy (talk) 23:17, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Errors (bugs) in "expert" and "expertsubject" tags

The tags "expert" and "expertsubject" do not work as described. Using "expertsubject = Biology" renders: {{Articleissues | expertsubject = Biology }}

Using "expert = April 2008" renders:

{{Articleissues | expert = April 2008 }}

The "expert" tag actually works as "expertsubject" is supposed to: {{Articleissues | expert = Biology }} Please correct the template or correct the description on the template page.

-Pgan002 (talk) 06:28, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

What are supposed to be the correct texts? If I just interchange Expert with Expertsubject are we ok? -- Magioladitis (talk) 13:01, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Expertsubject is not working for me, see Jack of all trades, master of none. "expertsubject=Literature" does not yield either the required {{Expert-subject}} text or an error message. Any help appreciated. Skomorokh 06:05, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Any chance someone will take a close look at this? Gracias, Skomorokh 16:52, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

We can't have special parameters. I think someone could fix it by omitting the date parameter and using the special ones but I think it's complicated. Better treat Expertsubject alone and not in Articleissues. -- Magioladitis (talk) 17:51, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation, Skomorokh 21:17, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

The template still says, in several cases throughout the wiki, "It is in need of attention from an expert on the subject. may be able to help recruit one." which is very ugly. It is one the first things people read when browsing to a page containing the template. Since the template is permanently protected and I have no knowledge of templates anyway, whom do I have to ask or who should pay attention to fix this? Ðæltåþíç (talk) 13:44, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

The problem is in the original template or in articleissues? -- Magioladitis (talk) 16:37, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Request {{do-attempt}}

Hi, I'm new to template editing so I'm a little wary of trying to do this myself. Could someone please add a {{do-attempt}} option to this template? Otherwise I'm going to have to keep adding it as a separate template. Thanks! --Aervanath's signature is boring 18:14, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

What's the difference of this template and {{orphan}} ? -- Magioladitis (talk) 20:57, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
{{Orphan}} just states that the article has very few or no incoming links. {{Do-attempt}} additionally says that someone tried to de-orphan it unsuccessfully.--Aervanath's signature is boring 23:01, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
Further explanation: {{do-attempt}} has two parameters: "date" (when it was originally tagged as orphaned) and "att" (the date when the de-orphaning was attempted). Thanks for your help!--Aervanath's signature is boring 05:12, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
Not compatible with this template. Stifle (talk) 14:54, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
Won't fix per Stifle -- Magioladitis (talk) 16:44, 1 May 2008 (UTC)


  • Is this even necessary to have in this template? I mean, if an article has so many problems that it needs a rewrite, what else needs to be said? Anthony Rupert (talk) 21:17, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
Maybe it needs rewrite because it's confusing. Usually rewrite refers to the content. Orphan, deadend, etc. are different issues. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:31, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Problem with "roughtranslation"

When I enter eg. {{Articleissues | roughtranslation = May 2008 | wikify = May 2008 }}

at roughtranslation there is text "Tagged since Error: invalid time" instead of "Tagged since May 2008}}

Why? Can someone fix it?

Kubek15 (Sign!) (Contribs) (UBX) 10:47, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Fixed Fixed that and onesource as well. -- Magioladitis (talk) 12:03, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

parameter: expert=topicname

What is the syntax to recruit experts from multiple WikiProjects? For example, for an article on diet: "This article is in need of attention from an expert. WikiProject Food and Drink or WikiProject Medicine may be able to recruit one." (talk) 06:53, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Spelling error in Unenclyclopedic entry

Spelling in message displayed - 'contains' should be 'contain'.

Seajay (talk) 10:42, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Fixed Magioladitis (talk) 10:45, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

need nocats=

Would someone familiar with this template please add support for {{nocats}}? Thanks. -- Fullstop (talk) 13:14, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Won't fix Template reads "Please place this template at the bottom (not the top) of the page, where readers will look for the categories". Articleissues is to be placed on the top. -- Magioladitis (talk) 13:20, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

ah. ok. On another note... Might it be possible to rephrase "This article or section has multiple issues" such that having only one issue (e.g. when others are resolved) does not leave an "odd" message? Thx. -- Fullstop (talk) 13:34, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
If there is a single issue. Just replace the template with the proper template. ;) -- Magioladitis (talk) 16:58, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

You know, this isn't the first time someone's requested that {{uncat}} be included in this template. Is it really crucial that it go at the bottom, instead of at the top? The articles that are tagged with uncat are almost always stubs, so usually what you get is articleissues at the top, with four or so issues, and then one paragraph, and then uncat at the bottom, which, to me, looks really strange. I would've already put it in if I hadn't noticed the debate at the {{uncategorized}}, above. I note that Waldir has just added his two cents there, supporting the inclusion of uncat into articleissues as well.--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 18:23, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

It is always better to give specific instructions to editors for how they do something and where they should edit. Fro the same reason if the problem is in a specific section, it's better to place a tag there and not on the top. I am thinking of creating a multiple issues tag for the bottom of an article. -- Magioladitis (talk) 17:14, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
As far as the specific instructions go, we can add this: "<small>Please add categories to the bottom of this article.</small>"
What do you mean by a "multiple section tag"?--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 18:46, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Multiple issues. I fixed it above. We can create another tag for the tags that have to go to the bottom. -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:54, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Ah, I see. How many tags are there like that? I only know of uncat. Also, some ppl put unref at the bottom.--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 06:52, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
Unrer "should be placed at the top of an article" (from its manual). We need do some research. I won't be online this week, so next week I'll check that. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:27, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

I have to inform the editors I don't agree with the addition of nocats in the template by Aervanath the week I have informed I won't be online with "no consensus so the editors decide" excuse. Where the tag for no categories is placed is not a consensus for articleissues but for the original template itself. I would like more editors to express their opinion. -- Magioladitis (talk) 00:10, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

I just reverted nofootnotes and uncategorized because if editors start adding this tags it will be very difficult to revert. I checked and someone already asked in Template talk:Uncategorized if the use of it in Articleissues would be a good idea. Sorry Aervanath but I disagree and I see many problems caused by the addition you did. -- Magioladitis (talk) 07:54, 16 June 2008 (UTC)


I added this issue yesterday, but it was reverted for the following reason:

Prophecy is used only by one article! Let's keep things simple

Huh? Do you mean the separate {{prophecy}} template is used in one article, or that it's only used in one article via this template? If it's the latter, well, sure it's not used in too many articles yet, because I just added it! Anthony Rupert (talk) 14:05, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

I checked the "What links here" and I found only one article. Not via Articleissues but as a separate template. Friendly, Magioladitis (talk) 14:09, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

  • In that case, I apologize. Maybe we should nominate that template for deletion then? Anthony Rupert (talk) 14:29, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
I think yes. If you do, I'll support you. It seems this template is rarely used. The only article using it, it was prodded for deletion! :) -- Magioladitis (talk) 15:03, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
Done. Anthony Rupert (talk) 06:01, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Citation style

{{editprotected}} {{citationstyle}} is a redirect to {{citation style}}. Please revise Template:Articleissues to directly use {{citation style}}. Thanks. Bebestbe (talk) 17:46, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

This template does not transclude the normal cleanup templates. If you are asking for the parameter name to be changed, that cannot be done. --- RockMFR 18:26, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Travel guide


Pretty much every article which uses {{travel guide}} has multiple issues.


| name       = {{{travelguide|}}}
| message    = * It is written like a '''travel guide'''.
| cat-date   = Cleanup from

Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 08:46, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

The above fixed:


| name       = {{{travelguide|}}}
| message    = * It is written like a [[WP:NOT#TRAVEL|travel guide]] and may require [[WP:CU|cleanup]].
| cat-date   = Wikipedia articles needing style editing
| cat-undate   = Wikipedia articles needing style editing from
| cat          = All articles needing style editing

-- Magioladitis (talk) 09:47, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Ooh, yeah, use this one. Cheers! Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 12:01, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
 Done Added; I also changed a few WP: shortcuts to their full titles while I was at it. {{Nihiltres|talk|log}} 14:37, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. Can we get travel guide bolded to fit with other issues too? Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 14:51, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
 Done Done.  Sandstein  21:25, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Dates in Template:Articleissues/doc/Fulltext

The page Template:Articleissues/doc/Fulltext shows up in each of the categories involved, particularly Category:Dead-end pages from March 2008 where it is the last remaining item in the category, keeping the category from being deleted. Is it okay to change all the dates in Template:Articleissues/doc/Fulltext to July 2008? Or should Category:Dead-end pages from March 2008 get deleted even though it isn't "empty"? Or will that category stick around forever, with just a single item in it? Thanks!--Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:56, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

The category can be deleted, even though there is technically an article in it. However, it is certainly possible to change all the dates in Fulltext to July 2008, if you like. Be bold!--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 03:23, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
Now all dates are "July 2008" :) -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:50, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, all!--Fabrictramp | talk to me 13:55, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
Changed to current month and year Rich Farmbrough, 16:41 30 August 2008 (GMT).


{{editprotected}} Please add {{Grammar}} to this template. Thank you.--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 03:27, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Done. Now I'm off to update the documentation. Cheers. --lifebaka (Talk - Contribs) 19:34, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks!--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 00:30, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Full protection

Is full protection really necessary? In the logs, I noticed it was raised from semi after a single instance of vandalism. Otherwise, vandalism has been virtually nonexistent since semiprotection started. Why isn't semiprotection good enough? Is this page being targeted by a persistent vandal or banned user I don't know about? While this template is used on almost 5000 articles, that doesn't even put it in the top 500 most used templates. I was planning substantial improvements in the display text of this template, so that each entry harmonizes better with the current wording of the individual templates. If the community decides that full protection is indeed necessary, I can write up the wikicode, and post it for an administrator to add. szyslak (t) 04:47, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Addendum: I rechecked the special page I linked to above, Special:MostLinkedTemplates. This template is number 837 on the list. szyslak (t) 04:51, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

You can request un-protection at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection.--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 06:03, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
I know that. I just wanted to see what this page's regular editors think before I send it through that backlogged process. szyslak (t) 06:31, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
Good idea. I would also like to see it unprotected, for the reason that I also would like to make edits to it. There are still a lot of templates that this article doesn't include. However, at just over 5,000 transclusions, this is a high-risk target (admittedly one of many, as you pointed out). So there are arguments on both sides. I support dropping to semi-protected for now, but if the vandalism happens again, I would have to support re-upping the level.--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 07:26, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
I agree that we should restore full protection if semi proves insufficient in the future. As for whether this template is inherently "high-risk" enough for semiprotection, I think that's a discussion for another time and another talk page. (I might bring it up on Wikipedia talk:Protection policy sometime in the future.) I plan on waiting a few days for any further discussion before I send it to WP:RFPP. Of course, anyone else is welcome to do so anytime. szyslak (t) 23:25, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Requesting travel guide

I would like to request {{travel guide}} be added to this template. --papageno (talk) 03:23, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

It's already there. The docs just hadn't been updated yet. Use parameter "travelguide = date". I'm updating the docs right now.--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 03:54, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the speedy reply! Smiley.svg Have made the change and it is working correctly at Puerto Ayacucho. --papageno (talk) 04:50, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

wikify param needs copy-editing

{{editprotected}} The "wikify" parameter needs a space after the period in its main text ("It may need to be wikified to meet Wikipedia's quality standards."). There is no space between the period and the "Tagged since" string. See e.g. Ralph Begleiter. -- Rob C. alias Alarob 19:54, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

 Done, cheers! lifebaka (talk - contribs) 13:31, 25 July 2008 (UTC)


{{editprotected}} Any chance someone could add {{Recentism}} to the template? :) – 'Latics (talk) 10:01, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

 Done. Boy, adding support for new parameters to this thing takes a while... lifebaka (talk - contribs) 13:45, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Not if you use the {{DatedAI}} template... Rich Farmbrough, 16:50 30 August 2008 (GMT).


{{editprotected}} Can someone please add support for {{Crystal}}? Oldiesmann (talk) 02:07, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Seconded--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 05:11, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
 Done Soxπed93(blag) 06:29, 27 July 2008 (UTC)


{{editprotected}} Any chance someone could add {{Recent death}} to the template? :) – (talk) 17:38, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

  • X mark.svg Not doneThis template is for article issues, i.e. problems. Recent death is more of a reader-advisory template, and as such should be separate. Cheers, Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 02:22, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • To clarify a little: any of the other issues listed in this template can be removed once an editor has fixed them. "Recent death" is not a fixable situation (not by our editors, anyway; you might want to ask this guy, instead).--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 03:16, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Acknowledged. Does the same apply to merge? (talk) 16:34, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
or off-topic/revelance ? (talk) 03:52, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
I would oppose adding the merge tags to articleissues. Merge tags are there to invite editors to a discussion about the future of the article, and therefore, like deletion tags, need to be kept separate to call attention to those discussions. However, I do agree that {{off-topic}} and {{relevance}} could be added. So:

{{editprotected}} Please add {{off-topic}} and {{importance-sect}} to this template. I think using "relevance" instead of "importance-sect" would be a better parameter for the users of this template. Thanks!Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 05:57, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

{{importance-sect}} is for sections and should be added in the appropriate section. {{importance}} is used for the whole article. -- Magioladitis (talk) 06:44, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
{{off-topic}} is for sections as well. None of these two parameters should be added. -- Magioladitis (talk) 06:45, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
I've canceled the editprotected for now until we can agree. My thinking was that articleissues can also be used for sections, so a section template wouldn't be out-of-place. However, I think a template that says "Parts of this article may be off-topic or lacking relevance to the subject matter" would be somewhat useful. Do you know of one we could add?--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 07:12, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
I think that this "Parts of this..." would make things more complicated than just having the templates in the correct section. Certainly, we could transform Articleissues to work with sections as well. -- Magioladitis (talk) 16:45, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
There already is a section parameter, and the default text reads "This article or section has multiple issues" (emphasis mine). That's why I thought that adding these wouldn't present a problem.--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 20:16, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Word "issues" could be improved ("problems")

I don't think that "This article has multiple issues" is as appropriate or meaningful as perhaps a better name, such as "This article requires refinement in multiple areas" or any of another dozen phrases I can think of off the top of my head. Anyone have any good ideas? Msa11usec (talk) 20:26, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

None that I think can be applied as well to the range of concerns this template addresses. I favor leaving it as it is. -- ℜob C. alias ⒶⓁⒶⓇⓄⒷ 22:09, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
Why? Seems pretty accurate to me. The article has issues. Some are major problems, some are minor. Issues covers them nicely. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 22:43, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
Wow, I never realized that wording hasn't been changed since the template was first started. I guess I'm just that good :P Mr.Z-man 20:45, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
The wording as it is now is quite clear. "Requires refinement in multiple areas" certainly sounds more posh, but in the end it is expressing the same meaning.--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 15:12, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Adding underconstruction?

Would it be useful to add {{underconstruction}} to this template? I've used {{Articleissues}} with multiple tags, but used the underconstruction tag as a separate tag. Yngvarr (t) (c) 22:48, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

I would say probably no. Under-construction isn't so much an issue as a temporary notifier - it'd be like having semi-protected in Articleissues. And, underconstruction usually needs to stand out so people know it's there - and to do that I think it really needs to be a separate tag.--danielfolsom 03:26, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
I agree with Danielfolsom on this one. There are some issues that need to be kept separate.--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 15:16, 30 August 2008 (UTC)


The template would not show the "Unreferenced" until I used a lower case "u". -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 07:12, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

All parameters work in lowercase. -- Magioladitis (talk) 07:16, 30 August 2008 (UTC)


{{editprotected}} Could someone add {{Gameguide}} to the list of supported issues please? We have travelguide so I see no issue why this one shouldn't be included.--Crossmr (talk) 05:25, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Seconded.--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 15:32, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
Thirded. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 15:40, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
Note that gameguide uses four cats per article,
  1. Category:Cleanup from March 2017}}} or Category:Wikipedia cleanup
  2. Category:All pages needing cleanup
  3. Category:Video games game guide cleanup
  4. Category:All video game articles requesting maintenance
Rich Farmbrough, 23:16 5 September 2008 (GMT).
OK implementing Rich Farmbrough, 23:19 5 September 2008 (GMT).
Done Rich Farmbrough, 23:25 5 September 2008 (GMT).

toolong / tooshort

These two items describe the intro length, yet they're not listed in the template description next to the other areas on intro. I'm not even sure that toolong is listed (as is says the same thing as "introlength". Too short is way at the bottom and says nothing about it being associated with the lead. I had to look at the source code to figure out what was what. Since it is protected, I ask that someone expand the description to easily identify these. Thanks Morphh (talk) 14:03, 09 September 2008 (UTC)

I've altered the docs to reflect that the tooshort parameter is representative of {{intro-tooshort}}. Also, since {{toolong}} is now a redirect to {{verylong}}, instead of {{intro-toolong}}, I've cleaned up the docs to reflect that, as well. Also, for the sake of consistency with the corresponding templates:


Responding admin: Please add a parameter "intro-tooshort" that is a duplicate of the current "tooshort" parameter. Please do not remove the tooshort parameter, as that will break any transclusions of the template that currently use "tooshort". In the same vein, and for the same reasons, please add a parameter "intro-toolong" that is a duplicate of the current "intro length" parameter. I would also request that the text generated for those issues be updated to reflect the wording of the templates they represent, if necessary. Many thanks,--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 16:29, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
 Done I accidentally comitted the change before finishing a decent edit summary, but the edit looks correct. —EncMstr (talk) 00:45, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Category:Articles tagged with Articleissues template

{{editprotected}} It would be nice if there were a category of articles tagged with the Articleissues template. Additionaly, it would be nice if the tagging could be categorized by number of issues, sich as Category:Articles tagged with Articleissues template having five issues, Category:Articles tagged with Articleissues template having six issues, etc. That way we could work on those articles having the most issues first before going to those with less number of issues. Thanks.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Suntag (talkcontribs) 7:23, Sep 23, 2008 (UTC)

To check which articles are tagged with this template just click on Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Articleissues. For your request I am not sure if I agree or not and if it is possible to make something like. -- Magioladitis (talk) 00:40, 30 September 2008 (UTC)


{{editprotected}} Can someone please add {{nofootnotes}} and/or its redirect ({{inline}})? Oldiesmann (talk) 02:24, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

X mark.svg Not done This has been discussed before, but nofootnotes was removed from the template because it belongs at the bottom of the article, not at the top.--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 04:14, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Please add a support for this template. -- Taku (talk) 02:29, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Could you please supply the code required to do this? Tra (Talk) 17:02, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
No. There was a discussion about that. Nofootnotes is supposed to be placed at the bottom of the article. Articleissues on the top. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:32, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
This template is already heavily misused. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:38, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Consolidation script?

I know that Friendly can consolidate new tags into articleissues, but it cannot currently consolidate tags which were already in place: this has to be done by hand. Does anyone have a script that does this? If not, could someone write one?--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 09:29, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Suggestion - may also need new template as well

While I was slogging through Marlins ballpark, I was struck by the glaring need for a tag (or a line in {{articleissues}}) that states with no ambiguity "too much detail" ({{toomuchdetail}} or {{too much detail}}, perhaps?), as opposed to the current {{toolong}}, which is a bit generic and offers as an option splitting into a new section (in the case of a section with too much detail, splitting off would simply move the problem to a new article). Could "toomuchdetail" be incorporated here, or is there something similar already in existence that might not be "evident"? If not, this might also be a worthwhile standalone tag. (talk) 19:49, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

{{fancruft}} exists for unencyclopedic detail. If the detail is appropriate for WP but simply too long for one article, there's {{toolong}}. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 23:23, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
I took a look at the Marlins ballpark and I see what he/she means. It is excessively detailed but doesn't appear that either {{toolong}} or {{fancruft}} is appropriate. At one point in the article, a day-by-day account of an ongoing lawsuit is presented. Splitting is clearly not an option. As presented in the article, the detail is clearly not appropriate for a general encyclopedia. I suppose that if there is a version of [[tl|toolong}} that does not offer splitting as a remedy of the problem, it could work. B.Wind (talk) 04:26, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
The bullet points are pure proseline, and we've got a template for that. Once that's cleared up, either the detail is important enough to keep, or it isn't. If it isn't, then it is trivia which is of importance only to a minority audience, which is by definition fancruft. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 18:00, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Recent - edit request

Please add link to Wikipedia:Recentism. Thanks. ---Majestic- (talk) 13:13, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

What exactly to add and where? -- Magioladitis (talk) 18:45, 3 November 2008 (UTC)


In the template's implementation of the "recentism" parameter, please pipe-link the words "slanted towards recent events" to Wikipedia:Recentism. This will bring it into conformity with {{recentism}}. Thanks!--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 02:51, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

 Done --Elonka 06:24, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Please add the equivalent of nofootnotes to the template. --Gavin Collins (talk) 10:51, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Nofootnotes should be places at the bottom of the article, articleissues at the top. -- Magioladitis (talk) 11:05, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

I think that could be said of primarysources, refimprove & unreferenced. Rather than have multiple cleanup templates, I suggest you include nofootnotes as well, so that the template tags an article or section for multiple issues, and displays all warnings in a single box. Could you add nofootnotes in any case? --Gavin Collins (talk) 11:41, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Request: {{totally-disputed}}

It would spare editors from having to use "disputed" and "POV" separately. --Adoniscik(t, c) 00:40, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

This is a good idea but its a bit tricky because we have to add two categories. I have to think a bit how to implement it. -- Magioladitis (talk) 07:52, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

X mark.svg Not done Template was deleted. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:03, 3 February 2009 (UTC)


Can you change "It may contain proseline" to a more descriptive "It may contain an inappropriate mixture of prose and timeline"? See {{proseline}} ---Majestic- (talk) 04:10, 24 November 2008 (UTC)  Done Magioladitis (talk) 07:44, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Additional request: Proseline doesn't show "Tagged since..." text. Please fix this. ---Majestic- (talk) 14:24, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

 Done Please remember that in order the fix to take effect in an already existed template, the article transcluding it must be refreshed/edited. -- Magioladitis (talk) 14:39, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

"Needs to be expanded"

 DoneEncMstr (talk) 06:01, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Can someone please fix the "Expand" parameter so it doesn't link to requests for expansion anymore? Requests for expansion was closed up as historical. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshellsOtter chirpsHELP) 04:46, 4 December 2008 (UTC)


I propose that documentation from {{story}} be added to this template. THE AMERICAN METROSEXUAL (talk) 08:42, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

What's the difference of this template and {{Inappropriate tone}} ? -- Magioladitis (talk) 10:25, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
Because {{story}} is more specific. Besides, {{essay-entry}} is in this template, isn't it? (It's the same story behind why one would use something specific rather than {{cleanup}}.) THE AMERICAN METROSEXUAL (talk) 16:49, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
 Done + I made some improvements to the original template. -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:55, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
One additional suggestion: maybe the word "story" in this template should be in bold? THE AMERICAN METROSEXUAL (talk) 09:03, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
Done! I think the original template has to much bold, I'll fix it as well. -- Magioladitis (talk) 11:01, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7


In the last edit a space was introduced causing a gap between some entries (see List of InuYasha characters for an example). Please undo or fix the space. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 13:59, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Template:Done-k I've fixed the spacing issue. No opinion on the change that was made that accidentally introduced the space.--Aervanath (talk) 14:49, 18 February 2009 (UTC)