Template talk:R to disambiguation page

message: *Is it used that much anyway? 67.81.33.18 21:02, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Deletion

message: Please restore "  " to the end of the template.  I know it looks useless, but it actually does have a purpose.  If an editor uses subst: on the template (which they shouldn't do, but you know some of them will), this helps other editors track down where the big mess of formatted text on the page came from.  --Russ (talk) 19:42, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, done. —Remember the dot (talk) 22:18, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Editprotected 

message: Please add  to the template so I can add  to it. (Note: Friendly is now part of Twinkle.) – Allen4names 18:13, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Ronhjones  (Talk) 19:56, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you. – Allen4names 02:39, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add documentation 

message: The template currently displays on Talk pages where it is added as:
"This is a redirect to a disambiguation page. This redirect is intended for use in links from other articles that need to refer to the disambiguation page, rather than be disambiguated. Therefore, this template generally should only appear on pages that have "(disambiguation)" in the title."
Note, the last sentence is a parenthetical type comment, which should not be part of the main message of the template.  It seems silly, as if the purpose of the template is to state where the template should not be used.
Please change to make that side comment an explicit parenthetical mention (and i suggest also italicizing for further dissociation from the main message:
"This is a redirect to a disambiguation page. This redirect is intended for use in links from other articles that need to refer to the disambiguation page, rather than be disambiguated. (Therefore, this template generally should only appear on pages that have "(disambiguation)" in the title.)"
--doncram 16:56, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I have no problem with the requested edit, but I note that there is a false premise in the request: "The template currently displays on Talk pages where it is added as:" -- this statement contains two errors.  First, the template is intended for use on redirect pages in the article namespace, not on Talk pages; second, when it is used correctly on a redirect page, it does not display at all.  The only way to see the actual content of the template message is here on the template page.  --R'n'B (call me Russ) 20:16, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: And if I may humbly add, on the diff pages.  — Paine Ellsworth ( CLIMAX )  18:23, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Revise statement to downgrade prominence of warning about where this template should appear

message: Please remove the categories from the end by editing the ending to look like the following:
 Category:Unprintworthy redirects</includeonly>
Those categories have been transferred to the /doc page, but are inactive.  As soon as this edit has been made, I shall activate the categories on the /doc page. – Paine Ellsworth ( CLIMAX )  22:08, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you very much, R'n'B!  The cats have been activated.  You'll notice that I had the "noinclude" tag directly following the "/includeonly" tag on the same line, and I noticed that part of the edit was not done.  Isn't it true that if this isn't done there will be extra whitespace at the bottom of the template? – Paine Ellsworth ( CLIMAX )  00:37, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  It's pretty much a moot point, because the template content does not actually appear on redirect pages, which is the only place this template is supposed to be used.  And even previewing the template on a non-redirect page just for testing purposes, I don't see any extra whitespace.  Do you?  --R'n'B (call me Russ) 01:03, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed.  In this case it's not all that.  Thank you again! – Paine Ellsworth ( CLIMAX )  04:36, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Transfer to /doc page 

message: Why doesn't the text that begins, "This is a redirect to a disambiguation page..." appear on the redirect pages that include this template? Pseudonymous Rex (talk) 00:21, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: that has been worked on for a long, long time.  See  and . – Paine Ellsworth CLIMAX! 09:20, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template question 

message: They're workin' on it boss – see Wikipedia talk:VisualEditor/TemplateData/Tutorial#Description. – Paine Ellsworth CLIMAX! 03:17, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, ok. Thanks!! RainCity471 (talk) 20:28, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Pleasure! – Paine Ellsworth CLIMAX! 14:35, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Links within the VE Templatedata tags 

message: I think the part about this template only being added to redirect pages with " (disambiguation)" is ridiculous, as we also have redirects to dab pages that don't have " (disambiguation)", such as Liberal Republican. Therefore, I request that all of the coding for "this template must be used for redirects that end in " (disambiguation)" and the like be removed entirely. ToThAc (talk) 15:22, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the  template. See the discussion immediately above — I think you've misunderstood the purpose of this redirect template. —RP88 (talk) 15:42, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template-protected edit request on 26 October 2017 

message: This template also counts as currently unnecessary disambiguation. Can you change the template to:
 Faster than Thunder (talk) 02:37, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please make your requested changes to the template's sandbox first; see WP:TESTCASES. Also, please don't use those templates directly in discussions, if you need to demonstrate them, set up a Template:R to disambiguation page/testcases page. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:18, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template-protected edit request on 11 November 2021 

message: Wanted to suggest that the superfluous italics be removed from this template, and that "may" be replaced with "should". It currently reads:
This redirect is intended for use in links from other articles that need to refer to the disambiguation page, rather than be disambiguated.  Therefore, this template should only appear on a redirect page that has "(disambiguation)" at the end of its title.  Ambiguous titles that do not have  page names ending with "(disambiguation)" may use  . For disambiguations that later prove to still be ambiguous (e.g. "(painter)" when there are multiple notable painters by the same name) and which redirect to disambiguation pages, then  is the appropriate template.
:* Any talk page redirect that has "(disambiguation)" in its title targets another talk page, not a disambiguation page, and should be tagged with  instead of this template.  
I'd like to suggest that instead it read thus:
This redirect is intended for use in links from other articles that need to refer to the disambiguation page, rather than be disambiguated.  Therefore, this template should only appear on a redirect page that has "(disambiguation)" at the end of its title.  Ambiguous titles that do not have  page names ending with "(disambiguation)" should use  instead. For disambiguations that later prove to still be ambiguous (e.g. "(painter)" when there are multiple notable painters by the same name) and which redirect to disambiguation pages, then  is the appropriate template.
:* Any talk page redirect that has "(disambiguation)" in its title targets another talk page, not a disambiguation page, and should be tagged with  instead of this template.
Thank you for considering the request. A loose necktie (talk) 17:53, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: . P.I. Ellsworth - ed. put'r there 18:25, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template-protected edit request on 3 January 2022