Template talk:WikiProject North Carolina

message: If anyone works on this template for other reasons, please add the nesting mechanism to support .  Thanks.  --J Clear 17:26, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nesting 

message: Could the Template:Project North Carolina/sandbox be copied over to the main template? Thanks. -- WOSlinker (talk) 07:59, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: . — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:29, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit Req 

message: This project is going to be supported by WikiProject United States so this template is going to be deprecated and the project added to the WikiProject United States banner. Since this template is protected I implemented the code to the sand box version here. Please implement. --Kumioko (talk) 16:47, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: You have an includeonly inside a noinclude. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:05, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

text: Disabled as no response. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:52, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: This is silly, clearly you know what the problem is, the intent and what needs to be done here. You could have easily just done the change rather than close it with no action. Yes I made an erorr but I don't even have to do as much as I do. I could just as easily just say I need this done because I don't have access and let the admin do all the work. But I do the edit in the sandbox because so all you have to do is copy it over and I am trying to make it easier but if admins are just going to expect all the work be done for them then I will stop doing it. --Kumioko (talk) 13:53, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I am merely trying to encourage you to be more careful with your coding. If you were to put that code on a live template, you could break lots of pages! Yes, I could probably have fixed this for you, but there are plenty of administrators who are not so familiar with template code and so you should not trust us to check your code. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:31, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately the way the system is designed I cannot easily preview the effects of a change on a template in the sandbox. If it wasn't locked down I would have previewed it, implemented it if no problems were noticed and then checked a couple pages for anomilies and if any were found fix them quickly rather than submit a request and wait a few days. I look at this in a rather plain light. If the requirement is for the template to be locked down and restricted then thats fine but that also means that the administrators are taking on the onus of fixing tasks quickly rather than days. This comment isn't directed at you but at the system itself. The admins that are locking these templates down are frequently not the ones that have todo the work when someone asks for a change. Its the same 3 or 4 that do the template changes. If they are going to lock the template then they need to step up and start doing some of the updates. As I said I would have done it myself but I wasn't trusted to have access to admin tools by the community when I asked for them a couple years ago and now its left to you and others. --Kumioko (talk) 16:57, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:28, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deprecate template