Template talk:No footnotes

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Slightly confusing phrasing with "section" parameter[edit]

Using this template with section results in:

  • "This section includes a list of references, related reading or external links, but its sources remain unclear because it lacks inline citations."

Obviously a single "section" does not include a list of references, FRs or ELs (usually). The standard handling of the section parameter does not work here. I suggest to rephrase the wording to something like this, when the section parameter is set:

  • "This article includes a list of references, related reading or external links, but this section's sources remain unclear because it lacks inline citations."

A similar tweak is also needed for Template:more footnotes with the same problem, consider it suggested for both templates at once please :). GermanJoe (talk) 02:31, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 22 June 2016[edit]

Move the {{#ifeq:{{{suffix|π}}}|π||[[Category:No footnotes using deprecated parameters]]}} to be inside the |$B= parameter of Module:unsubst. A similar problem exists with {{more footnotes}}

Reason for this change: make substing this template not produces an unnecessary #ifeq after the produced transclusion.

Pppery (talk) 12:50, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

@Pppery: The template doesn't clearly state that substitution is not allowed or anything, but what is the scenario that requires substitution? There isn't :) — Andy W. (talk ·ctb) 14:55, 22 June 2016 (UTC) 15:08, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
I did act on this after testing anyway. Thanks. Ping if there are issues. — Andy W. (talk ·ctb) 15:03, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
@Andy M. Wang: In your fulfilling of this edit request, you added a stray }} to Template:More footnotes, which makes substituting the template produce a transclusion in addition to rather than instead of the substituted wikitext. I am reactivating this request to request removal of those stray brackets. Pppery (talk) 18:43, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
On second thought, maybe you intended to do that. In any case, I wanted |$B= param to contain the tracking category and the rest of the template code, not only one of those. Pppery (talk)
@Pppery: Yes check.svg Done with Special:Diff/730717443. Tested at {{X7}}. Thanks for the catch, that's on me. — Andy W. (talk ·ctb) 20:04, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── @Andy M. Wang: It looks like this can now be removed... I'm not certain I'm understanding the code 100% though so I want to check with you. It appears that the param {{{ suffix}}} is deprecated, yes? Since Category:No footnotes using deprecated parameters is now empty and there are thus no more instances of the template using the deprecated param, should we remove support for the param and delete the tracking category? --Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 16:20, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 16 October 2017[edit]

Not the most important thing, but can the BLP parameter use the {{yesno-no}} template so it can take other "yes" values such as "y" and "true", rather than just "yes"? Adam9007 (talk) 00:54, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Done — JJMC89(T·C) 02:05, 16 October 2017 (UTC)