Template talk:Soft redirect

message: Wikinews now has this template. Please update the sister projects box to reflect this. —Zachary talk 11:46, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Cheers. --MZMcBride 17:37, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion

message: The image is hanging off the template. Could someone please fix this? --AAA! (AAAA) 04:05, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not on Firefox it isn't. Which browser/OS shows the problem? Could you recommend a way to fix it? --ais523 12:33, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe that AAA! has Internet Explorer, since I saw something similar on my userpage while ago, with a PNG (3, in that case) mysteriously moving only while in Internet Explorer (on school computers). I believe that it's a problem with the way Internet Explorer handles certain div tag calls - converting this to a table might solve it, although I don't see any problem either in Safari or in Firefox. Nihiltres(t.c.s) 15:18, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've asked User:AAA! to respond. Until then, there's no reason I see to have an active editprotected. Cheers. --MZMcBride 03:14, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The image is overlapping the border. I can get you a screenshot, if you like.--AAA! (AAAA) 03:41, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Here is the screenshot, where you can see the image hanging. I think this can be cured with a  tag. --AAA! (AAAA) 03:48, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've been experimenting with various float-clearing tags in preview mode but haven't found a way to do it that works properly yet (set your browser to very large and very small font-sizes, to make sure it works at those sizes too). --ais523 07:48, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: My guess is that it has to do with min-height. I remember reading and running into issues with min-height and Internet Explorer before. Is there any reason this template can't be converted to a table? I think that would solve the problem. Cheers. --MZMcBride 21:15, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I changed it. But "daring" to ask isn't so strange, since the code was fine before as well. — Carl (CBM · talk) 01:43, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I know, it's the combination of the width and height that IE doesn't like. I shouldnt have lost my cool, but I was affraid it might turn into another browser kerfufle. --Edokter (Talk) 10:28, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Image

message: Hi, just stumbled upon this. Whilst regular editors might know what you mean my 'soft redirect', readers on the whole will not. Can I suggest that it needs spelled out that the person is being offered a link to another wiki? Perhaps "Sorry, there is no such article as ABC on Wikipedia. However, our sister project XYZ has related material. Click here to be redirected to it."--Sandy Donald 19:07, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't like it. What jargon? What if your that template on a user page, talk page, or project page (those pages are not articles)? Why does it use  only?   Tcrow777  talk  01:22, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm... I'd hope "This page can be found at Foo" would be pretty clear, but this may be worth exploring. Any other ideas? – Luna Santin (talk) 00:24, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

text: I'd like to use soft redirects more within wikipedia.  For situations where somethign almost deserves it's own article, but the bulk of it's content belongs on another page.  For example, I think the different versions of the word Tyr deserves their own page, I was about to setup a soft redirect on Tyz to Tyr, but the Tyz pages would add a few lines about Tyz specifically.  Is this appropriate?  Mathiastck 22:20, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jargon? - Not user freindly 

message: Every time I find a soft redirect I click the link to Wikipedia:Soft redirect instead of clicking the proper one. That link alone and bold in the top of the template makes me mistake. In my opinion only the actual link should be bold and maybe the text could be rewritten to mix that link with the text. --SMP - talk (en) - talk (ca) 06:08, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bolding? 

message: Please replace the line
| 
with
|width=70px| 
thanks.
-- Cat chi? 23:58, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I actually just changed the entire template because I always hated the old one. --MZMcBride 01:47, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I like it though could you not use span? Span can cause problems. -- Cat chi? 01:52, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I got the code from a redirect that MediaWiki spits out. I only added one span tag; would you like me to change it to a div? --MZMcBride 02:29, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Minor alteration 

message: Needs Category:Redirect templates.— SMcCandlish [talk] [cont]  ‹(-¿-)› 04:52, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: — Edokter • Talk •  12:48, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category 

message: Dear administrators, please add the following interwiki link:
 ia:Patrono:Softredirect
Thank you in advance. Regards, --Julian (talk) 19:45, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. -- JLaTondre 19:59, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Done.  — Edokter • Talk •  15:02, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interwiki link 

message: 
Please use  16@r (talk) 16:22, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. --- RockMFR 18:14, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit requested 

message: This template should use :Image:Redirect arrow without text.svg 
rather than :Image:Redirectltr.png
--Inkwina (talk · contribs) 15:21, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. -- JLaTondre (talk) 15:27, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

text: Uhm... why? The png version is the actual system icon used by the real redirect, and looks better IMHO.  — Edokter • Talk •  15:40, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use SVG Image 

message: ... do you actually use this template? The documentation fails to answer this basic question! Thanks. – ukexpat (talk) 22:05, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I ammended the documentation.  — Edokter • Talk •  22:41, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, that's much better - thanks for your speedy response and fix. – ukexpat (talk) 14:38, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  How the heck... 

message: Please add "de:Vorlage:Interwiki redirect". --WIKImaniac 13:10, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done. That probably belongs at  which is a separate template. Though I'm not sure why we have the two separate templates. -- JLaTondre (talk) 14:56, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  interwiki 

message: Administrators, please add the following Portuguese interwiki: pt:Predefinição:Softredirect.
Francisco (talk) 03:55, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. You could have done so yourself, as the intewrwikis are on the /doc page.  — Edokter • Talk •  15:06, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Portuguese interwiki 

message: Is there any reason to use simply  instead of , such as in the meta-wiki version? I would like to change my user page soft-redirect name. Ganondolf (talk) 02:36, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this may cause unnecessary confusion - it is surely clearer to be able to see where the link is taking you? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:22, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  request: rename the link 

message: When you have two of the sample template next to each other the message "This page is a soft redirect." is displayed twice below the first redirect. Can somebody fix this, thanks. --173.183.102.184 (talk) 09:17, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: This is not a block-level template, and was never intended to be displayed twice on one page. You can force the second template to the next line by inserting a <P> between them, or you can wrap each template in a block element yourself like this:   — Edokter • Talk •  14:42, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  bug 

message: May someone please change  to  to reflect 
Template:Soft redirect/testcases.
Cf. Ja:Template:Softredirect and Meta:Template:Interwiki redirect.
Cheers, Pædia 06:10, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: That seems to make sense. Any comments from anyone else? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:55, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: .  — Edokter • Talk •  13:50, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from Paedia, 04 September 2010 

message: Can we make this just a tad more user-friendly by adding, in place of the full-stop, "to a page outside Wikipedia. To follow the redirect, click on the link above." Many users will not know (or want to know) what a "soft redirect" is, and is seems unhelpful to make them click a link just to find out that they should have clicked another one.--Kotniski (talk) 14:02, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: (e/c) Makes sense; that is more user friendly. Change made with a slight variation in the wording. -- JLaTondre (talk) 18:16, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

text: Question: Are soft redirects always to sites outside Wikipedia? I am sure I saw one recently (and I cannot remember where) that was a soft redirect to another page on En Wikipedia. – ukexpat (talk) 18:13, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: They are supposed to be. If they are internal, they should just be a regular redirect. -- JLaTondre (talk) 18:16, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I found it -- :WP:DL. I don't think hard redirects work to Special pages, do they? – ukexpat (talk) 18:18, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: While you're correct that redirects to special pages don't automatically work, this template isn't needed for them. A regular redirect does the same thing. See Wikipedia:Newuser. The template is for use with redirects that meet Wikipedia:Soft redirect. Internal redirects should just be redirects. -- JLaTondre (talk) 18:22, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: (e/c) However, given the template documentation currently says it is for use with special pages as well. I've added that to the new text as well. -- JLaTondre (talk) 18:27, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, thanks, works for me. – ukexpat (talk) 18:30, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

text: And see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2009 May 8#Redirects to special pages. Looking at the edit history of WP:DL, you turned it into a soft! – ukexpat (talk) 18:25, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

text: I reverted the change; I do not think adding more text is more userfriendly, especially if users dont want to read it. I'd rather have not any text at all, but that would be to minimalistic. The link provides all the information about soft redirects; adding part of that text to the redirect itself only confuses more, especially with terms like 'external to Wikipedia' or to a 'Wikipedia special page'. The focal point should be the redirect link itself; the extra text is only more distracting.  — Edokter • Talk —  01:37, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: So we should lose the jargon in that case, not the text that everyone can understand. People landing on such a page will certainly benefit from knowing what they're supposed to do next and that by doing so they'll be leaving the en.wikipedia site. Knowing that something like this is called a "soft redirect" is of no use to them at all.--Kotniski (talk) 10:40, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The redirect link should be very big, but I discovered that the move to Vector has lost the big text, so that may cause the confusion. I'll fix the textsize. Other than that, a simple link to soft redirect suffices.  — Edokter • Talk —  13:33, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

text: No, not in MediaWiki: space. No, we cannot check the existence of external pages.  — Edokter • Talk —  13:25, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe that using the parsing functions it can check whether the target is a special page. If not, then it can assume the target is an external page. -- JLaTondre (talk) 14:33, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a big if. What if the external page does not exist? That happens quite a lot. And I don't #ifexist: works on special pages either, and I don't recommend using string functions in general.  — Edokter • Talk —  14:36, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: A technical reason is one thing, but whether the external page exists or not is irrelevant. It's still an external link. -- JLaTondre (talk) 15:04, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I wasn't thinking of using ifexist, just checking NAMESPACE. Anyway, I agree the link should be big, but I still don't think we've seen any reason for the explanatory text to be dropped - surely you can see that making the user click another jargonny link (and then try to get back to where he came from) - just to find out a piece of information that we're capable of giving simply and directly using one short sentence - is a clear piece of unhelpfulness? --Kotniski (talk) 18:38, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

text: Yes, I still object. The longer the explanation, the more confusing it gets. People who want to know can find out easily enough. Others will just want to get on and click the biggest link. It should stay as plain-vanilla as possible.  — Edokter (talk) —  13:18, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, I don't get that. There isn't any explanation at the moment - how can a few words of explanation be worse (more "confusing") than no explanation at all? What readers are currently presented with is certainly not plain vanilla - it looks like a mess of technical code. Can you not see this from the point of view of someone who isn't familiar with these objects? (Of course you know to click the biggest link and what the consequences of that will be, but to you it doesn't matter what text is underneath, because you won't be reading it anyway. Given that it's all the same to you, think of others. Why leave them uninformed when we can very easily inform them?)--Kotniski (talk) 14:25, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Edit request

message: After I recently created a soft redirect, another editor quickly subst'ed in template  to keep the page from being listed on special:shortpages. Very smart, I thought. Then I thought, this must be an issue for nearly all soft redirects. So instead of doing this to every one, wouldn't it make sense if template  transcluded a long comment itself? Thoughts? Obvious reasons why I'm being dumb? » Swpbτ • ¢ 03:42, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Transcluding does not work as that does not add the comment itself; it must be substituted. And it is not possible to make this template substitute another template during transclusion. Also, only pages in article space are placed in special:shortpages, and this template is never rarely used in article space.  — Edokter (talk) —  10:10, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add long comment to template? 

message: Can someone work out a way to make  include :Category:Article Feedback Blacklist on all mainspace pages it's transcluded on? So we won't get the useless Article Feedback tool on pages like "Gallery of coins" or "Georg Hertting" where it would be useless. -- œ™ 04:05, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: .  — Edokter (talk) —  09:04, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: [[:Category:Article Feedback Blacklist]]

message: Append the text ", linking to Wikipedia sister site or elsewhere." or suchlike. Saves having to look at Wikipedia:Soft redirect. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 02:25, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: Adding a specific rationale would prevent the use of the template for any other reason. It also seems to me that a user who doesn't already know what a soft redirect is would not be helped much by a short explanation rather than the detailed explanation at Wikipedia:Soft redirect. Anomie⚔ 04:05, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add a rational 

message: I propose merging  into this template (with saving redirect for compatibility). This template is rare used and once was copied from Meta (which was useful). But he does not make sense at this wiki, in my opinion. --Kaganer (talk) 13:18, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merging [[Template:Interwiki redirect]] into this template 

message: Hi. Please remove :Category:Article Feedback Blacklist from this template. Following WP:RFC/AFT, the article feedback tool is opt-in per-article, so the blacklist category is no longer necessary. --MZMcBride (talk) 04:50, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Done.  — Edokter (talk) —  10:15, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remove [[:Category:Article Feedback Blacklist]] 

message: Can this template be converted to use template protection instead of full protection? Thanks. —mc10 (t/c) 03:34, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:15, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template protection 

message: Please add this TfD notice at the top of the page:

{{Tfm/dated|page=Interwiki redirect|otherpage=Soft redirect|link=Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2016 July 16#Template:Interwiki redirect|help=off}}

nyuszika7h (talk) 19:35, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedian Sign Language Paine  02:12, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template-protected edit request on 16 July 2016 

message: This question may be for those who know more about this history of Wikipedia than myself:Was this template created (in 2005) before hardcoded redirects to either interwiki pages or pages in the "Special:" namespace automatically became soft redirects, or have hardcoded redirects to either interwiki pages or pages in the "Special:" namespace always been soft redirects by default?– Steel1943 (talk) 21:31, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question regarding when this template was created 

message: Template:Double soft redirect has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Uanfala (talk) 10:29, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nomination for deletion of Template:Double soft redirect 

message: A protected redirect, Template:Softredirect needs redirect category (rcat) templates added.  Please modify it as follows:
* from this:
#REDIRECT Template:Soft redirect
* to this:
#REDIRECT Template:Soft redirect

* 
The  template is used to sort redirects into one or more categories.  When  and/or  suffice, the Redirect category shell template will detect the protection level(s) and categorize the redirect automatically.  (Also, the categories will be automatically removed or changed when and if protection is lifted, raised or lowered.)  Thank you in advance!  Paine  u/c 16:07, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: The page's protection level has changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 18:43, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I LIKE this kind of "not done"!  Thank you very much, Jo-Jo Eumerus!  Paine  u/c 00:14, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fully protected edit request on 18 October 2016 

message: The code in this template intended to avoid problems with double colons in links (e.g. ::de:Foo) is unnecessarily complicated.
Please replace:

With:

I've already implemented this approach in :pl:Szablon:Softredirect. Matma Rex talk 21:08, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: This would remove . — JJMC89 (T·C) 22:53, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request 

message: The soft redirects are needed in  Peter Horn User talk 03:02, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  The soft redirects 

message: Template:Soft redirect has been listed at Templates for discussion (nomination), but was protected so could not be tagged. Please add:

to the top of the page to complete the nomination. Thank you. JsfasdF252 (talk) 22:46, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: * Pppery * it has begun... 02:08, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request to complete TfD nomination 

message: Please change "March 18" to "March 17" in the TfD link: the wrong date was picked up because the tagging took place the day after the nomination. 116.86.4.41 (talk) 08:10, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: , and thank you very much, good catch! P.I. Ellsworth  ed. put'r there 13:35, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template-protected edit request on 20 March 2021 

message: has the following piece of code near the end: |. It adds an unnecessary vertical bar after the PAGENAME which should be removed. ---CX Zoom(he/him) (let's talk|contribs) 09:18, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: . P.I. Ellsworth - ed. put'r there 09:43, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template-protected edit request on 12 March 2022