Jump to content

Template talk:Documentation/Archive 7

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Template talk:Documentation
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Pigsonthewing (talk | contribs) at 10:14, 16 May 2011 (archive). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Archive 1←Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7Archive 8Archive 9Archive 10


Interwikis in Template:Documentation/docname

{{editprotected|Template:Documentation/docname}}

Could the following interwikis be added to the protected template {{Documentation/docname}}? 

[[ceb:Plantilya:Dokumentasyon/pangalansadok]]
[[en:Template:Documentation/docname]]
[[fr:Modèle:Documentation/docname]]
[[ja:Template:Documentation/docname]]
[[pnb:Template:Documentation/docname]]
[[pt:Predefinição:Documentação/nomedoc]]
[[zh:Template:Documentation/docname]]

It could be better to create a /doc page and move them there. Opraco (talk) 03:04, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Personally I can't see the point of adding interwiki links to subtemplates. The main link to the main template should be sufficient. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:25, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
Someone may need to use this template in another wiki and it could be troublesome to find them there or identify if they even exist. The English Wikipedia stands as a central place for placing and finding iw links and, as it is done in other templates, I don't see why they couldn't be here. Opraco (talk) 11:11, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
It just seems that having doc subpages for every subtemplate is excessive. It's easy enough to find them using Special:PrefixIndex and anyone who needs to find one should be sufficiently familiar with the code to be able to do that! — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:33, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
Okay, then. I think you know how it works here better than I do. Sorry for all that. – Opraco (talk) 19:55, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
This is just my opinion! We'll see what others think about it. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:15, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from 7, 12 April 2010

{{editprotected}} The "subpages of this template" and "subpages of this page" in the core documentation templates does not work... not sure when the break happened but it appears to be because of the trailing slash "/".

Request to change file Template:Documentation/core from: 

   -->{{#switch: {{SUBJECTSPACE}}
      | {{ns:File}} =   <!--Don't show it-->
      | {{ns:Template}} =  [[Special:PrefixIndex/{{{template page|{{FULLPAGENAME}}}}}/|Subpages of this template]].
      | #default =  [[Special:PrefixIndex/{{{template page|{{FULLPAGENAME}}}}}/|Subpages of this page]].
      }}

to this (two trailing slashes removed after FULLPAGENAME): 

   -->{{#switch: {{SUBJECTSPACE}}
      | {{ns:File}} =   <!--Don't show it-->
      | {{ns:Template}} =  [[Special:PrefixIndex/{{{template page|{{FULLPAGENAME}}}}}|Subpages of this template]].
      | #default =  [[Special:PrefixIndex/{{{template page|{{FULLPAGENAME}}}}}|Subpages of this page]].
      }}

Hoping an admin can help clear it up. Thanks.  7  06:51, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Works for me. Where are you experiencing the breakage ? —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 08:27, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
I found it here: Template:Uw-notenglish but it seems to happen everywhere - the link at the bottom takes you to here but the ending slash breaks the PrefixIndex. However this one works. Thanks.  7  09:00, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
Those latter are not subpages though. Only pages with the same prefix. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 09:22, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
Oops - my mistake. I knew there was a difference, but when I saw that appearing on pages with no actual subpages it seemed like it was a grammatical mistake. Thought I was being clever too.  7  10:50, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Use h2 instead of a span?

Hi!!

I was wondering if isn't better (semantically) to use the h2 tag instead of a span for "Template documentation" (at /core), since the span currently is being used as a header, with style "font-weight: bold; font-size: 125%". Helder (talk) 19:33, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

That's not a bad idea; and would resolve the H2/H3issue discussed above. OTOH, is that line really necessary at all? Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 19:38, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Wasn't the problem with this that it's editsection button generation was unpredictable, and that it would show up in the toc ? —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 22:28, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Yes. Indeed, that appears to be the root of all the accessibility problems here. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 21:02, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
Can we get a decision on this, one way or the other? Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 18:16, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

TheDJ, what do you mean by "it's editsection button generation was unpredictable"?

Would it be possible to put the [edit] button out of the <h2> tag so that it doesn't show up in the TOC? Helder (talk) 21:21, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

No, H2s get edit section buttons automatically. I believe the problem used to be that at times the edit button wouldn't work properly when transcluding from another page. Not sure how that is these days. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 22:16, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Weirdness at {{Abuse cases}}

For some time {{Documentation}} has worked well, transcluding the /doc subpage. Today at that page I see the Abuse Cases template itself, and below I see:

documentation

This links to something entirely different! I am confused, and could so with an expert eye to be run over it, please Fiddle Faddle (talk) 17:12, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

I think it's because the template is too complicated (the template is now a member of Category:Pages where template include size is exceeded). Removing some parts of it or splitting it should fix it. And I personally think that it is too big and something should be done about it even if the problem is resolved some other way. Svick (talk) 17:38, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
So I fixed it by replacing {{Navbox subgroup long}} with {{Navbox subgroup}} (that particular subgroup has 19 lists, so the long variant is not necessary), but I still think the navbox is too big. (And of course, if it continues to grow, this problem will eventually appear again.) Svick (talk) 17:44, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Many thanks Fiddle Faddle (talk) 17:58, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
yes I spotted this weirdness and checking through the history I noticed it started after I corrected your numbering error when you added a new list. It looks like there is now another reason to support my existing view (discussed on the abuse cases talk page) that the template should be split into 2 (catholic and non-catholic)--Penbat (talk) 19:00, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

So with the execution of scripts via the &withJS= and the ability to diff different pages by using their revision ids, can we add a link to the documentation template to compare the difference from the template to the sandbox? — Dispenser 06:00, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

That sounds like it would be very useful, if it's possible. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:19, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
I guess I could write such a script. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 23:06, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Something like this: diff ? —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 18:19, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Looks like a pretty good start. The inital landing page needs to be set to something to explain to users about what's going on and for our reusers what to copy. The parameter names should be change from page1/page2 to diff1/diff2, diffleft/diffright, left/right, yellow/green, prevpage/nextpage, oldpage/newpage or similar to the API as a single pipe separated titles=. The code should be executed as soon as it finished loading and not with the addOnloadHook() as this adds a few seconds of delay. Initally, I had thought we'd use {{REVISIONID}} but it doesn't show work on preview. — Dispenser 02:47, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
Ok, mostly taken care of. There is one catch, the order of the diff is determined by the ID of the page. This usually works, because most sandboxes are created AFTER the original templates, but it isn't foolproof. I'm too lazy to fix that at the moment. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 00:38, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
Added —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 00:47, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, I've gone ahead and added the link to Template:Template sandbox notice. Does anyone want to add instruction for copying the script to Wikipedia:Pagediff? — Dispenser 02:46, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
Now replaced with the new Special:ComparePages. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 12:39, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Error report

It seems to fail on Template:Class mask. (It compares it to Template:Class instead?) — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:45, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Repaired, though not really as I want it. I see no way however to properly use urlencode in mediawiki. I guess I could let core2 pass along the encoded string together with the original pagenames, but this hack to replace + with _ works as well for now. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 11:19, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks! — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:20, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
Working on fixing this properly btw: bugzilla:23621. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 00:34, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Code Fix

{{editprotected}} Could a templatey administrator change this: 

| sandbox = 
  {{{docspace|{{NAMESPACE}}}}}:{{{template page|{{PAGENAME}}}}}/sandbox
| testcases = 
  {{{docspace|{{NAMESPACE}}}}}:{{{template page|{{PAGENAME}}}}}/testcases

to this: 

| sandbox = 
  {{#if: {{{1|}}}
  | {{#rel2abs:../sandbox|{{{1|}}}}}   <!--Other docname fed-->
  | {{{docspace|{{NAMESPACE}}}}}:{{{template page|{{PAGENAME}}}}}/sandbox
  }}
| testcases = 
  {{#if: {{{1|}}}
  | {{#rel2abs:../testcases|{{{1|}}}}}   <!--Other docname fed-->
  | {{{docspace|{{NAMESPACE}}}}}:{{{template page|{{PAGENAME}}}}}/testcases
  }}

on Template:Documentation/core2? Thanks. Set Sail For The Seven Seas 281° 23' 0" NET 18:45, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Not sure about this. I think that even if a specified documentation page is being used, you would still want the /sandbox and /testcases in the standard place. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 22:55, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
On second thoughts, you do have a point. Probably best left as it is. Thanks. Set Sail For The Seven Seas 252° 15' 15" NET 16:49, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Shouting template

WHY IS THIS TEMPLATE SHOUTING AT ME? It even says "please" in allcaps. -DePiep (talk) 23:26, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Are you talking about the preload template? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:57, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Exactly. Couldn't find it first. -DePiep (talk) 19:51, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
I would not be opposed to changing to lowercase. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:24, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Spreading non-silence?

iF I GET IT RIGHT, THIS IS TEMPLATE FROM WHERE EVERYONE IS SHOUTING. cOULD SOMEONE PLEASE STOP THAT? THANK YOU. -depiep (talk) 02:03, 11 february 2011 (utc)

Sorry, could you explain? I don't get it. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:22, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
Oh, I just saw the thread up above. I will look into it. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:24, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
It looks like Template:Documentation/preload isn't protected, so edit away if you want to change the ALL CAPS. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:25, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
So I changed the comments into lowercase. I think it's  done -DePiep (talk) 02:38, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Code Update

{{editprotected}} Could a templatey administrator copy the code over from

  1. . Template:Documentation/core/sandbox to Template:Documentation/core
  2. . Template:Documentation/core2/sandbox to Template:Documentation/core2
  3. . Template:Documentation/sandbox to Template:Documentation

The result can be seen at Template:Documentation/testcases. Thanks. Set Sail For The Seven Seas 280° 50' 0" NET 18:43, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

 Done. I've only copied over the preload changes and not the other differences. -- WOSlinker (talk) 21:41, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Problems with transclusion depth

Unfortunately, this template is not working well with the {{convert}} template. Basically, you combine the transclusion depth of this template with the transclusion depth of {{convert}}, and red errors are the result. Here is a concrete example, have a look at

  1. This page using this template to create the documentation here, which has red error warnings in the transcluded calls to {{convert}}
  2. This page using just the "core" part of the template here, which has no red error warnings.

It would be great if we could figure out a way to refactor this template to reduce this depth. It might be enough to merge "core" with "core2". I would rather not fork it to create a simplified version which works with convert. This is a common problem, if you just have a look at Category:ParserFunction errors, and look for the errors coming from templates. If can find some time, I will see if I can come up with a solution, but it would be great if someone else has some ideas. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 04:38, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Hell's bells, {{convert}} has 3300 sub-templates!
at any rate, the place I'd start with this, I think, is by merging Template:Documentation/core2 into Template:Documentation/core it looks like someone created the core2 template as an easy way to add some features to the core template without rewriting it (all core2 does is call core with some conditionals and defaults). that should save a layer of transclusion. I can play with the merger if you like, but I can't implement it because the page is locked. --Ludwigs2 23:13, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
I read it 3 times now, and I still haven't really grasped the problem. Can someone try to explain it one more time ? —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 00:14, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
Okay here is the problem, Wikipedia has a limit on the transclusion depth. This template adds three to the depth of anything on the documentation page, since {{documentation}} calls {{documentation/core2}} which calls {{documentation/core}} which transcludes the documentation page. Now suppose you add a convert template being transcluded by an infobox template which transcludes {{infobox}}. Now you have officially hit the depth limit. The solution is to reduce the depth. As Ludwigs pointed out, we could easily reduce the depth of this template by one, by eliminating {{documentation/core2}}, but will this be enough? It could be, but I would have to check. I do know that if this template had a depth of only 1, it would be enough, as is evidenced by my test where I replaced {{documentation}} by {{documentation/core}}. The other solution is to reduce the complexity of {{convert}}, which is really the bigger issue, but that is an entirely different story. Reducing the depth of this template would be far easier. I hope this explains the problem. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:07, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
I agree that rewriting 'convert' would probably be the better choice, but let me reiterate - the damned thing has 3300 sub-templates! I don't think I can personally afford the quantity of aspirin that would require. now I'll take a look at the template and see if I can figure out the structure and suggest a simplification, but any revision there is probably going to require AWB or some bot interaction. however, a question - is the only place this where this is a problem on the template doc page? of so, we might just want to restructure the doc page to eliminate direct examples. easier by far. --Ludwigs2 01:21, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
Simplification of both templates would probably help. I just checked, and it looks like we would have to reduce the depth of this template down to one-level to fix the problem, without changing anything else. In other words, just removing {{documentation/core2}} doesn't fix it :( However, replacing {{documentation}} with {{documentation/core}} does fix it. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:48, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
Indeed; this bug was arising before /core2 existed (see Template talk:Documentation/Archive 3#Bug for example) and was never fixed. I would support merging /core2 into /core as it wouldn't do any harm. But sorting out {{convert}} is probably going to be necessary at some stage! — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:59, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
One level only ... wow. (Making two when transcluded into a subject Template page). How deep is {{convert}} then? I understand depth can be 20 levels maximum before problem occurs. That means, convert is eating most of the pie. (btw, {{edt}} tests template-depth). -DePiep (talk) 08:51, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I have refactored the template in the safest way I could imagine, but still fix the transclusion depth issue. As far as I can tell, this fixes most of the problems, but please revert and let me know if there are unintended consequences. Basically, the way the template worked before was that "documentation" called "documentation/core2" which called "documentation/core" which then transcluded the doc page. What I did was split "core2" into "box start2" and "box end2", putting the parts before the transclusion of the doc page into "box start2" and the parts after the transclusion of the doc page into "box end2". Then, I did the exact same thing for "core". For the middle section, I temporarily created "mid" and "mid2", then repeatedly substituted them to bring them up to the top level. This caused a bit of unnecessary repetition, since things were expanded. So, I reduced this repetition by creating two new subtemplates "doc page" and "docspace", which were common patterns in the code. Note that there still is some repetition, and the code is still a bit more complex than it needs to be, but at least this fixes the main problem and optimization can occur at a later date. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:21, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Not sure what's happening here

If you look at a transclusion of {{LIRR lines}}, it is noticed that there is an extra break after the template. However, when the noinclude tags are placed right after the final closing bracket of the parserfunction in the template, the transcluded /doc page does not have a green background. If I put a break in there, it may not be visible in the code, but it's visible in the tranclusions. What's going on? Other templates don't seem to have this problem. — Train2104 (talk • contribs • count) 16:45, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

I don't see where the {{documentation}} template is in this case? I checked that template and it isn't using documentation. Sorry if this is obvious. I did recently refactor this template, so I would like to correct any unintended features. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:49, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
Okay, I just checked your edit history, and I think you may be talking about {{LIRR links}}? Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:50, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
I moved the newline to within the noinclude, which is how I usually see the documentation template placed. This appears to have resolved the problem? Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:56, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
Looks good. Thanks!— Train2104 (talk • contribs • count) 18:57, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Preload....

I definitely don't get preloaded text when I click on the link to a /doc page that doesn't exist. But the documentation of {{documentation}} says I should. What's up with this? --- cymru.lass (hit me up)⁄(background check) 07:19, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Currently, the "create" button does do the preload, but the redlink "/doc" at the bottom doesn't. I suppose we could make both do the preload. Is that what you want? Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:08, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, if that's not too much of a hassle. According to WP:Documentation as well as the /doc of this page say that if the /doc redlink should do a preload. Thanks! --- cymru.lass (hit me up)⁄(background check) 03:11, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Interwikis in different subtemplates

Hi! I want to bring your attention to next template: Template:Hidden begin. This template uses different pages to include documentation and interwikis. I think that is not clear in the first time that interwikis should be placed on the Template:Hidden begin/doc instead of Template:Hidden begin-end/doc. That is why we have interwikis in both places. Is there more suitable solution when few templates share same documentation? --DixonD (talk) 09:24, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

I think the best way to do this is the way it is done at for the Harv citation series (e.g., Template:Harvcol/doc). Basically you still have individual doc pages with the categories and interwikis, but the main core part is on a single page (or in a single template). Does this address your question? Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:08, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
Looks good but still not perfect, because you should do extra actions to edit actual documentation. Still it is better because you at least know where are interwikis. But could it be good idea to provide two edit links on top of documentation - one for starting editing actual documentation and another one for just categories and interwikis? --DixonD (talk) 15:27, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Greek interwiki

Please add el:Πρότυπο:Τεκμηρίωση προτύπου as the greek interwiki. Cheers! --JimmyX (talk) 02:14, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Go right ahead, just edit Template:Documentation/doc. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:27, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Sandbox preload

I would like to change the template so that when creating the sandbox version, instead of using Template:Documentation/preload-sandbox (which I don't find very useful) it will preload the contents of the current live template. Does anyone have a problem with this? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:33, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Basic source code in it would be OK, but I do like that {{template sandbox notice}} that is in it now, and I don't like the {{documentation}} in the sandbox. Come to think of it, I'd prefer more links, e.g. all those that are present in the lowest box of regular /documentation (to have more Template control from the sandbox). Even better: there could be a button added in /doc, that does refresh the /sandbox with original code: like Sandbox (create/edit|view|reset-to-original code). -DePiep (talk) 12:50, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
Why don't you like documentation on the sandbox copy? For one, it automatically includes Template:Template sandbox notice at the top. Secondly it has all the useful links (e.g. to testcases and subtemplates) at the bottom. Thirdly, it can actually be useful to have the documentation in front of you when experimenting with a template. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:44, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
Let's drop my personal habits in sandboxes (pictures erased, especially those me peeing in b/w, please ;-)). Btw, I have developed templates with multiple subtemplates seriously (using sandboxes & testpages, but dropping /doc asap).
- Basic proposal 1.0: copy T:code unchanged into the sandbox (either at creation or by linked process). Good.
- Effects, undesired: -include- tag effects (e.g., original /doc in category intended for T:).
- Effects, desired: complete picture of the template. Control and access to this Template's environment (pages)
- To be checked: what about /sandbox/doc, and such likes? No invisible spaghetti relations please.
(I have tried some examples, loosely. Not to a true checking question to prove something)
The unintended and hard -include- effects look serious to me, and should be handled beforehand. -

-DePiep (talk) 20:57, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Example of unintended, undesired effect. Using {{Germanic name}}. Created its Template:Germanic name/sandbox, with full 100% T:source code. Now the main T:/doc shows up in the T:'s category: Category:Hatnote templates for names. -DePiep (talk) 18:44, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
  • After looking at the code (amazing how compicated it is for such a basic thing) it seems that, per /template page, separate documentation for /sandbox is not possible. It will always display the main documentation, unless you specifically direct it to use /sandbox/doc via the {{{1}}} parameter.
Actually what code is "how complicated", if relevant at all? -DePiep (talk) 22:41, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
Yes it does matter. Template /doc and such should not appear in content category pages. -DePiep (talk) 22:41, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Propose "Template:tlsandbox"

Why not create template "tlsandbox" (tl=template link, as in other template linking). It could be a box (not inline), and contain:

All with controlled page and -include- effects. "create" and "purge" options where relevant. -DePiep (talk) 22:41, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Why not just add these links to Template:Template sandbox notice and use this? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 22:54, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
Oh yes, could do done: Template:tlsandbox. And renamed for naming pattern. Just don't know what will happen with the -include- effects. And the magic words. -DePiep (talk) 23:05, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
I'm confused. What is the purpose of this new template {{tlsandbox}}? Why not use the existing {{Template sandbox notice}} and/or {{Template test cases notice}} and improve them if needed? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:21, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
I am targeting: a single template that has all the links together, the links now used on three different templates. If it works, we have a single control template for working with (and on) /sandbox and /testpages (e.g. in the sandbox we can open spacial page All subpages). Of course the current version is just a first step; the templates used have different buildups (uses of namespace, pagenames &tc). -DePiep (talk) 18:34, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Implement proposal 1.0

As you don't oppose my original suggestion, are you happy if I implement this diff on Template:Documentation/end box? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:46, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

BTW you can test it here. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:52, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

(edit conflict):Do I understand the change:

a) does not address the problem of /sandbox-appears-in-category then? (Earlier example {{Germanic name}} in Category:Hatnote templates for names, by full page copy.)
b) does not add the {{template sandbox notice}} to the created page. Test says: Solved.
I think a) is preventing the change, innit. We don't want sandboxes in content categories. -DePiep (talk) 19:05, 13 February 2011 (UTC) (b)solved -DePiep (talk) 19:08, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
The test shows that a) still exists see Category:Uttar Pradesh templates. Although, Category:Uttar Pradesh templates might not count as a "content category" exactly. Somehow I think the sandbox should not be there. -DePiep (talk) 19:14, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
I guess we disagree about how much of a problem this is. Personally I don't see that this matters, and would be outweighed by the advantage of convenience. In any case you could always remove {{doc}} from the bottom if you wished. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 22:26, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
Quite simple: the sandbox doesn't belong there. It's not content space, but it is editor's trove. All editors' that is, not just template-editing editors. And also: I don't think it is impossible or difficult to make that distinction in {{documentation}} or so. -DePiep (talk) 11:34, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
Okay, well that is your opinion. I can imagine that some others would agree with you. But I can also imagine some editors arguing the opposite view: one possible advantage is that Special:RecentChangesLinked on the category would show work in progress on /sandbox templates as well as the main template. Personally I don't care either way, but I'm suggesting that, whichever view you take, it is more convenient to start from a copy of the live template in the sandbox even if you then go and remove {{doc}} from the bottom. That is all I am proposing. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:04, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
Why not change {{documentation}} so that it does not reproduce categories when in page /sandbox? (btw, it is not 'just my opinion' of preference not having /doc there). You really mean to have the sandbox show up in {{template category}} for every new /sandbox page? -15:24, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
I said it is your opinion, which is the case. I also said above that I don't really care about whether /sandbox belongs to the same category or not. I am discussing the issue of the preload template. And no, I don't think there is any way for this template to automatically exclude categories on /sandbox versions because that would mean partially transcluding the contents of /doc which is not possible. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:39, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

We seem to have reached somewhat of an impasse. It may be helpful to get comments from other editors on the benefits or otherwise of applying this diff, without perhaps getting sucked in wider issues. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:51, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template_talk:Documentation/Archive_7&oldid=429369528"