Template talk:Very long/Archive 1

message: I've added a bit about just trimming an article - quite often, the article just gets crap in it, and it doesn't need transfered into a subarticle. I have a few juicy examples, if anyone is interested. I hope the change is OK. -Patstuart(talk)(contribs) 04:45, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trimming 

message: The current wording is:
"This article is becoming very long.
Please consider summarizing or transferring content to subtopic articles."
The phrase "very long" sounds a bit too much like a statement about the importance of the topic. There are some very long articles out there, granted, but it just struck me as something of a fight-starter if misused. (The first thing that comes to mind is a bored student complaining, "It's too long!")
Take an article about Hitler: it is technically longer than one on Libertarianism, but is not listed as Very Long due to its large array of subtopic articles. One could take that to mean that Hitler was more important than Libertarianism, when this template relates more to style editing if I'm correct.
Why not change it to something like, "This article is becoming very long, etc..., This is not a statement on the importance of this article"? It would prevent petty disputes and thus help things get done faster. Kennard2 06:58, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wording may need work 

message: Part of the wording is "Please discuss this issue on the and help" (nowiki tags and italics added). The italicized part doesn't make any sense, and I think it would be better to change the wording of that part to "Please discuss this issue on this article's talk page and help", which sounds better (to me, at least) and fixes the nonsense part. Would that work? --Burgercat 18:52, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Talk page link and wording

message: has a name that could be confused with . Perhaps one of them should be rename? / Fred-J 15:34, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like it has been. I have added it to see also so that people can find it now that they are redirected here. Richard001 (talk) 04:11, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Verylong vs Toolong 

message: What about sections that are toolong? We have one for leads () and this for whole articles, but what can I use for a section that is too long? Perhaps this should be modified to allow it to be used for sections too (e.g. |section changes it to a section specific message). Richard001 (talk) 04:11, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Good idea, but the message for a section has almost nothing in common with a message for an article. The latter suggests to split in WP:Summary style, which is obviously not recommended for a single section. Having KISS principle in mind, I've created  template (alternative names ,  should work as well). --Kubanczyk (talk) 11:33, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Sections

message: No where in this doument does it state that Reza Pahlavi attended Lubbock Christian College, while living in Lubbock Texas.  He did.  I attended there at the same time.
75.47.157.28 (talk) 09:58, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: This page is for discussions concerning the template named Very long. Edits related to Reza Pahlavi are supposed to be discussed at the article's talk page Talk:Reza Pahlavi. Go there and leave a proposal, preferably with a reference to your claim and where in the text to add it, and I'm certain someone will perform the edit for you. jonkerz♠ 10:40, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from 75.47.157.28, 11 May 2010