Template talk:Article for deletion/Archive 4

message: The first sentence of this template was previously entirely bolded.  This didn't entirely match with the parts needing emphasis: we need to emphasize that the article is being considered for deletion.  The fact that it's being considered in accordance with our policy is certainly true, but doesn't need to be emphasized.  Also, with the previous version, there were two bolded wikilinks in the message: the article's entry on AfD and the deletion policy.  I kept clicking on the Deletion Policy when I was trying to quickly get to the article's AfD entry.  I think that my newer version, which makes only the first part of the first sentence bolded, will increase usability.  -- Creidieki 18:22, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  debolded part of first sentence 

message: In :Template:AfD doc, why don't we use preload= on the "Create its AfD subpage" link to preload the
   ~~~~
stuff into the newly created page?  Jamie 11:04, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  why not use preload 

message: In response to some recent changes to the template which broke the [show]/[hide] button:
: This template uses some magic CSS and JavaScript to provide a dynamic [show]/[hide] button.  This is used to reveal some shortcuts used by many editors when listing articles for AfD.  Although this code looks ugly in the wikisource, it is very fragile and easily broken by even small changes.
: Please be very careful when editing this template, especially the lines involving CSS tags.  And please test your changes using "show preview" to make sure the [show]/[hide] funciton still works, before commiting it to public view; the AfD template is used over 200 times daily.
Jamie (talk/contribs) 12:31, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  This is a good reason to finally get rid of subst.--Eloquence* 05:45, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Be careul editing this template! 

message: Hi, no pics in this template please. It's a subst: so I've got broken images stuck on the pages I've just AfD'd now. - Randwicked 14:08, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  No pics please 

message: I don't see why the template should consist solely of sterile text. What's wrong with a little icon to indicate the nature of the process? Firebug 02:01, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem is, :Category:Pages for deletion is one of the largest and most-used categories on Wikipedia, and an image would thus have a side effect on performance.  I'm not a developer, but that's most everyone's stance on this issue.  My own idea to include an icon failed after this (the mockup was then declared unneeded and speedied under userpage criterion 1.  --WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:58, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Why the resistance to images here?

message: on jan 17 the template got broken by adding a subst: on it.
I've reverted the changes.  has  a screenshot of the breakage. 
Moreover, if someone moves a page with an afd tag, it's the mover responsability to fix links (as in any move, mover alawys should fix links) --  ( drini's page ☎ ) 23:06, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Weird... I tested it in my sandbox before I made the change and I successfully used it myself on a few articles (see Lambert - The Blue Robot With Style and Lilly Greenough, both of which subst'ed the page name correctly). Why would it work for me and not for you? I wonder if anyone else has experienced this problem. As for the larger issue of people moving pages, it happens not too infrequently and oftentimes they forget to change the link. Anything that reduces complexity IMHO is good. howcheng  {chat} 07:24, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I get it. Someone didn't subst when applying the template to the article. Tsk tsk tsk. I guess I'll leave it as is, then, because you can't expect people to remember to do that. Lesser of two evils, I suppose. howcheng  {chat} 07:32, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

text: I've gone through :Category:Pages for deletion and substed the template wherever it was just transcluded (as of about an hour ago).  I've also removed the self-link, so that in a week or so, once all the articles that were already substed with the old version are resolved and the template removed or deleted, Whatlinkshere will be able to find articles where it needs to be substed.  I'll check it the hard way about once a day or so until then.  (Can you tell I'm in favor of this?  I'm certainly tired of leaving two or three snippy "please fix the redlinks when you move articles on afd" talk messages every day.) —Cryptic (talk) 16:08, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  We could add a category, :Category:Unsubsted uses of Template:Afd, that only gets included on un-substed pages.  That might be a little easier than using Whatlinkshere ... dbenbenn | talk 18:39, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  template broken 

message: I've made it so that the template now takes an optional parameter that will take the place of . This should be useful for when bundling a number of articles into a single AfD.
For example, when nominating Some article for deletion, use:

And then on Some other article, which is related to the first article:

I've tested this with and without subst and with and without the optional parameter. I don't think this should break anything. howcheng  {chat} 16:55, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New optional parameter 

message: Not that it's a gigantic problem, but wouldn't it be best if this template and Template:AfD in 3 steps matched each other? Expert Wikipedians won't have any problems with it, but the difference is more than enough to make a newbie stumble, IMHO. --Aaron 03:11, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How could they match?  Template:AfD in 3 steps is instructions on how to nominate a page for deletion.  Template:Afd is a notice that a page has been nominated.  dbenbenn | talk 20:27, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Template:Afd]] vs [[Template:AfD in 3 steps]] 

message: This should changed from
:You are welcome to edit this article, but please do not blank this article or remove
to
:You are welcome to edit this article, but please do not blank it or remove
// paroxysm (n) 23:08, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: bad wording