FANDOM


Parameter for doc-page to use Edit

Someone should update this to allow for supplying the doc-page to use, which is handy when you write a template that is made out of multiple templates working as one.
eg. a template with sub-pages of sub-templates that all share a common doc-page.
⇐⇑©TriMoon™TalkHandyWikiLinks @ 04:46, November 7, 2010 (UTC)

I've hacked in support for this. It's untested, but it *should* work. ダイノガイ千?!? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 03:32, November 10, 2010 (UTC)

Content= Edit

Can someone add a "content=" parameter to this, to make it more compatible with Wikipedia?

I hacked the version on my wiki to add it, but the version here is different from the one on Starter... and my hack cut out the instructions at the end when using "content", so someone may want to write a nicer one.

My hack is:


<noinclude><div style="display:none;"></noinclude><div style="border:1px solid black; margin:1em; margin-top:3em;"><div style="background:#ddd; color:#111; padding:1em; margin:0em;">'''Template documentation''' <span style="font-size:85%;">(for the above template, sometimes hidden or invisible)</span></div><div style="padding:1em; padding-bottom:0em; margin:0em;">{{tocright}}
{{#if:{{{content|}}}
|{{{content}}}
|{{{{{docpage|{{PAGENAME}}/doc}}}}}
</div><br style="clear:both;"/><div style="background:#ddd; color:#111; padding:0.5em; margin:0em; font-size:85%; text-align:right;">Visit [[Template:{{PAGENAME}}/doc]] to edit this text! ([[Template:Documentation|How does this work]]?)
}} <!-- endif -->
</div></div><noinclude></div>

ForestMonthZero 08:19, November 19, 2011 (UTC)

Done; hopefully I didn't break anything in the process (I'm a bit burned out ATM from template-wrangling on another wiki). =) ディノ千?!? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 08:32, November 19, 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, though, now the instructions on the bottom don't match the contents when using contents (ie. "/doc" isn't being used, it's being entered directly ) We're going to need to think of some better instructions. ForestMonthZero 09:44, November 20, 2011 (UTC)
Export this template, then import, to install it.
Use edit summary: Copied from [[w:c:templates:Template talk:Documentation]] to properly attribute this template's editors.
This template is probably already on your wiki.

ja:Template:Documentation

Template documentation
Note: the template above may sometimes be partially or fully invisible.

Edit this template for the documentation.

Description:
This is a test using |content= for inline documentation.

Should be fixed and equal with WikiPedia's version, see on right.
⇐⇑©TriMoon™TalkHandyWikiLinks @ 12:40, April 27, 2016 (UTC)

header Edit

Abuot the edit and "refresh" links in the header. Should it be "editsection" or "mw-editsection" calss? Also why not to add a little hover text above the "refresh", to explain better what it is? --Mbg2 (talk) 09:07, June 23, 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia suggests the change from "editsection" to "mw-editsection" happened in MediaWiki only in the past few days; the version of MediaWiki that Wikia uses is nowhere near recent enough to have that yet.
I've added the span with the title text "Refresh this page", though if you (or anyone else ;) ) have suggestions for better text, I'm all ears. =) ディノ千?!? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 01:08, June 25, 2013 (UTC)

Some improvement suggestions Edit

Hi there, I'd like to suggest a few improvements to this template - they seem to have worked on another wiki, but I don't want to break anything... anyway, here they are:

  1. Having two links in the doc footer - one for viewing and one for editing the doc. The doc page name would link to the doc page without causing an edit, whereas the word "change" directly links to the doc page's edit window.
  2. Optimizing a few #ifs - {{#if: {{{1|}}} | {{{1}}} | something }} could be shortened to {{{1|something}}}, right?
  3. Does {{FULLPAGENAMEE}} (note the second E) do anything different than {{FULLPAGENAME}}, or is that just a typo that can be fixed?
  4. Improving the transclusion code. The following code is used to transclude the doc text itself:
{{{{
#ifeq: {{NAMESPACE}} | {{ns:Template}} 
|| :{{NAMESPACE:{{ #if: {{{1|}}} | {{{1}}} | {{FULLPAGENAME}} }}}}:
}}{{ #if: {{{1|}}} | {{PAGENAME:{{{1}}}}} | {{PAGENAME}}/doc}} }}

Now I don't know if I'm missing anything here, but wouldn't just using {{:{{{1|{{FULLPAGENAME}}/doc}}} }} also work?

Again, sorry for the lengthy explanation, I'm only asking because I don't want to break anything. If these changes are fine, feel free to implement them, or tell me and I'll put them in. --dgelessus (wall) 19:07, November 25, 2013 (UTC)

@(1)
This functionality seems already implemented by now with current version in the header.
@(2)
That depends on context used, it's clearer to use the default-value version only when substituting a single word/value, but it makes the code less understandable when used in a context that needs other lines of code.
@(3)
The versions with an extra E at end are url-Encoded versions and only useful when generating links with {{fullurl}}.
See: mw:Help:Magic_words#URL_encoded_page_names
@(4)
In the code snippet you provided the output of that parser function is provided as input for another parser function that extracts the namespace only.
In this case it is not needed to use the url-encoded version.
That code could, IMHO, be further compressed/simplyfied to get the same intended functionality, which i will do in due time.
@Your suggestion in last line
That looks very neat and logical taking into account the intended result, see Help:Magic_words#Page_names
I think i'll implement this ^^.
⇐⇑©TriMoon™TalkHandyWikiLinks @ 13:43, April 27, 2016 (UTC)

missing preload pages Edit

Check the links at bottom of the generated borders, where it says experiment with.
The version here is missing Template:Documentation/preload-sandbox and Template:Documentation/preload-testcases.
Maybe even more...
⇐⇑©TriMoon™TalkHandyWikiLinks @ 15:50, December 28, 2015 (UTC)

Copied-over to here
⇐⇑©TriMoon™TalkHandyWikiLinks @ 06:43, April 11, 2016 (UTC)

Broken on non-template namespace Edit

It's broken on non-template namespace, eg. main namespace. If none takes on the challenge i will in due time...
⇐⇑©TriMoon™TalkHandyWikiLinks @ 14:25, December 29, 2015 (UTC)

Fixed nowerdays.
⇐⇑©TriMoon™TalkHandyWikiLinks @ 14:56, April 27, 2016 (UTC)

Creates /sandbox and /testcases entries under Special:WantedPages for every page that uses it Edit

I'm not sure if there's any way around it, but using this template creates a redlink for [x]/sandbox and [x]/testcases. This means for every template that uses it, Special:WantedPages shows two entries. For example, Template:Documentation/sandbox and Template:Documentation/testcases. On this wiki, of course, tons of these links show up in Wanted Pages. If there's any way to keep these helpful links on Documentation, but prevent them from showing up in Wanted Pages, that would be wonderful.

I've tried a couple things on my wiki, but nothing has worked so far. It doesn't help that Wanted Pages is cached and only updates once a day. :P Maybe it can be obfuscated in complex wiki markup somehow, so the links still appear on the page, but do not get picked up by Wanted Pages?

I dunno.

—[ iynque ][ Talk | Contributions | 20:43, 10 Apr 2016 ]
Hmmm i understand the problem, the only way to prevent them from showing up would be to use fullurl after a test with ifexist i think, but they need to be pickedup by MediWiki to showup in WhatLinksHere when they do exist. Maybe someone could experiment with that in a personal sandbox?
⇐⇑©TriMoon™TalkHandyWikiLinks @ 06:41, April 11, 2016 (UTC)
There is no way around this: you either get the links and the WantedPages entries, or you don't get either; #ifexist doesn't work for this because it still causes the pages to be listed on WantedPages if they don't exist. If you don't mind the extra maintenance overhead, though, it would be possible to create a variant template that only lists the links if sandbox/testcases (or whatever names) parameters are given. ディノ千?!? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 03:42, April 13, 2016 (UTC)
I'm not sure if it would be desired by the coding community to prevent these functionalities from the default plain-usage of {{Documentation}} because it would invite un-aware editors to directly edit the original template(s).
That said it could be an option to explicitly disable these functionalities by use of |no-sandbox and |no-testcases respectively or similar names.
This needs careful planning because it could interfere with the custom doc-page usage of the 1st unnamed parameter.
Maybe even use a single parameter with multiple value possibilities parsed by a switch?
⇐⇑©TriMoon™TalkHandyWikiLinks @ 15:46, April 27, 2016 (UTC)

Dependencies Edit

Due to recent changes, the dependencies list for this template is now extensive thanks to content on preload pages and their documentation. {{Ombox}}, {{tl}}, {{Select skin}}, {{TEMPLATENAME}}, {{TEMPLATENAMEE}}, {{Testcases notice}}, to name a few. I was trying to add the preload pages to a wiki, and there's just a bunch of other stuff that needs adding before it works without errors. While I tried to pare it down on my wiki, I'm not confident I know what I'm doing or how it all works. ...and I just outright deleted some stuff to avoid figuring it out :P

Surely at least some of this can be simplified so there are fewer dependencies, but at the very least, the dependencies list needs to be expanded until that happens. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iynque (talkcontribs) 02:42, April 18, 2016. Please sign your posts with ~~~~!

I agree; a template meant to be as integral and fundamental to a wiki as Documentation should not have any dependencies it doesn't absolutely need. As such, I've removed {{Underconstruction}} from the documentation since most wikis aren't ever going to need it in any capacity (and if they do, they've already got the template expertise on board to copy it from elsewhere or just write their own), and I deleted the testcases preload page since it was just copied directly from Wikipedia and that's where all the extra dependencies were coming from (not to say a testcases preload page wouldn't be useful, but it should be written from scratch specifically for use on Wikia rather than being copied from Wikipedia or elsewhere). ディノ千?!? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 23:31, April 18, 2016 (UTC)
@{{Underconstruction}}
On most wikis if not all where new templates are written, they will ALL be under-construction by nature, so i don't understand your reasoning. It's correcter for them to remove it when they don't use it, as to let everyone start new templates without notifying other editors about non-completeness of these new templates !
A default template like this should teach users of it a standardized way of coding-conduct, if not why have this wikia with all it's templates at all?
⇐⇑©TriMoon™TalkHandyWikiLinks @ 15:33, April 22, 2016 (UTC)
@{{Documentation/preload-testcases}}
[sarcasm] Why not remove all it's preload subpages with functionality as shown on top&bottom of the generated page then? [/sarcasm]
As with all W.I.P. templates, they won't be fully functional until edited enough to work.
Deleting a page, the way you did, will simply prevent other editors to make things work because they will be under the impression the page is denied by admins!
That said IMHO {{Documentation}} should have a {{Underconstruction}} on it's top to make it clear it is still lacking functionality !
⇐⇑©TriMoon™TalkHandyWikiLinks @ 15:33, April 22, 2016 (UTC)
@copied from Wikipedia or elsewhere
I'm sorry to burst the Wikia bubble but as long as volunteers provide free code, they will be copying from anywhere they are allowed and able to.
If Wikia want's original code exclusive to them, they should PAY people for such things !
Untill then instead of removing legally-allowed copied material, you should give editors the chance to improve and tweak it to the needs here on wikia.
⇐⇑©TriMoon™TalkHandyWikiLinks @ 15:33, April 22, 2016 (UTC)
This template is a complex template and as such can not be expected to have all functionality coded inside it's own code.
If resolving dependencies is to much work for the one copying it, maybe that person should leave the job to a more competent and willing editor. (Just my opinion)
That said all contributors intend to ofcourse make it less depended on other templates as much as they can ofcourse which is only logical.
⇐⇑©TriMoon™TalkHandyWikiLinks @ 15:33, April 22, 2016 (UTC)
It seems silly to break a "standard" template like this, throw an {{Underconstruction}} on it, and leave it broken until someone wants to fix it. Set up a sandbox, make a version of {{Documentation/preload-testcases}} work there, completely, with as few dependencies as possible, and no manual editing required (and no calls to MediaWiki functions that exist on Wikipedia and not on Wikia). When it works, simply copy it back to the main template/dependencies. Skip {{Underconstruction}} completely, so the novice wiki users aren't left without a copy-and-paste template that requires no editing or fixing before it can be used—or, if you feel capable, just re-create the {{Documentation/preload-testcases}} page again, with a fully-functional version, and skip the sandbox. The deletion log/message is pretty clear that creating the page is not at all "denied by the admins," specifically: "This needs created specifically for use on Wikia." It literally says it "needs to be created." :D
Re:"@copied from Wikipedia or elsewhere," no one is saying you can't copy from Wikipedia. Just modify it so it works first, like, as I said, removing calls to MediaWiki functions that exist on Wikipedia and not on Wikia.
—[ iynque ][ Talk | Contributions | 00:58, 23 Apr 2016 ]
The only proper way to improve upon a copied template is as steps:
  1. Copying the unaltered version so we can see what parts need to be changed on wikia while at same time give proper attribution to the version that it was copied from.
  2. After that we can modify for specic needs on Wikia.
Don't you agree?
That's why i disapprove deletions like that, because it interferes with the proper workflow in respect to attributions of everyone involved.
Some Templates, preload types in particular, don't function properly without saving the code and using it afterwards.
⇐⇑©TriMoon™TalkHandyWikiLinks @ 15:22, April 27, 2016 (UTC)
This version of preload-testcases still depends on {{TEMPLATENAME}} but I can't figure out how that dependency could be removed... I still really don't understand subst/safesubst xD
—[ iynque ][ Talk | Contributions | 23:21, 25 Apr 2016 ]
The {{TEMPLATENAME}} dependency is an integral part of the functioning of {{Documentation/preload-testcases}} intended usage, so it not a good option to remove it.
See mw:Help:Templates#Usage for explanation about subst: and safesubst:
⇐⇑©TriMoon™TalkHandyWikiLinks @ 15:22, April 27, 2016 (UTC)

sandbox and testcases Edit

I ported Wikipedia version of the sandbox preload. Working on the testcases preload. But it already looks like it will require at least two other templates (We could, in theory, get down to one) but that already seems like too many dependencies. I say we use the testcases locally (it seem like something that will be used locally much more than on other wikis) but it is an optional component (I.e. remove it dependencies list) elsewhere (i.e. if there is an editor that wants, is willing and can do the import). Beyond that we can make sure special:export will get the testcases preload and it's dependencies so that if that is how they are importing the will get the functionality. Miiohau (talk) 22:58, October 10, 2016 (UTC)

update: the testcase template invokes a lua function I will have to see what dependencies that function has but looks like local only is becoming more a sure thing. The other template required is a simple banner with the ability to change skins. Miiohau (talk) 23:12, October 10, 2016 (UTC)

Ok the lua module depends on three other modules. So final dependencies count for a nearly straight port is four lua modules(Module:Template_test_case, Module:Yesno, Module:Template_invocation, and Module:Arguments) and two to three templates(template:Testcases notice(newly created for us), template:Test case, and possibly template:clear(which we already have but which is not on starter))  not including the preload page itself or the two subpages of Module:Template_test_case(Module:Template test case/data and Module:Template test case/config) I'm not sure if need or not. Like I said local only and don't require them elsewhere (the wiki software handles the missing preload gracefully. i.e. doesn't load anything but a blank page)  Miiohau (talk) 03:56, October 11, 2016 (UTC)

Ok, I have imported the components needed and attempted to lean on dev.wikia.com as much as possible the preload is currently at Template:Documentation/Sandbox/preload-testcases. I have a draft of Testcases notice (all that missing is a box around it), Template:Test case is imported and should work as soon as I can get the LUA modules to work. Miiohau (talk) 20:03, October 14, 2016 (UTC)

Ok, got the lua modules are working with nice feature that if there's an error for any reason it print out the error message (It a testing template it is kind of thing we want) and it ready to port down from Template:Documentation/Sandbox/preload-testcases to Template:Documentation/preload-testcases as soon as we decide what level requirement we going to put at. Final requirement count two templates((template:Testcases notice, template:Test case), two lua modules  (Module:Template_test_case and Module:Template_invocation.The other LUA modules were already hosted on Dev.wikia.com and I linked to those versions) and two lua config pages (Module:Template test case/data and Module:Template test case/config) not counting the preload page itself. Miiohau (talk) 02:18, October 21, 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for this Miiohau! Do you think it would be possible for this template to transclude the preload stuff from this wiki directly (e.g. something like {{w:c:templates:Template:Documentation/Sandbox/preload-testcases}}) and make it so that all functionality would be included if a novice editor just copy and pasted this template's code into their local Template:Documentation? Would love to help get it to that point! --xensyriaT 19:47, November 20, 2016 (UTC)
EDIT: Or rather if we could convince community central to host whatever else they would need to, as transclusion from "w:" works, while "w:c:" seems not to. --xensyriaT 19:51, November 20, 2016 (UTC)

Dual documentation Edit

Templates on this wiki have their installation described in documentation, as they should.

But, then, these templates will be copied to others' wikis. And then, they will have to be described - in a different context entirely. No Template:SPW, no "How to install", no nothing - the subject is now "how to use".

If we assume that users will copy these templates to other wikis verbatim, as they should, then they should also have documentation to copy verbatim. This documentation should be located at /doc, so that the templates and their documentation can be copied from the same pagename to the same pagename.

What's currently located on this wiki at /doc should be moved to a different location, such as /templatesdoc. Template:Documentation on this wiki can be modified to suit, displaying only /templatesdoc, or displaying both /doc and /templatesdoc in some intelligent manner.

Agree/disagree? I would be happy to undertake this task myself. Henstepl (talk) 00:20, August 18, 2017 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea, but maybe you should also post the proposal at Forum:Watercooler and I will advertise it with a wiki-wide notice. You should also leave a message with Kirkburn, since he is technically the bureaucrat of this wiki even though he's Fandom staff. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 17 Aug 2017 4:28 PM Pacific
Discussion moved to Forum:Dual_template_documentation. Henstepl (talk) 00:33, August 18, 2017 (UTC)

Creates too many wanted templates/pages Edit

This template creates too many wanted templates and pages with its link to the /doc page for the template. Instead of creating a wanted (red) link, how about making the transclusion and link show up only if the documentation exists, but include a link to the /doc page with the suggestion of creating it. There could be an additional category of Templates without documentation when this template is used without documentation.

Also, some documentation may be too short for its own page, so there could be a content parameter added that would be used for very short documentation.

Suggested edits Edit

For the top:

{{#if: {{{content|}}} || 
{{!}}-
{{!}} {{#ifexist: {{FULLPAGENAME}}/doc | Visit [[Template:{{PAGENAME}}/doc]] to edit this documentation. | Documentation has not been written for '''{{PAGENAME}}''', but you can ''[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAMEE}}}}/doc?action=edit write it]''! }} ([[Template:Documentation{{!}}How does this work?]]) }}

For the transclusion:

{{#if: {{{content|}}} | {{{content}}} | {{#ifexist:{{FULLPAGENAME}}/doc| {{{{FULLPAGENAME}}/doc}} | ''There is no documentation for this template.'' }} }}

I may just do it and see if anyone complains. Lady Aleena (talk) 04:21, November 24, 2017 (UTC)

I came back to style the pre tags. Sorry the code in them is such a mess. Lady Aleena (talk) 04:24, November 24, 2017 (UTC)

Your solution does not work #ifexist: will still put the /doc subpage on the wanted pages list. Currently there no way to do what you want to do. The transclusion of the /doc subpage is core to this templates function and to the version included by default on all new wikis. My best recommendation to remove the {{Documentation}} template from the pages or create blank /doc pages. Miiohau (talk) 04:48, November 24, 2017 (UTC)

You are right. I don't intend this one to be copied to other wikis, but I see it can trash our own. I have commented out that code.
We could still have installation instructions in another harmless template parameter. For the rare cases that the standard message is unsuitable.
Should we display standard instructions to copy templates and their documentation? Or should we assume the user knows enough to copy the template and its documentation? The instructions would not be copied to the user's wiki. Henstepl (talk) 05:50, November 25, 2017 (UTC)

Interlanguage links on /doc subpages Edit

I have added |de= |ja= |zh= parameters to Template:Documentation. Now the interlanguage links can be migrated from hard redlinks. Henstepl (talk) 06:25, November 25, 2017 (UTC)

But honestly... should we just assume that an interlanguage link exists for those languages from the start? Then we don't even need a parameter, OR to have the link code on many pages, to avoid redlinks. Henstepl (talk) 06:39, November 25, 2017 (UTC)

Seems okay, but I'm not sure why you picked those particular languages. You might as well add |es= |ru= (more common on high WAM wikis than |de= |ja=) and maybe |fr= |ko= |it= |pt=. As far as assuming interlanguage links of particular types exist, I'm not sure how that would work. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 25 Nov 2017 1:03 PM Pacific
I added ja, zh, and de because those are the only other languages of this wiki, Templates Wiki. (Tagalog interwikis have been enabled, but tl.templates.wikia.com seems to have been deleted.)
The point of my edits to Template:Documentation is to reduce the amount of trimming that the end user has to perform on the code of each template and its documentation. Just as I moved the information conveyed by Template:SPW from a template certain to redlink on the user's wiki into a parameter (which will throw no errors if used with the default documentation template), I have moved the interlanguage links (similarly liable to redlink) into a parameter (similarly harmless).
By changing the default behavior of our Template:Documentation, and by adding a list of the default templates to the code of Documentation, the only place that the |SPW= parameter is needed now is when the template is newer than an SPW template, or not relevant to other wikis besides our own, as our custom Template:Documentation. Template:SPW is ready to be removed from existence entirely.
I am asking if we should remove the need to specify interlanguage links entirely by changing our Template:Documentation to simply insert an interlanguage link to the same pagename on de.templates, ja.templates, and zh.templates by default. If that page doesn't exist, the impetus is on those wikis to create it. Henstepl (talk) 22:04, November 25, 2017 (UTC)
This is the edit I have in mind. Every template would have interlanguage links, up until the moment the template is copied to the user's wiki. Is this what we want, or should we continue to specify them page-by-page? (harmlessly, for the end user?) Henstepl (talk) 10:15, November 26, 2017 (UTC)

Resolution Edit

There is now no need for any interlanguage link on a page-by-page basis, nor any template parameter, for the case that the PAGENAME of both the EN and JA templates is the same, due to Template:Is JA and Template:Is ZH Henstepl (talk) 19:25, November 28, 2017 (UTC)

Moving to project namespace Edit

Because this template is not actually meant to be copied to other users' wikis, I recommend that distinction be made even clearer by moving it to the Project: namespace. The redirect from Template:Documentation to Project:Documentation should remain. Such a move for templates specific to our wiki would allow me to simplify the code of this template even more. Henstepl (talk) 18:21, November 28, 2017 (UTC)

Make this template generic Edit

I believe this template needs to be made generic, meaning wiki neutral. Everything relating to Templates Wiki maintenance should be removed. If you want a documentation template for this wiki, name it something like {{t|TW documentation}}. This template needs to be written in such a way that it can be exported without the exporting admin having to go through this template and hack out all the TW related material.

All bare name templates should be the exportable versions.

I know going through the hundreds of templates that use this template to the TW specific documentation template would be a pain, but this one needs to have all TW material removed.

So, I suggest this series of events:

  1. Move Documentation to [[Template:TW documentation|TW documentation]]
  2. Restart this template with all Templates Wiki maintenance parameters removed.
  3. Add the following to all templates using this template, probably with a bot:
    {{#ifeq: {{SITENAME}} | Wikia Templates | {{TW documentation}}  | {{Documentation}} }}

Lady Aleena (talk) 23:24, December 8, 2017 (UTC)

That I customized this template would not mean I would be particularly offended by its genericization. I created a custom version because I wanted to remove the SPW and interwiki redlinks without removing that information from display on the page, at least without consensus, and elected instead to use parameters. At the time I did not realize I could create Template:Is SPW and its friends.
So, I note that with this current template and those Is templates, these four cases:
  • |SPW=is newer
  • |SPW=is not relevant
  • |ja=(not PAGENAME)
  • |zh=(not PAGENAME)
Are just as non-redlinking, non-breaking as your {{#ifeq: {{SITENAME}} | Wikia Templates | {{TW documentation}} | {{Documentation}} }} - and are the only times a basic call for {{Documentation}} is insufficient. The unparametered call clearly works for almost all pages! Do we really want to forego that to edit all the templates to parse your #ifeq instead?
That's the question - do we want all our templates to accomodate our documentation template, or do we want our documentation template to accomodate all our templates (in the process making our Documentation template a little more unwieldy to copy)? Documentation is the only TW specific template that is at a location likely to be called for by other templates.
Disclaimer: I understand others appreciate attribution but I have a tendency to constantly waive such rights for my wiki creations wherever possible. All my WP uploads are as close to PD as possible. Henstepl (talk) 05:44, December 9, 2017 (UTC)
Consider me neutral on this. Henstepl (talk) 12:07, December 10, 2017 (UTC)

To subtemplate, or not to subtemplate? Edit

Earlier, I said that Is SPW, Is JA, and Is ZH could be used without including them when templates are exported. Unfortunately it seems I was going off of bad information there. I cannot find a way to use these templates (the function of which is to remove the need of code on large swathes of individual pages) without inclusion with Special:Export.

Do we want the user to include Is JA, Is ZH, and Is SPW as well as Template:Documentation when they export templates on this wiki with the "include templates" option? Or do we want to remove those templates from play, and re-insert the SPW information and interlanguage links on hundreds of templates?

Or is there some nefarious way to avoid export inclusion that I haven't seen? Best I can think of is to include the Export link, as I have, to facilitate export without inclusion of templates. Henstepl (talk) 09:54, December 29, 2017 (UTC)

Copypasting versus exporting Edit

Also, copying and pasting should not be the first option for getting this or any other template. Special:Export should be the first (possibly only) option with copying and pasting being the deprecated option. It is all about attribution, which is far easier to accomplish with exporting than copying and pasting. My wrists would be killing me if I had to copy and paste every user who edited a template into a "I got this template from TW and here is the list of editors". How many admin do you think would actually take the time to go through and get that list of editors and properly attribute TW for the template?

I would be fairly upset if I came across a template I created or (heavily) edited without being given the proper attribution. I have come across a wiki where lists from Wikipedia were just copied and pasted to a Fandom wiki and my Wikipedia edits were not in the history of the list. I did not appreciate it one bit.

However, this is just my opinion, but I do not see how Templates Wiki will become the place to get templates if the ones we want to get exported are TW specific. Lady Aleena (talk) 23:24, December 8, 2017 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I had a suggested edit summary inserted:
Use edit summary Copied from [[w:c:templates:]] to properly attribute this template's editors.
But it was improperly #if'd away in a subsequent edit of mine. I have reinstated it. Is that not suitable attribution?
Copying and pasting perhaps should not be the first option for installing these templates - but in practice, that's exactly what it will be. How many Wikians know how to export and import, or can be bothered to learn, before they'll just copypasta it? Henstepl (talk) 06:30, December 9, 2017 (UTC)
If an admin were to do the right thing and export then import this template with a template that is used on, all the parameters' settings would be be as they are here creating redlinks, including the language links. The admin would have to take a knife to the imported Documentation to remove all that clutter.
Also, admin who do not know how to do something as simple as using export and import need to be trained to do it, so let's not encourage copying and pasting. Instead how about a page on Exporting. Exporting is the best, and should be the only, option.
For example, the Tommy Westphall Universe (TWU) wiki does not have either ja or zh. But if I were to import Documentation with say Infobox series character, I would have redlinks to the non-existent ja and zh TWUs. I would have to cut all of that Template Wiki (TW) stuff out of Documentation.
This wiki should be about boiling things down to usage on all wikis not just TW. Everything has to be exportable, and exporting should be given as the only option for using a template from TW. Lady Aleena (talk) 06:46, December 9, 2017 (UTC)
How do you propose we dissuade the user from copypasta long enough to implore them and teach them to import/export it? It's just not a plausible task. You and I are more capable and ethical wikists than most Wikians. Don't assume you can make them care. Making text bigger and bolder only does so much...
Thank you for that example. I will admit that it did not occur to me that the include templates option of Special:Export would include this template. As a matter of fact, I see edit-summary links to be sufficient for most purposes and only personally resort to import/export for fairly enormous community efforts like Wikipedia pages imported to Wikia. I'm very efficient with the Monobook layout and it is difficult to remove myself from the typical edit workflow long enough to import/export.
I would not suppose that the user would definitely care for a cascading template import including any changes to Template:Documentation. I think that a better solution would be to limit the number of subtemplates we deem necessary. Henstepl (talk) 07:04, December 9, 2017 (UTC)

Redundant SPW? Edit

What is Category:Redundant SPW supposed to be for and what can I do to get infoboxes out of it? Lady Aleena (talk) 07:26, December 22, 2017 (UTC)

|SPW=is on and |SPW=is not on were needed once, but now, they are not. I had added those to some pages and now I am trying to remove them (at which point that temporary category can be deleted entirely). Because I am not a bot, I try not to do hundreds of edits at once, else I would have taken care of it all already.
You can simply change {{Documentation|SPW=is on}} or the other case to be a plain {{Documentation}} call. Henstepl (talk) 07:33, December 22, 2017 (UTC)

Not on Starter Pages Wikia relevance? Edit

What is the use of [[:Category:Not on Starter Pages Wikia]] [[:Category:Not on starter pages‏‎]] when only 25 templates are on the Fandom starter pages wiki?

Here is the list of all the templates, with their documentation, on Fandom starter pages:

I can see the use for [[:Category:Fandom starter pages templates]], but not a category for all of the rest of the templates that happen to use this Documentation template. A template with this name is on Fandom starter pages, however, ours is useless outside of Templates Wiki.

So, I seriously suggest you dump the scheme of marking templates not on Fandom starter pages, but marking templates that are on Fandom starter pages and making sure to note the ones that are on Fandom starter pages but are different from the ones here. It shouldn't take too long to check that.

So, suggested new categories:

  • [[:Category:Fandom starter pages templates]]
  • [[:Category:Templates different from FSP templates]]

Please think about this. Lady Aleena (talk) 05:11, December 30, 2017 (UTC)

After a rethink, there is no need for any categories. Just make an interwiki link for those that are on Fandom starter pages so users can check for differences themselves. This template should not categorize pages and should maybe create interlanguage links.
So dump [[:Category:Not on Starter Pages Wikia]] [[:Category:Not on starter pages‏‎]] completely, create an interwiki link to Fandom starter pages, and be done with this. It is just so messy as it is now.
Another note, who from any vanilla wiki would use any of our templates if this one is cluttered with irrelevance? Lady Aleena (talk) 00:16, January 1, 2018 (UTC)
Further note, we have over 450 templates here that will probably never be on Fandom start pages. That means there are over 425 templates that will be in the Not on Start... category. If a category contains almost all of the templates on this wiki, then it is a useless category. Lady Aleena (talk) 10:13, January 1, 2018 (UTC)
I am in favor of removing all but Fandom starter pages templates, but I am not convinced that that category should be removed. Henstepl (talk) 01:44, January 2, 2018 (UTC)
So you are willing to dump [[:Category:Not on starter pages‏‎]]? Lady Aleena (talk) 11:23, January 4, 2018 (UTC)
Da. Let's do it. Henstepl (talk) 12:01, January 4, 2018 (UTC)
I've removed its use from the template, it will probably take a few minutes for it to depopulate. Please go through all of your conversations and use <nowiki> on all of the uses of all of the category mentions like I've done here? I would be grateful for fewer redlinks. Lady Aleena (talk) 13:27, January 4, 2018 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.