FANDOM


is this a template for templates? —JediRogue 00:55, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

yeah -User:PanSola (talk to the Follower of Lyssa) 01:11, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
We should make a template to display the template template. Felix Omni Signature 01:23, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
I beat you to it. The template template can already use itself to display itself. See documentation. -User:PanSola (talk to the Follower of Lyssa) 02:11, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Bugs

  1. It breaks on {{[[Template::User:Warwick/Drama|:User:Warwick/Drama]]}}.
  2. It redlinks on {{subst: Quote| a | b}}.
  3. It swallows named parameters in {{subst: Quote| b}}. {{Burp}}.

--mendel 13:25, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

On example 1, that's because it only works for templates in the Template: namespace. Probably an overlooked limitation, but I haven't seen a lot of complaints about it.
On example 2, it treats "subst:" as part of the template name, which is why it redlinks. I'd call that a feature.
On example 3, I'd say that's also an overlooked limitation, but unlike example 1 I'd say this one should definitely be fixed. The odd thing is that it passes the #if: test, it just doesn't display. Even using template:= doesn't get around it: {{Quote| sig=a | b}}Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken 17:01, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
  1. It is because it prepends Template: even if the parameter starts with a colon.
  2. It's not a feature because in docs you need to explain subst: as well, and this template should be able to do it. It just doesn't, so it's an absent feature.
  3. I don't see how it can pass the #if test. But I've been thinking that expansion of parameters has been poorly documented - the docs seem to state that a = must be present in cleartext (and I seem to remember having confirmed that experimentally), but I've come across cases where that isn't the case (which is why {{D}} breaks when you're using it as unnamed parameter). The only way you can get it to work is by using the HTML code for =. Or finding a parser function that lets you enumerate named parameters.

--mendel 18:23, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

What's wrong with using nowiki tags all the sudden? --- VipermagiSig-- (s)talkpage 18:28, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Take too long to type and don't link to the template. Don't mess with our toys. ;) --mendel 19:08, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Linking isn't that hard... O-o' --- VipermagiSig-- (s)talkpage 19:10, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
I'd like to see you do it within nowiki tags. ;-P --mendel 19:19, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
{{ri}} --- VipermagiSig-- (s)talkpage 19:21, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Way less readable and a lot more work than {{ri}}. BTW, now that I have your attention, could you comment on User:M.mendel/Wikibase if only to say why you didn't read it? Unclear? Too long? Irrelevant? --mendel 19:26, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Imho, that's not much trouble. Troubleshooting a template is, for me. I'm no wikicode mage. About the Wikibase shizl; I indeed didn't read it. Why? You lost my attention after I read 3 sentences. In words and thoughts: *reads* "Ok what was that about? Meh, I'll just listen to Ayeron". --- VipermagiSig-- (s)talkpage 19:34, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Missing Feature #4: when discussing templates to be (or templates to be moved), they may be nonexisting, so a redlink protection as in {{DeletedLink}} would be nice. --mendel 10:22, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

The template:= workaround for example 3 has started working with the new parser update. --◄mendel► 00:22, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Redundant

Why do we have this template, it seems realy redundant... we have Template:tl so why do we need this one? --Shadowphoenix 19:07, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I'd say it's because "tl" is a very non-intuitive name for it. This one is also much more heavily used, tl only had 6 links (which mendel edited earlier today). —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken 21:56, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
This template has more features: it can do more parameters, and automagically prevents redlinks from showing up on "wanted templates". I forgot how to do subst: though. --◄mendel► 22:32, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
I realize the new functions, but why not just add them to tl instead of making a new template? For the reasons Ishmael put? --Shadowphoenix 16:37, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
In short, its better, tl isn't a good name for it, and its more linked. —MaySig Warw/Wick 16:54, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
Shadowphoenix, you'll have to ask PanSola that - this template was created May 1st. I honestly don't know. I like to use this template because the wikicode is very readable and easy to understand with it. --◄mendel► 20:20, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-NC-SA unless otherwise noted.