Template talk:Unicode

Deprecation

@Izkala, Izno, Edokter, and BU Rob13: I've removed a use of this template from {{Fb round2 2006 ACL GS}}. This was the only use of this template I could find in any football related templates and pages. "What links here" still lists many more uses, but they may just be cached and disappear in a while. Wouldn't it be better to fix the actual templates (ab)using this one, instead of adding a hack here? —Ruud 11:37, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

@Ruud Koot: There's a whole load of templates that aren't showing up in what links here that transclude this template. For instance, {{Fb round2 2002–03 ACL Q}}. There's over 200 of them, I believe. Why don't they show up in "What links here"? No idea. But they don't. Previously, this was gotten around by using {{Unicode}}. Your solution works, and it's what we'll almost certainly do eventually, but someone has to go through all of the templates in Category:Fb templates to find the few hundred that need the fix. This can be done with AWB, but it takes time. I'll get to it eventually. In the meantime, the hack is the most effective way to go about things. ~ Rob^Talk 11:41, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Okay, it seems there was a bit of miscommunication on various other talk pages. So if I'm understanding this correctly, the hack Izkala added (the second time, when they used the correct syntax) will not cause any spurious spaces to be inserted or substituted on pages where they shouldn't be, right? In that case, I'd be okay with leaving it in place until those football templates have been fixed. —Ruud 11:55, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

As it stands, Izkala's fix will either (a) simply pass-through the parameter of unicode if one is given or (b) pass-through a single space if no parameter is given. So "{{unicode|blahblahblah}}" becomes "blahblahblah" while "{{unicode| }}" becomes a single space. No spaces will be added if a parameter is supplied, which should be the case in 100% of templates where this fix is not needed. ~ Rob^Talk 12:00, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Not that it made much of a difference I misplaced the pipe the first time - the template wasn't being substituted, nor is it now being substituted. We seem to take pleasure from making a kerfuffle over every little thing; 24-hour ultimatums are a timeless classic. Izkala (talk) 12:03, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

That's why it's a good idea to leave a note on the talk page (and test changes in a sandbox), it's not always clear to others what you're trying to do based on just an edit summary and (slightly broken) edit. If the current version of this template does what it's supposed to do in all cases, can't the bot just continue to expand and substitute this template? (Instead of someone having to go through it by hand.) —Ruud 12:34, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

The bot won't touch things outside of the mainspace to avoid exactly the type of issues I had to rollback. The bot completed its substitution of everything it's programmed to do already. There's no reason not to have the automatic substitution reactivated to catch any new uses, but it also won't do anything as of now. ~ Rob^Talk 14:02, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

"The bot won't touch things outside of the mainspace to avoid exactly the type of issues I had to rollback." It did subst {{Unicode}} in templatespace but stopped on 20 April: [1]. Does it subst templates in templatespace selectively? Izkala (talk) 14:31, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

OK, I think the reason it's not substituted the rest is they're not output on the original template page itself and thus won't show in Special:WhatLinksHere (or whatever the API equivalent is). But yeah, it definitely does subst in templatespace. Izkala (talk) 14:35, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

To be clear: the substitution notice is required to stay to catch any future transclusions that may occur for whatever reason (like copying from old revisions or other wikis). They should be substed as soon as possible. That is why I am set on allowing the bot to continue its job. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 15:48, 9 May 2016 (UTC)