Template talk:Title - Revision history

TK-421 at 06:39, 26 January 2021

2021-01-26T06:39:28Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:39, 26 January 2021
Line 7:		Line 7:
	== Obsolete Titles ==		== Obsolete Titles ==

	Executive decision: I've just depreciated the "Obsolete" banner from this template. The DR2 to DR3 transition was ages ago, and if we haven't updated all the titles by now... we're not going to. The odds of another major overhaul of the titles is low, and the confusion the banners are causing outweigh their benefit (particularly since the "new" flag isn't properly supported in [[Form:Title]]. --[[User:TK-421\|TK-421]] ([[User talk:TK-421\|talk]]) 00:39, 26 January 2021 (CST)		Executive decision: I've just depreciated the "Obsolete" banner from this template. The DR2 to DR3 transition was ages ago, and if we haven't updated all the titles by now... we're not going to. The odds of another major overhaul of the titles is low, and the confusion the banners are causing outweigh their benefit (particularly since the "new" flag isn't properly supported in [[Form:Title]]). --[[User:TK-421\|TK-421]] ([[User talk:TK-421\|talk]]) 00:39, 26 January 2021 (CST)

TK-421: /* Obsolete Titles */ new section

2021-01-26T06:39:04Z

Obsolete Titles: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:39, 26 January 2021
Line 4:		Line 4:

	The Discussion link on any page based on the Title template page links to "<name>" instead of "Title_talk:<name>". - [[Padhg]] <sup>([[User talk:RY4NPW\|talk]])</sup> 22:16 4 December 2015 (UTC)		The Discussion link on any page based on the Title template page links to "<name>" instead of "Title_talk:<name>". - [[Padhg]] <sup>([[User talk:RY4NPW\|talk]])</sup> 22:16 4 December 2015 (UTC)

			== Obsolete Titles ==

			Executive decision: I've just depreciated the "Obsolete" banner from this template. The DR2 to DR3 transition was ages ago, and if we haven't updated all the titles by now... we're not going to. The odds of another major overhaul of the titles is low, and the confusion the banners are causing outweigh their benefit (particularly since the "new" flag isn't properly supported in [[Form:Title]]. --[[User:TK-421\|TK-421]] ([[User talk:TK-421\|talk]]) 00:39, 26 January 2021 (CST)

RY4NPW: /* Discussion links for this template are broken */

2015-12-04T21:17:01Z

Discussion links for this template are broken

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:17, 4 December 2015
Line 3:		Line 3:
	== Discussion links for this template are broken ==		== Discussion links for this template are broken ==

	The Discussion link on any page based on the ~~Item~~ template page links to "<name>" instead of "~~Item_talk~~:<name>". - [[Padhg]] <sup>([[User talk:RY4NPW\|talk]])</sup> 22:16 4 December 2015 (UTC)		The Discussion link on any page based on the Title template page links to "<name>" instead of "Title_talk:<name>". - [[Padhg]] <sup>([[User talk:RY4NPW\|talk]])</sup> 22:16 4 December 2015 (UTC)

RY4NPW: /* Discussion links for this template are broken */ new section

2015-12-04T21:16:47Z

Discussion links for this template are broken: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:16, 4 December 2015
Line 1:		Line 1:
	It seems most (if not all) of the calls to this template attempt to pass requirements as unnamed parameters, rather than using the TitleReq template call. Judging by the history of the template, this is because there used to be a Req1 - Req11. Does this mean we need to go through all the titles and make sure they use any available TitleReq formats? I've done [[Gypsy]], at least.[[User:FuIru\|FuIru]] 06:32, 18 November 2008 (UTC)		It seems most (if not all) of the calls to this template attempt to pass requirements as unnamed parameters, rather than using the TitleReq template call. Judging by the history of the template, this is because there used to be a Req1 - Req11. Does this mean we need to go through all the titles and make sure they use any available TitleReq formats? I've done [[Gypsy]], at least.[[User:FuIru\|FuIru]] 06:32, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

			== Discussion links for this template are broken ==

			The Discussion link on any page based on the Item template page links to "<name>" instead of "Item_talk:<name>". - [[Padhg]] <sup>([[User talk:RY4NPW\|talk]])</sup> 22:16 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Maintenance script: New page: It seems most (if not all) of the calls to this template attempt to pass requirements as unnamed parameters, rather than using the TitleReq template call. Judging by the history of the tem...

2008-11-18T06:32:36Z

New page: It seems most (if not all) of the calls to this template attempt to pass requirements as unnamed parameters, rather than using the TitleReq template call. Judging by the history of the tem...

New page

It seems most (if not all) of the calls to this template attempt to pass requirements as unnamed parameters, rather than using the TitleReq template call. Judging by the history of the template, this is because there used to be a Req1 - Req11. Does this mean we need to go through all the titles and make sure they use any available TitleReq formats? I've done [[Gypsy]], at least.[[User:FuIru|FuIru]] 06:32, 18 November 2008 (UTC)