- template:indent (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (XfD|restore)
- Template:I (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:I0 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:I2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:I5 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:5 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Indent family usage (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
As the bot operator who would ordinarily convert these templates, I disagree with their deletion; the administrator who closed the TFD discussion has stated that he "would not be against" relisting and suggested raising the matter here [1]. Even the best available substitution of template:indent, for example, gives us ugly and unreadable wikicode like [2] and [3]; conversion to the standard template:spaces syntax would break uses of the template, since the "templates alternate HTML and unicode acceptable variations of ways to declaring spaces, forcing browsers to recognize each in turn, when their rendering would normally compact and eliminate successive spaces. In short, they force padding within, before, or after a field which includes them in a line (which in practice, is usually within a wikitable, to force alignments of long and short words, such as month names, etc.)" (from Template:Space/doc). I suggest relisting to more fully explore the technical considerations involved. Erik9 (talk) 15:29, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I'm obviously too non-technical to understand what the point of these templates are and whether they are needed or not but there was a reasonably clear consensus here although the participation was pretty slim. I'd be interested in someone being able to explain in very simple non-technical language for thickies like me what the consequences of deleting these things are but I wouldn't be averse to a relist if it is genuinely thought that a more expansive discussion might lead to a more conclusive outcome. Spartaz Humbug! 16:03, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Basically, these templates are used to produce a newline, followed by indentation by a specified number of spaces. If we substitute template:indent, then instead of having "{{indent|15}}" as wikicode, we would have "<br />        ". We can't use template:spaces for the same purpose, because this template produces only a type of spaces which some web browsers compress into a single space. Erik9 (talk) 01:59, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Is there any reason that it couldn't be replaced with a linebreak and the proper number of colons (eg., for
{{indent|15}}, :::::::::::::::)? lifebaka++ 22:24, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Some combination of colons would produce the desired effect. However, the problem is that you would have to know the prior indent amount, since this indent is an increment on the previous indention, rather than an absolute amount of indent. It's a complete mess. However, I don't see it as being entirely critical to get it complete right if it's only on a talk page. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:00, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I think a consideration like this is a pretty good reason to extend the discussion, personally. But I don't think the venue should be TFD. Is there some appropriate place where technically-minded users would naturally gather to talk about such matters?—S Marshall Talk/Cont 09:42, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- As far as I can tell, most of these are unused in article space? It appears that {{5}} has quite a few transclusions, but it's hard to see which template is actually using it. Note that, a common typo in template programming is to leave off an extra brace, in which case, this template is the result. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:58, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I would say that getting the exact appearance right is not that critical if they are only used on talk pages. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:58, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The deletion of these templates is premised upon the project being somehow better off without them. To claim, then, that it's okay to break formatting by deleting the templates because only talk pages will be affected doesn't really explain how the deletion of the templates is beneficial. Erik9 (talk) 00:57, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Agreed. However, I would say that deleting {{5}} would be beneficial. It's a common error in template programming to forget an extra brace. I just tracked down one such error in {{BS-header}}, which was causing {{5}} to be transcluded on thousands of articles. I don't know how long it takes for the "what links here" cache to update after such a fix. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:31, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Template:5 is a redirect to Template:I5. If the redirect's name is too simple to avoid a significant number of mistaken calls, then we could delete the redirect, replacing any transclusions thereof with calls to the base template. More generally, if any of these templates have problematic names, renaming is easily effectuated (my bot can replace every template call with the new names), and provides a viable alternative to deletion that preserves functionality. Erik9 (talk) 01:38, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- That sounds like a reasonable resolution, and perhaps deprecate them all as well. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:57, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Suggested resolution
Okay, the wikipedia cache has now caught up with the fix to the broken {{bs-header}}, and so the list of 'uses' should now be correct:
- Template: indent has approximately 50 transclusions.
- Template: I0 has approximately 25 transclusions.
- Template: I2 has approximately 150 transclusions.
- Template: I5 has approximately 15 transclusions.
- Template: 5 has 2 transclusions.
- Template:Indent family usage has 7 transclusions (all on the above template pages).
My vote would be to
- Replace {{I5}} and {{5}} by <br/>{{spaces|5}} or {{indent|5}}, and delete these two.
- Substitute/delete {{indent family usage}}
- Replace {{I0}} with <br />, and delete it.
- Replace {{I2}} with <br/>{{spaces|5}} or {{indent|2}}, and delete it.
- Keep {{indent}} for now and possibly send it back to TFD for more discussion.
I think that there is some advantage to removing these very short name templates as they often expose typos in template programming (especially true for Template: 5). Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:24, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I'm with spartaz. I don't have any desire to make some decision about something I don't understand. Can someone ping the deleting admin to see if he minds restoring them and opening some discussion at WP:VPT as to how they should be depreciated or moved (or whatever)? Protonk (talk) 05:18, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
