Template talk:Sofixit

message: See this diff for what I mean. I don't know how to fix it, otherwise I'd already have done so :P Stifle (talk) 13:56, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, happened to me too.  - ulayiti (talk) 05:44, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed it now so it works with or without subst:. —Pengo 22:47, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  This template is messed up without a parameter 

message: It's a self reference...so, should we really be substing it? 1ne 13:37, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I hate subst'ing this. I don't want people to think this is how I write. —Chowbok 20:59, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Subst? 

message: As it happens, though I have seen this template used at least four times (I'll dig up links if anyone insists), but not one of these seemed to be appropriate, because they were each in response to various raised issues (or complaints or whatever) made by people who did not obviously have the time or means to "sofixit" — things along the lines of "the section on such-and-such ought to be expanded," or "there's something inconsistent about these views, but I don't know which one is correct".
As far as I'm concerned, the nature of the template itself is largely to blame, because it it so broadly worded. Instead, perhaps the suggested use of this template should be in regards to: copyediting fixes ("You misspelled blah), word-for-word suggestions of additions or removals ("This article aught to mention the famous 1857 such-and-such"), and basically nothing else; while we all have the ability to type and copyedit, we're not all experts in the field of articles we might happen to be interested in, so we can't always "fixit" when it comes to certain areas. Does what I'm saying make sense? What do people think? \sim Lenoxus " * " 03:28, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for your suggestion! When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes.  Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the  link at the top. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to).  The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes — they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills.  New contributors are always welcome. (All right, I just stuck that in myself to preempt any smart-alecks who would think of doing that. ;) \sim Lenoxus " * " 03:28, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

text: I'm not sure I agree that rewording this template is the best way to go, but I definitely agree it should be used carefully and conservatively. As Lenoxus explains, a reply of 'sofixit' is appropriate in certain areas - where users mention simple, obvious errors that they can easily fix themselves - but highly inappropriate in others, and in the latter cases it's arguably downright incivil to use this template in place of a proper reply. Terraxos 19:23, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Easily overused 

message: I was called trolls when I used this template to someone who just "talks." Sigh! --Manop - TH 20:30, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  called trolls 

message: If you use this with indentation, such as:
 :
It doesn't indent.  This is because there is a newline after the title.  Will it break anything if the </noinclude> is moved to the start of the second line instead of the end of the first line to avoid pushing the newline character when the template is used?  I have made this minor edit and I do not see any problem. -- Kainaw(what?) 17:10, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Indent Fix 

message: I don't have any problems with the tempate per se, but I think the name is a little rude.  How about just , which I see is already redirected here.  Would that be a better name in general? ←BenB4 00:50, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Go ask Mr. Roosevelt (i.e. his Big Stick). 68.101.123.219 (talk) 22:00, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rename? 

message: There probably should be some mention in the template's text about what to do if you can't "fix it" because your ip is blocked or the page is protected. OlEnglish (talk) 22:04, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  add some kind of mention for blocked ips and protected pages 

message: I just used this template (it's been a long time, and I forgot to subst). But it occurred to me that the expanded text should also call attention to the need for a citation; after all, the template has been around since long before WP started emphasizing accurate sourcing. It's important when addressing comments like "the article's account is wrong; what actually happened was this and this and this", which may be true but an edit shouldn't be encouraged without proof. David Brooks (talk) 22:19, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ask for citations 

message: Use of this template in its current form has excess overhead for load times and does not properly subst: all parts of the template as they should be.  There was no consensus to change the substitution method to the heavier method and all caps mw:Help:Magic Words are the norm and are not considered shouting. —  (e • t • c) 18:37, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: On the page you linked to, parser functions are lowercase (only variables are uppercase, and safesubst isn't a variable). I'm not sure what you're saying the "heavier" method is. I did change the int:edit to just use it directly, though, since that message doesn't ever change. Jackmcbarn (talk) 19:15, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template is broken 

message: Many of the links and references to parts of Wikipedia web pages are significantly outdated. The following code should represent updated text and links replaced with the pages they redirect to:
 Thank you for your suggestion. When you believe  needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes.  Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the Edit link at the top. The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills.  New contributors are always welcome. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons you might want to).  


 —The Editor's Apprentice (talk) 23:47, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like this is almost all just bypassing perfectly good redirects, which I do not support. The only part I support is changing the "edit this page link" to "Edit link". P.I. Ellsworth  ed. put'r there 03:42, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

text: Done Sorry, Paine Ellsworth, I missed your comment when I stepped away for a bit. I checked the code in the sandbox and saw that there was at least one substantive change, so I went ahead with the update. You are welcome to revert if you feel that this change needs further discussion.  – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:14, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: It's all good, Jonesey95. As long as there is at least one important change, such as the edit link, there is nothing in policy that would say no to bypassing the redirects. So it's all good, and thank you for the nod! P.I. Ellsworth  ed. put'r there 17:34, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template-protected edit request on 26 June 2020 

message: I've redesigned this template, mainly to help make it more conversational in tone (it's not bad currently, but the icon and some of the language still sounds a bit too template-y). I also made some beneath-the-surface changes, such as including the "you may want to log in" suggestion by default only when it's used on an IP's talk page, since for everyone else it's unnecessary. Does the redesign look alright to everyone? I'll implement in a few days if it's good. We'll also want to change  into a wrapper so that it'll remain synced.  talk 05:53, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Only objection is the link to the  huge 70+ page  tutorial that makes us loos readers. Best send them to the overview page (that is already here) so they can pick what info to search about. Very detrimental to keep sending potential new editors to a set of pages we know dont help.--Moxy 🍁 15:53, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: You've made that point repeatedly and other editors have not been persuaded by it. But fine, I'll keep the link pointed to Help:Getting started for now, and hopefully that page will eventually be retired.  talk 22:38, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redesign