Template talk:WikiProject Anglicanism

message: As examples, both on this page and over on Template_talk:Archbishops_of_Canterbury, the colon is not appearing between the Template and Pagename as the first words of the infobox.  I was not going to mess with the template as it is very intricate, but I thought I would mention it. — MrDolomite • Talk 01:01, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Missing colon?

message: The edit link has the following literal URL http://en.wikipedia.org{{localurl/Comments|action=edit%7D%7D .  Therefore it does not link to the correct page to edit the comments.  Someone knowledgeable in the template please edit to fix. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 12:42, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments edit link broken

message: What is the 'orphan' parameter for?  If it is 'yes', the text: "... is not assigned to a WikiProject or workgroup" spits out, which is wrong, as adding the banner assigns the article to WikiProject Anglicanism.
It seems that no articles use it, since :Category:Anglicanism articles without a WikiProject is empty.  I suggest that 'orphan' be disabled.
--Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 13:46, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disable "orphan=" ? 

message: Both  and  can be added to talk pages, and the Christianity one also adds the Christanity project. Is this template redundant, or are there circumstances where an article is in the Anglican project but not in the Christianity one? Peter E. James (talk) 01:09, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redundant template? 

message: I have just posted the following on the Anglicanism Portal Talk-Page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Anglicanism#Does_the_Anglicanism_Template_need_more_work_on_it.3F and would appreciate any comments being posted there rather than here.  Thanks
I much appreciate the time and effort put into the scripting of the Anglicanism template and I know that there has been an earlier discussion of the point I am now going to raise. But as a newcomer, I feel that the end result as displayed is too heavy for the page. If it appears opposite a short lead with a long TOC under it, the end result is a visual horror (see Book of Common Prayer). Would it be possible for the detailed menus under each main section to become "drop-down" ones when the cursor is moved over the main section name? Alternatively, could a small "logo" be devised with a link to the overall menu? Perhaps this should be on the talk:template-page but I suspect few people look there and I will post a link there--Jpacobb (talk) 21:19, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does the Anglicanism Template need more work doing on it? 

message: Can you replace the :File:COTWnew.png to :File:Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive.svg. Higher resolution image. ___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk (We are the champions, my friends) 13:22, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Is there any reason for this cosmetic change, what "improvement" are we gaining from this change? --qedk (t 桜 c) 18:07, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

text: Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the  template. qedk (t 桜 c) 07:18, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: , Hey, thanks for reviewing the edit request. Portable Network Graphics (PNG) is a raster file format, which means file quality isn't great. Converting PNG to SVG makes the file's resolution higher. See an example in this image :File:Bitmap VS SVG.svg. Thanks. ___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk (We are the champions, my friends) 20:12, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

text: with respect to 's objection, as this is mostly "cosmetic" I don't see it as contentious or in need of a lengthy discussion - so processing this as WP:BRD - if someone has a specific issue with it, it should be reverted and further discussion can be opened. — xaosflux Talk 13:14, 24 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template-protected edit request on 19 September 2019