Template talk:NOINDEX

Template:NOINDEX is permanently protected from editing because it is a heavily used or highly visible template. Substantial changes should first be proposed and discussed here on this page. If the proposal is uncontroversial or has been discussed and is supported by consensus, editors may use {{edit template-protected}} to notify an administrator or template editor to make the requested edit. Usually, any contributor may edit the template's documentation to add usage notes or categories.

Any contributor may edit the template's sandbox. This template does not have a testcases subpage. You can create the testcases subpage here.

This template was considered for deletion on 2010 August 20. The result of the discussion was "keep".

I'd kind of like to see an option for "visibility" added to this template, so that it produces a banner or sidebox which makes it clear "This page is tagged as NOINDEX, meaning that it will not be indexed by search engines." Anyone else have an opinion on this? --El on ka 22:27, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. Perhaps a hidden category? --MZMcBride (talk) 22:29, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That could work too, but I'd still like something visual, so anyone new coming to the page could quickly see that it was an "off-Google" page. --El on ka 23:28, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that this template is implemented in so many different ways that it's bound to break certain pages or make them look ridiculously goofy. --MZMcBride (talk) 23:44, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What about adding an option like "visible=yes"? --El on ka 23:52, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That seems fine. {{#ifeq:{{{visible|}}}|yes|{{{text|Lorem ipsum.}}}}} or something. --MZMcBride (talk) 23:56, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone please implement this? I would like to use it particularly when noindexing userpages (e.g. after a keep in an MfD of a draft for example). I'm not template literate enough to implement it myself.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 23:16, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(unindent) Done. --MZMcBride (talk) 23:53, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And I have added all pages into Category:Wikipedia noindex pages so that pages without "visible" param set can still be readily seen to be tagged, and to allow easy review of the list of tagged pages. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 22:39, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand the purpose of this category given Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:NOINDEX. Cool Hand Luke 23:18, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(cross-posted from Category talk:Wikipedia noindex pages)

The primary purpose is to provide a visual element (the hidden category) on the page. Hidden categories are visible on the edit form, so this category exposes the actual status of the edited page to the editor - if the hidden category is missing on a page where an editor expects it to be there, they are more likely to add it.

I would like to also add a {{topicon}} for noindex-ed pages, however the current template is too widely used to introduce that without taking it to the village pump to ask if there are cases where it wouldnt be desirable.

Also, categories are sorted, counted, and multiple templates can fill them. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 01:19, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:NOINDEX also shows up when you edit pages. I do notice that hidden categories are sorted at the bottom though; that's more noticeable. Ok. Cool Hand Luke 02:27, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Per-namespace categories ? The category is quite vast, wouldn't it be useful to have talk / Wikipedia / user / ... categories ? Cenarium (talk) 16:59, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why So Many Bands?

Why are so many bands in this category and what put them here?

JimCubb (talk) 00:09, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You mean band articles, right? At this moment, I don't show any band in this category. If there were bands, it might be because they were nominated for deletion. Some of the deletion templates include {{NOINDEX}}. Cool Hand Luke 02:01, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(e/c) Grumble; I just lost my post. If it was the "band" talk pages you are referring to, it is because they use {{WPBiography|living=yes}}, which includes {{Blp}} which includes NOINDEX. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 02:09, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I'm aware the entire Talk: namespace has been excluded from search results for years.... --MZMcBride (talk) 19:26, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why Does This Template Exist?

So far the only answer I have seen to this question is a justification of hidden categories. I understand the need for hidden categories. I devoutly wish that more categories were hidden.

The question is why does this template, {{NOINDEX}}, exist, what function does it serve and how does it increase a user's ability to find articles?

JimCubb (talk) 05:17, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

__NOINDEX__ is a Magic word. Currently, MediaWiki (the software that runs the site) doesn't support tracking magic words easily. But it does support tracking templates easily. So this template was created. --MZMcBride (talk) 19:25, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am not being polemic or obstructive, really. I am trying to understand what is happening here and why.

If this template is applied to a page does that mean that there is a problem with that page that should be addressed? If so, how should the problem be addressed? (For the pages in Category:Biography articles without listas parameter the listas parameter needs to be completed on even the trivial instances so that the list will be short enough to fit on a single page and allow easy monitoring.)

If there is no problem to be addressed, why is this template applied?

JimCubb (talk) 00:59, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Further, if the intent of this template was to exclude the talk pages of biographies of living people from search engine indexes, why is it on

Category talk:10 BC births
Category talk:49 BC deaths
Category talk:100 BC births
Category talk:100s BC births
Category talk:101 BC births
Category talk:172 BC deaths
Category talk:489 BC deaths
Category talk:1890 deaths
Category talk:1891 deaths
Category talk:1892 deaths
Category talk:1893 deaths
Category talk:1894 deaths
Category talk:1895 deaths
Category talk:1896 deaths
Category talk:1897 deaths
Category talk:1898 deaths
Category talk:1899 deaths

just to list a few?

JimCubb (talk) 20:59, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This seems to be a bug of sorts. I'll look into it. -- Ned Scott 03:04, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question regarding indexing of mfd's

If we were to add the <includeonly>{{NOINDEX}}</includeonly> to the top line of {{mfd}} would that make all pages with mfd transcluded on them noindexed or only pages where it's subst'd, or would something else entirely happen? John Carter (talk) 17:03, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It would apply to all pages that transclude {{mfd}}. If the template was substituted, the code would be inserted into those pages too. --MZMcBride (talk) 03:49, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Notification of dicussion

There is a discussion about this template at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Noindexed pages. Cenarium (talk) 19:06, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request

{{Editprotected}} Please assist Per Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2010_August_20#Template:NOINDEX, please add {{Tfd}} or a similar notice. Thanks. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:47, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:00, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from Basler04, 23 August 2010

{{editprotected}} Could this template be added to the Category:Exclude in print so that it doesn't show up in PDF files?

Basler04 (talk) 07:29, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:NOINDEX/doc, which is where categories should be placed, isn't protected. Please add it yourself; if there are any problems let me know. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 10:02, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, i tried a few things and it did not work. I am either doing it wrong or does it take time for the change to take effect? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Basler04 (talk • contribs) 05:51, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind it is working now —Preceding unsigned comment added by Basler04 (talk • contribs) 01:34, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why does this template still exist?

The magic word automatically adds the needed category, so the question I have is why we still promote and use this template? Wouldn't it make more sense to promote the magic word instead which is cleaner and simpler. EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 18:16, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Effect on talk pages

The documentation says "It has no effect on talk pages." - but the template is used on 2500+ usertalkpages (incl. archives), and over 300+ article-talkpages (incl. archives).

It also seems to work just fine (I googled some "exact strings" from a few examples, and none showed up in google (though one did in a mirror)).

Does that sentence of documentation need to be deleted, or clarified with something I've overlooked? Thanks. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 23:44, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is false, I will delete it. See here as a proof. Only draft namespace and its associated talk page are exempt from this indexing and noindexing. 4nn1l2 (talk) 17:31, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template-protected edit request on 2 July 2022 - Categorisation

Moved from Template talk:Noindex

This edit request to Template:Noindex and Template:Index has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Could we get

{{R category shell|
{{R from modification}}
}}

on the Template:Index and Template:Noindex pages for categorisation? Aidan9382 _(talk) 13:59, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^put'r there 02:23, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Banner