Template talk:Ln/Archive 3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3

Template:La

Why does this template show up so often as having a disambiguation link to Article? It seems to show up even without any changes in "Article". The Banner talk 01:08, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

The article La (a disambiguation page) is not he same as Template:La. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 09:56, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, off course I mean the template. The Banner talk 12:40, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
@The Banner: The problem is not with the template but its doc page; specifically, at Template:Ln#Examples, fifth and sixth rows after the header (the ones beginning {{la|Article}} and {{lat|Article}}), column 2. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:14, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
Okay, identified the problem. But how to solve it? The Banner talk 23:39, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
  • I'm not sure on this, but does this change solve the issue? If not, actually subst:ing should fix it even if the result is messy looking code in the /doc page. Otherwise, I'm not understanding what you are saying is the problem, which is entirely likely as my brain is slightly burnt-out from the holidays. — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 01:25, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
  • The problem was that the template showed up quite often at Templates with disambiguation links. Most of the links showing up there I can fix, but this one I could not. I could not even find where the problem was. (And I am an experienced link-to-disambiguation-page-solver, I have seen some difficult tricks along the way) But for now, the page is out of the list, thank you for that! The Banner talk 11:57, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Add an edit beta or vedit link

I'd like to add another link to the output of this, labelled "edit beta" or "vedit", which would edit the target article using the visual editor. This would be a convenience for those of us who use VE. I proposed this at Template talk:Al but I now see this is a family of templates, so it's probably best discussed here. I posted notes in a couple of other places; I assume I should redirect those pointers here but will wait for comments before doing so in case the conversation needs to happen elsewhere. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 17:26, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

No disagreement above so here's the specific edit request. Currently the {{la}} template produces "Article (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs | views)" with appropriate links. I would link this changed to "Article (edit | edit beta | talk | history | links | watch | logs | views)", with the "edit beta" link pointing to "?veaction=edit" for the article, to give access to VE. I am not sufficiently familiar with the template to be able to edit it myself, and I see other requests above using [[tl|editprotected}}, so I'll request this edit using that template; if that's not the right way to request this please let me know. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:59, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

I oppose adding more links to an already cluttered template which already causes template inclusion expansion limit issues. What I would prefer to see is a little JavaScript gadget to change the edit link into an edit source and add a new edit for ve (to simulate the existing system). I'd be happy to make such a script. — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 15:17, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Yes, it's a cluttered template, but I don't think the script approach is the best way to handle this -- that would mean people would essentially have to opt in to see the link they prefer, by using a script. The right answer, however we do it, should give people the links they prefer to see without needing any script to be loaded in their preferences. Is it possible for the template to test whether the user has opted in to VE, and only show the link in that case? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 15:23, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
That is exactly what Technical13 is proposing, but it can only be done in JavaScript. One would not have to opt in because VisualEditor needs JavaScript anyway, so a default gadget is the best option IMO. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 15:39, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
OK, then I misunderstood -- sorry. That sounds perfect -- if the link shows up for VE users and not for non-users that's exactly what's needed. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 16:28, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Request disabled for now. Technical 13: are you still planning to write this script that you offered? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:21, 9 December 2014 (UTC) 

importScript('User:Technical 13/Scripts/Gadget-veditLinks.js');//Backlink [[User:Technical 13/Scripts/Gadget-veditLinks]]
I know that it fails to work on Template:Pagelinks (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) when used for non-talk page links, and that is due to the fact that MediaWiki:PageLinks (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) doesn't wrap the links in an lx classed span. I'm working to correct that now. I also am aware that it is likely applying the change to namespaces that don't have VE enabled, such as talk spaces, template/module, etc, and I'll work on a fix for that as well. I figured a good first step was to add the link to everything, and then work on filtering out stuff that shouldn't be after. — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 20:55, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
It works well for me. I went to Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:La and tried a few pages; it correctly does not add the edit beta link to category page listings, for example. Thanks! When you're confident that it works correctly in all circumstances, how will it be made a general default? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 21:20, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Not ready to figure that out yet. I'll likely want an opinion from Krenair or another WMF staffer that is working on VE. Then, it'll either be looked over and added as a VE component by the foundation or we can start a proposal/RfC/discussion of some kind to see if the community supports it.
@Jackmcbarn, Mr. Stradivarius, MSGJ, and Anomie: can one of you help me with fixing Module:PageLinks/sandbox so that it passes an argument to Module:Toolbar to add the lx class to the span since I've little experience with Lua? Thanks. — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 21:30, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
@Technical 13:  Done Jackmcbarn (talk) 05:37, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Mike, I believe I've found all templates that make the hlist of links and got them to work, and I've applied filters so that only links to pages in namespaces that VE is enabled add the "edit beta" link. The rest just change the text to "edit source" but don't add the link. What do you think? Did I miss anything? Feedback would be appreciated. :) — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 19:18, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
    Just tried {{article|radiocarbon dating}} and I get this: Radiocarbon dating (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs | views). Shouldn't that include the edit beta link? Or is the {{article}} template a different beast? Or do I need to update the script I'm including in my .js? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 19:59, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
    • Where is this broken usage because I used it in my sandbox and got Radiocarbon dating (edit source | edit beta | talk | history | links | watch | logs | views). — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 17:50, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
      It was here on this page in preview mode, but I just tried it again and it's working now. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 18:04, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
    An additional note: a page that provides a fairly stiff test of the response time of the gadget is WP:GAN. It works extremely well. On my machine it takes about 2-3 seconds to add the "edit beta" link to over 500 templates. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 16:51, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
    • I'm guessing most of that time is waiting its turn to run. There are a lot of other scripts that Wikipedia itself runs for various things (including VE itself) that have to complete before the script can run. bits.wikimedia (the site that holds all of the code for the software) has been kind of slow lately. I'm glad you're enjoying it. :) — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 17:50, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
  • The code for this script is on GitHub on GitHub for those interested. — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 18:38, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
    @Technical 13: this is now working well for me (thank you again). Is it time to think about making it a general default yet? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 02:16, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
    • Probably not default yet. It will need more users to test different environments like various browser, skin, and OS combinations. A good idea is to bring up the script and a few places and try to get more people using it. The first thing to do is to add it to the list of userscripts. I'll do that now. It takes quite a while to make something a gadget. — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 14:41, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Adding vedit link to pagelinks

About a year ago I asked about adding a visual editor edit link to {{pagelinks}} and related templates; Technical13 was working on it but has since been blocked. Can anyone else complete the necessary changes? See Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Æthelwulf/archive1 for the usage that I'd like to see fixed; the links at the top don't include a vedit link. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 14:37, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Just added it to the sandbox, e.g:
Was not sure what to go with for the link title but could not think of anything better than 'vedit'. Straightforward enough, but could do with some more opinions before adding it to the live template I think.--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 15:12, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
Should add that that’s to {{la}}, i.e. {{la/sandbox}}, as the main one for linking articles. Would a bit more complex and a bit less straightforward to add it to {{pagelinks}} I think.--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 15:18, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
That would be Template talk:Ln/Archive 3#Add an edit beta or vedit link. I note the discussion there was about adding a gadget of some sort to add the link, since VE is unusable without JS anyway and this template is already fairly cluttered. Anomie⚔ 12:40, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 29 March 2016

Please change February 9 --> March 29 in the TfM template, as the merge discussion was relisted. ~ RobTalk 19:46, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Done Jackmcbarn (talk) 20:21, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
Update again to April 10 (and maybe even participate in the TfD :P). ~ RobTalk 00:46, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
Done — JJMC89 (T·C) 01:01, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
Please remove this now. Izkala (talk) 10:26, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
 Done. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 10:50, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Consistency in font-size

How come {{pagelinks}} and {{la}} do not put the links inside a <span style="font-size:90%;"> like the rest of the examples seen at Template:Ln/doc#Examples? Shouldn’t all of those templates just transclude {{lx}} (via {{subst:ln}}) for consistency? Hftf (talk) 00:00, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

redirect=no

Is there still no template for hard redirects?  I see that Template:La was modified in August 2012, but the change reverted.  Thanks, Unscintillating (talk) 15:45, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

  • I didn't like some of the design with the existing template, such as "Edit" is not needed at AfD, and the Talk page history should be included if the Article's page history is available.  So I've started with BigNate37's work from 2012, and gone my own direction at User:Unscintillating/Template:Lrdr.  The following AfD has several substituted examples:
Unscintillating (talk) 21:46, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
  • But as in 2012, I've quickly run into the expectation that the link should be red if the page, in this case the talk page as shown above, doesn't exist.  Unscintillating (talk) 21:46, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 18 November 2017

Please copy over the contents of Template:Pagelinks/sandbox into {{Pagelinks}}. See Template:Pagelinks/testcases for "User talk:Example" for the linking difference on the subject page. This has also been manifesting in the interface (probably since special:diff/793584929 and we didn't notice this prior), like this (do you see the red "subject" link?).

— Andy W. (talk) 15:45, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Courtesy pings Train2104, JJMC89 — Andy W. (talk) 15:55, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
Done — JJMC89 (T·C) 17:42, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 28 October 2018

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

No consensus for the proposed moves after extended time for discussion, but there is apparent consensus to at least redirect the longer titles to the short forms. bd2412 T 02:48, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

– There has been a push in recent months to make template names more "obvious" - i.e. "what do they actually do". While the vast majority of people will continue to use shortcuts like {{la}}, it will help clear up any confusion (for example, if someone doesn't know whether {{lm}} links to Modules or MediaWiki they will immediately know it if they end up at {{MediaWiki link}}). If I've missed any (there are a lot!) or there are one or two that really should be removed, I'm amendable to such changes. Primefac (talk) 18:48, 28 October 2018 (UTC) --Relisting. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 23:05, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

  • As a note, I left out {{lt}} and {{ltt}} because {{Template links}} is already a redirect to {{Tfd links}} and there are just enough subtle differences that the future usage of {{lt}} is worth a different discussion. Same with {{lu}} and {{user links}}. Primefac (talk) 00:24, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support, per nomination. – BrandonXLF (t@lk) 00:41, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support creating redirects from the proposed long names to the existing short names, Oppose moving. —Locke Cole • t • c 02:26, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - per nom. In coding conventions using recognizable words is always preferred over short un-legible shorts as it makes the lives of those using it much easier and less pron to mistakes. This seems to be the same situation, as the template needs to be easy to understand what it does just by its name. --Gonnym (talk) 08:00, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
  • oppose. I can see no problem creating redirects from the long names to the short names, but the fact that this has only been done for one suggests people are happy using shorter names. The one that is used most, probably more than the rest combined, is {{la}} and that already has longer redirects if people want to use them. There is no standard that template names need to be verbose or readable, many aren’t. I am not aware of any consensus this be changed.--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 08:34, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support These are the proper names of the templates like {{User}}, Template:Afd2 is a bit different as it is only used in the context that that would be understood. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:12, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Relisting Comment: Relisting due to the large number of moves and the large usage of the templates. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 23:05, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose. This seems like a longstanding solution in search of a problem. (However, I’m okay with the prooosed titles being created as redirects.) Steel1943 (talk) 00:11, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Template-protected edit request on 29 August 2019

Could someone please try to fix the template's talk page links for non-articles? Due to a lack of a "switch" parameter there, it's displaying weird broken link coding for some areas this template is used in, including very recent MFD nominations and SPI cases. ToThAc (talk) 23:43, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: {{la}} is only to be used for articles, not pages in other namespaces, which have their own templates, e.g. {{lw}}. — JJMC89 (T·C) 00:09, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
The request is apparently for {{la}} as JJMC89 guessed. It only requires a change from Talk:{{{1}}} to {{TALKPAGENAME:{{{1}}}}}. I see no harm in doing this. Templates are often used differently than intended. A few searches like [1] quickly found around 600 pages using it on other namespaces. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:07, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
I see no purpose to adding extra markup to a template so that the <1/600 of its uses that pass it a specific kind of invalid arguments don't produce errors. * Pppery * it has begun... 04:27, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
It's only 12 extra characters with no transclusions. We don't know how many cases have been fixed by using another template when {{la}} could have worked fine, or how much time was spent trying to figure out the problem. It's natural to expect that a valid page name will work when "article" is not in the template name. "la" could mean anything. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:36, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
For what it's worth, I did try getting the names changed to something more obvious. Primefac (talk) 16:11, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
I find myself agreeing with pppery on this one; we should not be backdoor-fixing incorrect usage. If anything, all of these "link" templates should be turned into wrappers of {{ln}}. Primefac (talk) 16:15, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
 Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit template-protected}} template. I might add that it would be good to set up a sandbox for the requested edit regardless of the above discussion. Izno (talk) 23:25, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Italic titles

This is admittedly picky, but would it be possible to get pages like The New York Times to display with an italic title? {{u|Sdkb}} talk 04:13, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Possible yes. Necessary? Depends on how picky you want to be, I guess! This template family should never be used in the article space, which means that MOS and italics guidelines pretty much go out the window. I know if I were linking to NYT I wouldn't be bothered with italicizing it because that's a purely stylistic choice. I can also think of some edge cases (such as Nature (journal) where you'd then end up italicizing the disambiguator as well, which isn't ideal. I'm not saying that we shouldn't do it, just not sure why we would want to. Primefac (talk) 10:47, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
Yeah, on second thought, probably not worth the effort. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 09:21, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Escape code vs magic word

Why is | used instead of {{!}} if the latter is more readable? JsfasdF252 (talk) 21:34, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

I have no idea to what you are referring. Primefac (talk) 23:46, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
I meant & # 1 2 4 ; without spaces, which I was unable to display raw. JsfasdF252 (talk) 01:04, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
I know what you typed, but I have no idea what it means in this context. Primefac (talk) 01:17, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

{{La}} fix for talk namespaces

{{La/sandbox}} has a fix for the link to talk outside article space (diff). See Template:La/testcases#Other_namespaces. This fix should be applied to the template. MarioGom (talk) 21:30, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

 Not done See Template talk:Ln/Archive 3#Template-protected edit request on 29 August 2019 * Pppery * it has begun... 21:35, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Pagelinks: Bug with links for popups

Comparing the sets of links produced:

{{la|Example}}
Example (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
{{pagelinks|Example}}
Example (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

If I hover over the links via 'la', WP:POPUPS gives me a preview, such as the page-history when I over over 'history'. That's typical POPUPS behaior for any bluelink on wiki. When I hover over the links via 'pagelinks', which uses Module:PageLinks, there is no preview. If I click on the links, everything works, and I get to the same targets either way. So this seems like a weakness in now PageLinks is generating the links. Maybe it needs a special CSS class, formatting detail, or other hint? Or should 'pagelinks' be a wrapper function around the more-featured 'l*' family? DMacks (talk) 21:42, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

If I'm not mistaken (which I could be) {{pagelinks}} uses wikilinks while {{la}} uses unformatted elinks. That could be what is causing the discrepancy. Primefac (talk) 21:48, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Nominating protected templates for deletion

I am nominating many internal link templates for deletion. The discussion is happening at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion#Internal link namespace-specific templates. I would like <noinclude>{{subst:tfd|type=inline|header=Internal link namespace-specific templates}}</noinclude> to please be put on these templates, according to WP:TFDHOWTO. Thank you. SWinxy (talk) 05:35, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

 Done Primefac (talk) 06:21, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
ty prime ilu. SWinxy (talk) 06:21, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template_talk:Ln/Archive_3&oldid=1179131452"