Wikipedia talk:Template index/Archive 4

message: Does one exist? I don't see one listed at :Category:Split maintenance templates. If not, could one be created? I think Template:Splitsections could be adapted with only a few word changes. CovenantD 02:36, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template for splitting categories? 

message: Is there a template to put either on top of an article or section or at the end of a sentence that asks for clarification of words like "recently" or "soon"? If there isn't, I'd be happy to make it. I'd just need to know which is preferred: a general top-of-page one, a specific sentence one, or both. Mr.Z-mantalk¢Review! 23:06, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ambiguous Dating 

message: How would I go about creating a template for a list of fictional characters?
I need to devise a way to do so, because there are some fictional charcters (from films and comics) whose articles I have either modified or created and need to thus find a way to have categories for them.
--KnowledgeLord 20:03, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fictional character template 

message: I often wish to use this text along with a vandalism warning to IP accounts:
:If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make any unconstructive edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant warnings.
However, i've never been able to find the template for this. It is always a pain to locate the text and input manually.
Can someone please identify the template that accomplishes this, and indicate its location?
Also, on this article's page, there is a link that seems like it ought to go to just such a template, but it does not. Under the link "User Namespace" there is an entry for "Shared IP", but it isn't helpful. Is this an error, and if so, can it be repaired?
I have particularly slow dial-up only, and it takes a very long time to search some of these pages. It would be helpful if things really are where it seems they ought to be. :-)
thanks,
Richard Myers 20:19, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps you should try the WP:Help desk. More people read it. S Sepp 18:30, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  shared IP template? 

message: I think we currently have an inflation of tags and templates in this Wikipedia. There are too many of them, especially tags that say something must be done with the article. Many people seem to take to the easy route and simply add a tag instead of trying to make the requested improvement themselves. For example, you don't need a tag that tells everybody to add metric measure. You just do it if you see it's missing. It's not that difficult. And there are many  more unnecessary ones and they're virtually flooding the Wikipedia. They're becoming annoying. Something should be done about it! --Maxl 22:19, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Templates also help, however, with categorizing articles that need attention. I think they are useful. ~ UBeR 22:38, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If anyone is interested, there is a "multi-template" currently in development at Template:Articleissues. Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 23:34, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that the templates can sometimes be useful to show articles which need attention. But I also think that it is overdone. Once again, if you see that something is wrong in an article, why not changing it yourself instead of using a template. The latter is the comfortable way. You tell others that something has to be done while you have an easy time and can watch others do the work. I wouldn't wonder if a new template concerning typos would show up soon. "There are typos in this article, would someone correct them please?" Yes, there are a few useful templates like "stub". But most of them are unnecessary and annoying. --Maxl 21:18, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that template tags are added too often. I follow the use of template:howto very closely, and I find that rarely is anything done to the articles. I take that it is much my fault. I introduced the tag, but couldn't find good guidelines on what to do with them. I have this feeling about the issue that people would gladly edit the articles, if there would be good, strongly sourced and well-opinionated guidelines to what to do with all the tagged categories. I am trying to find contributors to give their ideas on how to handle how-to articles, and I bet that when the guidelines are finished, many people will join to edit the articles. My opinion is that people follow the conservative approach and not delete the offending material, but rather inform about the issue and leave the decision to parties they consider as better informed. Santtus 16:58, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree (are we sounding like a broken record yet?) about using template tags instead of mindlessly nominating an article for deletion. Plus, the tags are an obvious way to show the article needs work. What I do is try to fix the article but if it's too much I also tag it--such as creating a table from a list, which I have started and tagged, in the hopes that someone else will continue/finish the tabularization (such as on RenderWare). ∞ΣɛÞ² (τ|c) 06:33, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too many tags 

message: These template message lists are getting too long. They should be split up into even more subpages, like Wikipedia:Template_messages/Sources_of_articles/requests, etc. Templates for each template list could be created, then applied to the subtemplate pages (like Wikipedia:Template_messages/Sources_of_articles). That way, just the "sub-subtemplate" list would only need to be edited, and would automatically appear on the longer compiled lists. -Eep² 15:59, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If we split out and then transcluded subpages, as you suggest, the lists would still be too long. They should be split out completely.—greenrd 17:24, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I just meant that if someone still wanted the full long list, they could, but for others who just want direct access to the subsections, they can have that too. :) -Eep² 04:10, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, a simple way to do this, I'm finding, is to create subpages off the main Wikipedia:Template messages, then the section (such as Wikipedia:Template messages/Cleanup), then the subsection (which may or may be necessary to create if it's applicable to more than one section (such as Wikipedia:Template messages/Merging and splitting). This modular design will help faciliate a more comprehensive organization of templates, I believe. What needs cleaned up, specifically, are the templates applicable to both article and user talk pages. ∞ΣɛÞ² (τ|c) 06:42, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  subpages 

message: I find this page extremely useful in organising the myriad templates into reasonable categories. However, it appears that the page is not complete in its coverage of clearly high-value templates: for example the old  and the new  templates are not linked to from this pages and the subpages (at least not according to "What links here").
Is there a more comprehensive listing elsewhere? 
Stca74 16:42, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Completeness of the template listing? 

message: For articles with disturbing images, to be placed at the top of the page.
	This article contains images that you may find disturbing. Viewer discretion is advised.
Could I have some vote type thingys. Samuel 23:07, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sorry, but Wikipedia is not censored. We already have a content disclaimer. It's "discretion," by the way. ~ UBeR 23:09, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Disclaimers are a form of censorship. ~ UBeR 19:42, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: (e/c) Please also see Wikipedia:No disclaimer templates. The only exception to this is the  template, and even that is often under dispute. Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 23:12, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Support. If we can have a spoiler template, we ought to be able to make another exception for this one! I strongly support this, although I would urge editors to avoid adding seriously disturbing images altogether.—greenrd 23:55, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New template 

message: See :Category:National Football League staff templates.  I've never seen this before, but before I nominate this for deletion, is it acceptable to categorize templates?  Corvus cornix 21:50, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. We have a huge number of templates; most are subject-specific.—greenrd 23:59, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Categorizing templates 

message: I dont know if this is the right place to do this or not. But I am complaining about the ridiculous amount of templates on articles, some particular examples including this article in which the templates are collectively longer than the article! Quite frankly most of those templates should be categories, and some (including the wester nafrica one) should simply not exist! Why not reorganize the africa one to show countries by what part of africa instead of having several!? Its stupid. You need some sort of mass cull of these wretched things, they are being created for the sake of it, not to serve any useful purpose. Philc 19:07, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Complaint 

message: I created a new category in the main table for formatting templates, those which are used to format text on Wikipedia. Currently there aren't very many templates in this category, but I believe that there are lots of templates that belong here. Please help expand this category. Andrew_pmk | Talk 04:51, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: These could probably be put in another section since there aren't that many templates on that page... ∞ΣɛÞ² (τ|c) 05:58, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Formatting templates 

message: I say "excessive" with some hesitation, as that is a highly subjective word.  That being said, many articles on athletes contain a significant number of "succession boxes".  In the case of articles like Bob Gibson (14 at last count), Walter Johnson (x12), and Roger Clemens (x16), the lists are intimidatingly long.  I feel that much of the information is "relatively" repetative.  For example, Roger Clemens has at least 4 entries for ERA titles.  The information is so disorganized that I find the usefulness of that many layers to be counter productive.  Is there anything in place that address this concern?  I cannot find any pages that discuss the use of templates. //Tecmobowl 06:01, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, this information can surely be integrated into the article, these boxes are no more justifiable than trivia sections. Philc 19:54, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

text: *Thanks for your response.  So how do we address this.  Many of the people that I come across are very protective of information.  They seem to view the removal of information as a bad thing.  It does not matter to them what information is being removed, they just want it in there.  I have been trying to reduce them significantly, but people see this as a problem. Any suggestions would be appreciated. //Tecmobowl 20:05, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

text: *Two possible fixes have been suggested on the baseball project page.  The first is a "collapsible" succession box template that can be defaulted closed on busy pages like Roger Clemens' and open on pages with just a few boxes like Dave Bristol's.  The other is a "multi-succession" box template that could pick up all four of Clemens' ERA tiles in a single box with the years down the middle and the predecessor and successors all packed in.  Brholden 22:46, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem is, what title to give the collapsible "succession box" table/template? As far as I know "Succession box" is a term basically unheard of outside Wikipedia. As much as I want to wrap ALL the navigation templates in the bottom of an article (at least when there are many) in a collapsible box, it would be amateur and self-referential to refer to them as "boxes", "templates" or similar. ? heqs ·:. 17:28, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

text: *In the baseball case, "Titles and Awards" could work.  One shortcoming of the collapsible template is that they interfere a bit with the calculations for the width of the boxes.  Without the collapsible template, the boxes are automatically sized to the longest line of content.  The collapsible boxes have their own size (expressed as a % of the total width) that can foil this calculation if specified too small.  The result is still readable but sub-optimal.  The other technique discussed above of combining the years for a given award/title into one succession box has worked out great (and did not require new templates).  Here is an example: Juan González.  The different years are combined by adding a line break ("br" surrounded by angle brackets) after each year's winner. Brholden 18:17, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Excessive" Use of a Template 

message: Hi, I am not English, so I please ask that you give clear information on this. I want to make a template that, if there is nothing written after the | , it would put something there. Like, for example, if people write , it should say "This sentence is an example". But if people wrote , it should replace the "example" part with "sentence". Therefore, it shouldn't just say "This sentence is an example sentence", it should say "This sentence is an sentence" (just forget about the "an"-thing for now). So my question actually is, how do I use the #if function to replace a certain default text in my template? <FONT FACE="MS Reference Sans Serif" COLOR="#FF0000">► Adriaan90  ( Talk ♥ Contribs ) ♪♫</FONT> 16:51, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Using the #if function 

message: Normally I'd just let something like this slide, but take a look at Arts Club of Chicago.  The WikiProject Chicago is using their Collaboration of the Week banner at the top of the article -- not the talk page, but the actual article.  It seems to me that if every WikiProject started doing this, it would really be a mess.  I didn't really know where to ask, and couldn't find a guideline page about this, but is this an acceptable use of templates in the main space?  It sorta bothers me, especially since they submit their collaboration to DYK and essentially get a giant advertisement for their WikiProject linked from the main page.  They have a rationale that I find really unconvincing for why it's okay.  It's nothing against WikiProject Chicago, or WikiProjects in general, just the fact that I think these top-of-article templates are already over used. --JayHenry 22:41, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Obviously WikiProjects should never advertise in main space. Remove on sight. heqs ·:. 21:23, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject banners on articles 

message: After reading a few of the complaints regarding the proliferation of templates on this page, I thought this would be a good place to mention a little essay I just posted, although it is mainly about navigation boxes. Wikipedia:Avoid template creep. Check it out and direct any love/hate my way. heqs ·:. 22:38, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Avoid template creep 

message: Hi. I've just created a merger template . Could someone please tell me where I should list it and such? I have no idea what to do next. I've already included it into the list of merge templates at :Wikipedia:Template messages/Merging and splitting/List#merging. Please do lemme know. Thanks! aJCfreak yAk 11:15, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added the template to Wikipedia:Template messages/Merging and splitting. But due to the non-acceptance of the = symbol by the  template, the formatting is not quite right. If someone with more experience in templates and template editing could take a look or drop in a suggestion, I'd be grateful. Thanks! aJCfreak yAk 14:42, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where do I list created templates? 

message: Moved the subpage on the Wikipedia namespace.  Calling it the Project namespace was incredibly confusing and (mostly) wrong.  At Wikipedia the namespace is named Wikipedia not Project; project namespace refers to the namespace for the project you are using the Mediawiki software to run.  Unlike all the other default namespaces (like "User") that in essence have a default name, the project namespace is given the same name as the name of the project (Wikipedia, Wikinews, or whatever else).  The only caveat is that Project will work like a builtin redirect to whatever the actual name of the project namespace is.  See m:Help:Namespace for more details.
Anyone not familiar with Mediawiki will be totally confused.  Hell, it threw me for a loop for a second before I realized what was going on.  It seems minor, but this is precisely the kind of thing that steepens the learning curve for newbies and decreases participation.  —Tox 23:45, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia (project) namespace 

message: Wikipedia:Template standardisation has been resurrected to try and improve our template messages.  Please take a look and discuss it on the talk page.  violet/riga (t) 20:31, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template standardisation 

message: Any advice on how to proceed with a merge discussion for this bloated and largely redundant set of Templates? Pairadox 21:53, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:Category:Education infobox templates]] 

message: Wikipedia:Templates redirects to Wikipedia:Template_messages (this page)
As a result, it is very difficult to locate the predefined templates for converting units for feet to meters, temperature from F -> C, and the like. I suggest adding a section to the template table for unit conversions. It sould have links to the following
::Category:Conversion_templates
::Category:Unit_display 
:Template:Convert - more generic conversions
I would also include
::Category:Mathematical_function_templates
At any rate, the word *conversion* needs to appear in the template table with an appropriate link.
It would also be useful if searches like
:templates converting temperature
:templates converting feet to meters
found a related page.
By the way, it took more than an hour to figure out that you had to add a leading colon to link to a category. I suggest that that trick be made easier to find - like on the top of every category page. If someone wants to suggest that people modifying some page use templates, they should be very easy to link. Q Science 21:38, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs direct link to conversion templates 

message: Ok, what happened to all the templates? Like overnight they just all began to look cooler and the like. What happened? Is there a discussion anywhere? Could someone tell me what happened? And give me a link? -Sox207 23:52, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia:Article message boxes is where most of the action happened. Harryboyles 02:48, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  When did the templates change?! 

message: It's like a really complete template box, so I thought it might be helpful.  Sorry if I wasted a lot of space on you're page.--Kkrouni/Ккроуни/ΚκρΩυνι 02:38, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess it would be useful. But I think it should be created as a template and transcluded into spaces where we need it.... It does take up way too much space. :) aJCfreak yAk 18:23, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Its a brilliant idea. Yes put it into a template and implement it. -Sox207 23:50, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Would this be useful? 

message: Could anyone help me find a template sutable for informing other editors that the IP adress is for a school and who to contact if there is vandalism. Thank you Foxtrotman 18:51, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Left-hand column of Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace#Other, specifically, . --Quiddity 18:01, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  School IP adress 

message: This is very useful, but keeps experienced editors from going to the example pages. Which is great... but that's less people seeing what a mess those pages are, which in turn means less people working to improve those pages. Anyone want to help me? - Rocket000 03:35, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia:Template messages 

message: Why is this template suddenly adding a new page when it is added properly at the foot of a stub - see below. Giano 17:35, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed. It was just page move misuse. See the history of templates to diagnose problems like this. --Quiddity 17:54, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bio-stub template 

message: Please stop deleting templates simply because they supposedly duplicate some other existing template. People should not need to research what is every existing template before they make some annotation to a page. If the obvious name for a template does not resolve to an existing template, what is wrong with adding appropriate content? When you delete a template, do you go and find and alter every single page that already uses this template? And what if some content is changed back later by other editors .. should they have to check if they have resurrected some old previously-existing template reference to a template that you had deleted? [please respond in-line, do not respond to my page, as I will never check that. Better still, do not respond, simply cease from your pathological behaviours...] -- Gribblegrobble 07:24, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you have a problem with the deletion process for templates, please take it to Wikipedia talk:Templates for deletion. Templates normally don't get deleted until they've gone through the process described at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion.  -- John Broughton   (♫♫) 21:55, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template deletion is stupid 

message: There has been much made of this template, and the ARS, on TfD recently. Following this, I believe that there is a place for this template on article pages, perhaps listed in the cleanup category (although that's not a great match). This would, of course, be accompanied by redesign and categorically seperating the template from the ARS, with the ARS simply existing to serve wikipedia by reacting to this template.
I'm sure that this page is a bit general for this discussion, but where would people suggest that I take up this discussion? SamBC(talk) 11:45, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You're talking about an article message box; the place to discuss that probably is the talk page of WP:AMB.  -- John Broughton   (♫♫) 21:57, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That would seem to be about the design (graphical) of the templates, not the existence/use of them. Or am I missing something? SamBC(talk) 10:04, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The guideline page is focused on design, but you're more likely to find someone there who is interested in the template you're talking about than you are likely to find someone here.  -- John Broughton   (♫♫) 17:57, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Template:Rescue]] 

message: I created Template:Warhawk Ranks, but don't know how to make it hide. Can someone do it for me?--Playstationdude 01:50, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Warhawk]] 

message: The line at the top tells us that "WP:TEMPLATE and various other shortcuts redirect here."  But I guess people just can't see the forest for the trees:  why is WP:Template messages red?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gene Nygaard (talk • contribs) 14:10, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Because that is not a recognized or widely used shortcut, so no redirect was made for it, I suppose. Finell (Talk) 19:19, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can't see the forest for the trees 

message: Many templates in article space have date parameters, but not everyone uses them. Bots crawl Wikipedia to fix undated templates, but that involves work and server resources. I am not a programmer, but would it be possible to add "code" to these templates to insert today's month and year automagically? It would be the equivalent of adding , or the code of , to all templates with a date parameter, instead of the editor completing the date parameter or adding  manually and therefore fallibly. Is this feasible? Finell (Talk) 19:37, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure sounds reasonable and likely doable to me.  Gene Nygaard 00:37, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Automatically date template messages? 

message: I believe templates should be "automatically propagated" to articles with created links in the template that are dont already have that template, at the bottom of the page.  They can be moved manually later to any part of the page if it isn't the optimal placing.  Why waste precious human labor when a simple append or addline by computer will do?  71.117.93.160 20:41, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, what you're suggesting doesn't seem very clear. Could you give a specific example, perhaps using a specific article?  -- John Broughton   (♫♫) 21:12, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template Auto Propagation Feature REQUEST 

message: I believe it could be quite useful to editors if the pages/articles of templates would have a section with all the articles linking the template that the page is about. This is allready available for pages (i.e. every picture has a page that at the end has a section with all the pages linking to the picture) therefore I don't believe it would be very hard to implement.Nergaal 09:02, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Look in the sidebar, in the "toolbox" section, for the "What links here" link. ;) --Quiddity (talk) 17:55, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks Nergaal 08:08, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "File Links" section on template pages 

message: Can someone help me. I am trying to get all of the sub stuff on template:playstationp to go directly below each other, instead of next to each other. Check it out here. Please respond on my talk page.--Playstationdude 23:28, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I fixed it.--Playstationdude (talk) 20:00, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Help 

message: I have a question about templates. Is there any way to make our own template message? I would like to have a personal template message inside my Sandbox User:Ianonavy/Sandbox
EDIT: Please answer on my user talk page.
:Ianonavy (talk) 00:33, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question 

message: The messages on the cleanup maintenance tags are primarily directed at WP editors. Shouldn't they also communicate to readers the specific concern? For example, the cites-needed tags should more clearly alert the average reader that the article or section contains unverified and unsourced statements, and the reader should take that into consideration; the request to editors should be secondary (although the automatic inclusion in a category broadcasts the alert nicely).Jim Dunning | talk 04:44, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maintenance messages should be external, too 

message: Is there a template which allows the user to organize the subpages on the userpage or talk page and links back to the previous page without it showing the full web link. SKYNET X7000 (talk) 17:42, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  General Question 

message: A number of the standard templates mention "see discussion on talk page" or "see details on talk page".  Is it acceptable to simply remove these templates if no discussion nor details have in fact been posted on the talk page?  This is most commonly seen with templates claiming unverified research but with no details as to what information is referred to. Hyphz (talk) 04:21, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: My feeling is that if an editor cannot be bothered to start a talk topic about his issue with the page then the tag is fair game for removal. Editors are not mind-readers. So yes, if you cannot figure out what the issue is then, IMO, you are free to remove the tag. (If you can figure out what the issue is then the thing to do is try to fix it.) Just be sure to check the talk page history in case the discussion was archived. You could also go the extra mile and ask the editor that put the tag on the article to finish the job by starting a talk page discussion with an explanation of his/her reasoning. That is probably the best solution. (and you should probably word it more tactfully than I just did.) --Alfadog (talk) 15:53, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's probably a good idea to check for pages linking to a template before removing it. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 05:16, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion on talk page? 

message: If you were to create a Template page, are you able to create your own template to be used in Wikipedia? Androo123 (talk) 21:13, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, check out wikiProject templates and requested templates. Think outside the box 17:38, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template help 

message: This is one of the entries in Wikipedia:Template messages/General:
What to type	What it makes	Where it goes	Article top
Since the template reads "This article or section...", clearly the "Where it goes" should read "Article or section top."
There are about 15 instances of this error on that page alone -- and it seems likely that if there are that many, then the other pages with lists of templates will also have the same problem.  Someone needs to review them all and clean that up.
Unfortunately, this is an inconvenient task because when actually editing the article you can't see what the template expands to.  You just see
     {{tlrow|Current spaceflight}}
     | Article top

and you can't tell from that that this is one of the ones that conflicts.  You have to have a copy of the article at hand in another window or on paper or something.  If I thought there was just the one page I'd be willing to do that, but I don't want to take the time to browse through a whole series of pages, so I'm just complaining about it here.
A further problem is that in many cases there doesn't seem to be any logical reason why some templates say "This article or section" and others say "This article".  Compare the templates  and ; why should they differ in this respect?  But if there is no reason for them to be different, someone may later edit them to be the same -- and then there'll be another instance of the error I started by mentioning, unless they're careful to fix that page as well.  Here I have no particular solution to suggest, but I thought I should point out the issue.
--207.176.159.90 (talk) 01:01, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Article or section top" 

message: Where do I place a new user warning template?
After a recent spate of lowercase-letter rename requests at WP:CHU, I created  so that I would not have to write customized messages to each user who made such a request. Since the corresponding page says to list new templates there (yet I see no list for them), I figured I'd ask. -Jéské  (v^_^v Detarder) 07:51, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: At Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace and in :Category:User warning templates. -- Quiddity (talk) 17:47, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank'ee. -Jéské  (v^_^v Detarder) 20:54, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question 

message: In Template:Star_Wars_character, I was trying to remove the color assignments (by affiliation) for the various Star Wars characters as unencyclopedic, but am having some difficulty moving the template back to the black and white standard. Could someone tell me how to fix it? - Arcayne (cast a spell) 16:58, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  How do I fix this? 

message: Please comment on a new article space template at TfD Images needed. GregManninLB (talk) 08:02, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images needed template in article space 

message: Is there a template I can use on a user's talk page to inform them of the guidelines around removing deletion notices on images? I can't find one. Thanks. ChimpanzeeUK - User | Talk | Contribs 08:30, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Informing users not to remove deletion notices from images? 

message: I found this:  as an external link in Ramesses II -- I'm going to delete it as it adds nothing to the article, but can someone please give me some context for it? What's it supposed to be used for? Thanks.--Doug Weller (talk) 13:23, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Findagrave template 

message: Would it be a good idea to split the numerous template examples from WP:SISTER guideline into a more proper /Sister projects subpage here (similar to /Cleanup or others)? I find it funny that a serious thing, a guideline, is so overloaded with templates that it now became effectively a subpage of this help. Main discussion is at SISTER's talk page, so please respond there. --Kubanczyk (talk) 17:20, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sister project - split 

message: Someone asked (pretty much) this question almost a year ago on Template talk:Onesource but it was never answered. I was reading in Template:Onesource#Usage and it seems to me that the  is for when citations are inappropriate or misinterpreted. On the other hand I can not find anywhere in WP:Citing sources which shows that a section needs to have more than one source (although I agree that in most situations the more the better in a section, and that it is a problem if the entire article is based on only 1 source). Please correct me here if I'm reading this wrong, or correct the Template:Onesource#Usage to be more plain in its correct meaning. If I'm right that a section can be based on one source and still be effevtively written, then why does this template give the option to be used on sections, instead of only on entire articles, and why do people constantly use this template for sections that have one perfectly legitimate reference?  Thanks Mathman1550 (talk) 02:49, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question about onesource template