Template talk:Deprecated template

message: Why is this template in :Category:Redirect templates? It's not for use on a redirect page, is it? –RHolton≡– 02:50, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably because it's a "soft" redirect. →AzaToth 18:20, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I see. I suppose that makes sense. Thanks. –RHolton≡– 18:43, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category 

message: What is the advantage of categorizing deprecated templates by month? We'll just be left with a lot of monthly categories, possibly many only holding one or two templates.
How does one use the new format for templates that are replaced with non-template solutions? For example, . The old version allowed free text to describe replacements. Pagrashtak 17:48, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Questions about the new Tdeprecated format 

message: Any objections to linking the word deprecated in this template? It would be helpful for those not familiar with the term. -- Zyxw 18:48, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've linked it to the category page (where I'll add a description in a moment), which should make it clear to inexperienced users what the term means, while also providing an explanation of the whole process – Gurch 15:47, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link the word [[deprecated]], for those not familiar with it 

message: I found this idiom somewhere that can be used when there are multiple candidates for replacing an old template:

:: {{new1}}, for when the arg is argled
:: {{new2}}, for when the bar is bargled


:: , for when the arg is argled
:: , for when the bar is bargled
— Ksero 21:38, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Modified above to show code and remove cat. Rich Farmbrough, 11:55, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Multiple replacements 

message: Why is it necessary to have to type in the name of the template for the old parameter?  I think that adding  should be fine because the template will not be used anywhere but the template's page itself. –Dream out loud (talk) 00:09, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This template is used on the template page and (once orphaned) every page transcluding it. This shows users a message notifying them that the template is deprecated when they use it somewhere. If we only use , the user will get a message like "The template  is deprecated" when they add it to George W. Bush. —{admin} Pathoschild 03:16:52, 02 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  <nowiki>{{PAGENAME}}</nowiki> vs. "old" parameter 

message: The  has an  implementation:

Conrad T. Pino 10:47, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please note that  is for article message boxes, not for template message boxes :) —Ms2ger (talk) 20:46, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ambox look 

message: could you please add the turkish link? --> tr:Şablon:Geçersizş--78.180.58.116 (talk) 10:22, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 11:21, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Turkish link 

message: I changed the stylized exclamation point image to one that, IMHO, is more in keeping with current trends.  –droll [chat] 10:14, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changed image  

message: The documentation for this template says that the box style changes depending on which type of page the template appears. I'm flabbergasted. The casual reader doesn't need to see our dirty laundry. Washing dirty laundry in public reflect an imperfect strategic approach. IMHO, it would be better to place the article in a hidden category. Then the problem could be addressed in a more systematic way. Thanks of reading this. Seems I just spreading joy all over today.10:30, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: In Wikipedia, every reader is a potential editor. In addition, it helps drawing attention. Debresser (talk) 11:43, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does this template really appear in the main name space 

message: I used this template ([here]), but it is very confusing. I do not even know in which category the templates ends up. Why is the template not in :Category:Templates for deletion (which has dozens of pages)? Also, there is no connection with the grand WP:TfD (Templates for Discussion)-policy, which includes merging. I would like the process of deprecation to be merged with the TfD-process, both by technics and by documentation. -DePiep (talk) 19:44, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Process missing parallels with TfD 

message: This template did not work correctly with the parameters , , , and , or alternatively parameters  and . To my surprise. To make it work with them correctly, took some thinking and some trial and error, see these edits. Debresser (talk) 04:15, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Make work with parameters 

message: Lojbanist remove cattle from stage 18:44, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: It would keep it to aware about icon if you would without it would be confusing. ~ Junior5a (Talk) Cont 18:49, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does this template really need an icon? 

message: Dated maintenance categories really don't make sense here as can be seen at :Category:Deprecated templates with most of the categories only having a single member. If no one has any objections I will remove this function and only have one category for them all. Also posting a message at WT:WPT considering the low traffic nature of this page. --Trialpears (talk) 21:49, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: No problem here. Debresser (talk) 21:51, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  --Trialpears (talk) 22:28, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dated maintenance categories 

message: recently move this template from "Deprecated template" to just "Deprecated". While I don't have any real issues with this I really think it should be done properly or not at all. We should update redirect links in the documentation, , all the categorize and probably some other links. I also don't think this template should be used on things other than templates (and modules) making the rename quite pointless. --Trialpears (talk) 23:36, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it should be moved back. for stuff in other namespaces we have Template:Historical, and in response the suggested other uses that they added to the documentation: We do not keep depreciated modules around as they are not called directly in articles so editors will not be running across them, and I have no idea what the suggested use on files is supposed to accomplish. The template is coded so that it only works properly on template pages (e.g. it automatically adds a "Template:" prefix onto any names inputted to it) so that would also need fixing, but the usage on other namespaces seems pointless at best. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 00:10, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Given that the mover didn't come to discuss I have now reverted. --Trialpears (talk) 23:37, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Undiscussed move