Template talk:Vector version available

message: This template does not work when linking to images on Commons directly as the Image: prefix is already set.  Please change this so that vector versions on Commons can be linked correctly (e.g., :Commons:Image:Vector image.svg).  (Forgot to sign --Geopgeop 07:04, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Linking to commons images 

message: I'm not opposed to merging the two templates, but I'd like to use the  design because it looks better. El T 15:25, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge 

message: The display of a thumbnail of the replacement image does not seem to be working. AnonMoos 21:55, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think it was my edit, I just removed the merge tag.  But this is an odd problem, it appears inconsistent.  For example, while :Image:Hyperbola one over x.jpg doesn't render the new image, :Image:HSV RGB Comparison.png does.  Ideas? --ChrisRuvolo (t) 00:18, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Looks good, thanks. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 03:47, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Thumbnail problems

message: I suggest merging :Template:SupersededSVG into this template. 
:Template:SupersededSVG seems to be a parallel to commons:Template:SupersededSVG (ironically, there is a similar conflict between it and commons:Template:Vector version available), but I see no reason to use both. Unless I am mistaken, they perform the same function: notifying visitors to an image's description page that an SVG version of that image is both available and preferable. I understand that the Superseded template might be used to indicate a stronger conviction that the SVG is superior, but I believe the phrasing of Vector Version Available (i.e. "should be used in place of this raster image whenever possible") fulfills this purpose as well. Furthermore, :Template:SupersededSVG is not as widely used and does not add tagged pages into the appropriate category, as this template does.
On the other hand, I prefer the look of :Template:SupersededSVG, and I believe the insertion of "Note: this file will not be deleted, unless it is explicitly nominated for deletion" is a wise choice. If possible, I believe those aspects of :Template:SupersededSVG should be included in this template. MithrandirMage 16:46, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge 

message: Should this template be moved to "Template:SVG version available"? I think "SVG" version available sounds better than "Vector" version available. --98E 22:31, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move? 

message: Template:Non-free vector version available has been nominated for deletion. Anyone interested is invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. That template uses the "nonfree=yes" parameter of this template; if that template is deleted, then I believe the "nonfree" parameter of this template should be removed as well. All the best, – Quadell (talk) 22:03, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-free images 

message: Where it says, "…in order to maintain this information.For more information…" it should be, "…in order to maintain this information. For more information…". There must be spacing between "information." and "For". JC ·  Xbox ·  Talk ·  Contributions 08:01, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: —Bkell (talk) 08:31, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requesting changes 

message: When using nonfree=yes, the middle part of this box is displayed in a mono-space font like this:
  For more information, see the documentation on MediaWiki's support of SVG images.
There's a space somewhere before this fragment, related to the use of nonfree=yes. +mt 03:03, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  mono-space font for nonfree=yes 

message: To remove obsolete HTML tag lint error, please change 
: ...
to
: ...
Of course, everything before, in between, and after stays the same. — Anomalocaris (talk) 02:08, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  why do you want to introduce a new block element here (as opposed to using span or otherwise stylizing the table that is wrapping this)? — xaosflux Talk 02:49, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: User:Xaosflux: I edited  to be the version I requested in the first place. I tested it at User:Anomalocaris/sandbox/Lint Test and my sandbox version has no lint errors and seems to work without any issue. I do not understand your problem. Where in Wikipedia is this template used where an additional block element would be a problem? —Anomalocaris (talk) 06:41, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  just semantically, checking why you want to create a new block element (div) when this line of text is already fully enclosed in a block element? — xaosflux Talk 16:23, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  Done Span does not work and I can see no table for this. Also this group of elements does seem to be in it's own section (as indicated by the horizontal line), so as a div defines a section of a document, it seems a good fit. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 18:06, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template-protected edit request on 27 December 2018