Template talk:How-to

message: I have reworded this template to cite WP:NOT#IINFO, because it previously did not make explicit why "how to" content is inappropriate according to Wikipedia's content policies. Please feel free to revert or reword if this edit was in error. --Muchness 07:03, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Citing relevent policy

message: For how-to materials, or anything that is predominantly instructional, I think we should make it much more clear that Wikibooks is the correct destination. I would like to make the reference to Wikibooks in this template more prominent. I would also like to include mention that authors who are interested in writing instructional material may accompany their articles to Wikibooks as well. What I dont want to see is valuable instructional material get deleted, or authors of instructional material get disenfranchised, just because Wikipedia is the wrong place for it. --Whiteknight (WB:Whiteknight) 01:20, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Currently this template is mostly used to mark articles with only small how-to sections. If you see the previous discussion about this subject, it was discovered that at least two different templates are needed for two kinds of articles: one template for the articles where minor editing is the best option, and another template for articles where transwiki:ing seems to be the best option. This is so as to be more helpful in directing the efforts of contributors. Santtus 11:26, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's fair enough, If this isn't the correct template then there is no sense begging to change it. I'll try and find the right template for the job. --Whiteknight (talk)  (books) 20:47, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Dont be discouraged. There are two main templates now. This can be made to suggest transwiki:ing more. I just think that the templates should have different emphasis, the templates should suggest different actions with different weight. Santtus 00:04, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikibooks as a predominant solution 

message: can someone create an  page to do the same thing. It's more intuitive for those who don't have all the templates memorized. 165.21.154.93 (talk) 11:14, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Advice 

message: I often find that only one section of an article has how-to content, but the current Howto tag only really covers the whole article: it reads "this article contains instructions..." etc.  There is also a Howto-section template, but this is a redirect to Howto itself, so does not solve the problem.  There are two obvious solutions:
*Make Howto-section a template on its own, worded appropriately (see for example :Template:Cleanup and :template:Cleanup-section).
*Change the wording of the Howto tag to cover both situations: "This article or section contains..." etc (see for example :template:Contradictarticle).
Any thoughts?  Richard New Forest (talk) 21:12, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: This is already possible. Just use . . Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 23:28, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Brilliant, thanks, that's useful.  Is this already explained somewhere, or do we need it mentioned on the template front page?  Richard New Forest (talk) 09:51, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Done. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 08:35, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Howto tag for sections

message: , pinging you to let you know that the recent change causes some potentially undesired effects, making "no" display in place of "section" in places such as Isometric video game graphics. Not sure what is the correct solution, a code change or a bot run to update code in cases like this. YuriNikolai (talk) 23:56, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: @YuriNikolaiThank you. Reverting now NW1223 <Howl at me•My hunts> 00:32, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bug