This template (like all templates) is within the scope of WikiProject Templates, a group dedicated to improving the maintenance of Wikipedia's templates. This particular template is especially important to the project because it is used in the maintenance of other templates. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TemplatesWikipedia:WikiProject TemplatesTemplate:WikiProject TemplatesTemplates
This page has archives. Sections older than 180 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 6 sections are present.
Bolding tweak
I propose changing the bolding on this template so that only the "its entry" is bolded, as that's really the main link people are going to want to use. {{u|Sdkb}}talk01:55, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, but just this one? I often have to read the notice twice to remember where to click to find the discussion, because of "bolding blindness", if that is a thing. It seems like this one should be consistent with {{Article for deletion}}, {{Catfd}}, {{Cfd}}, etc. Viewed as a system, the naming and formatting of these templates is kind of a mess. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:56, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, good point. I'll go ahead and make the change here in the spirit of marginal improvement, but for anyone who wants to take this on as a larger project, standardizing all these notices is a task awaiting. {{u|Sdkb}}talk04:43, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think it would be helpful to have a new param value |type=template doc page, so that the message could start out with "This template doc page" when nominating Template doc pages. Or maybe just |type=doc page, and then it could be used for Module doc as well. Mathglot (talk) 23:37, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why? I know there are certain editors that are convinced that every unused /doc needs to be sent to TFD, but really it could just be redirected or (gasp) ignored and left alone. There is zero reason to modify the template just to add an extra word to indicate that the /doc itself is being nominated. Primefac (talk) 23:39, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For clarity. The reason is because if one sees "This template is being nominated for deletion" it could very easily be interpreted as being the template that is nominated (that's what it says; why wouldn't it mean that?). To prevent confusion, and maybe alarm in readers viewing that statement, it should say that only the doc page is being nominated for deletion. Redirecting it is still a possibility, and WP:TFD stands for "Templates for discussion", and the one-sentence lead at that page says that it is about discussing "deletion or merging", and either one may involve creation of a redirect, so that is the proper page to discuss it. (Then again, why keep a page around and provide a redirect from it for a dead doc page with no inlinks to it other than Tfd itself?) To prevent alarm or misunderstanding on the part of users seeing a big, red-bordered box at the top of their favorite template doc page saying, This template is being discussed in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy it would be wise, in my opinion, to add the two extra words. Mathglot (talk) 00:08, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Documentation pages should not be deleted if they are being actively transcluded onto a template, and if they are, the TFD nomination should be put in noinclude tags or use the parameter that disables display. Primefac (talk) 00:29, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. I am talkig about orphan doc pages transcluded nowhwere, other than Tfd itself. Sorry if I wasn't clear about that. Mathglot (talk) 00:41, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hide subsequent inline instances
At Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Weird problem with STN Template, the problem of {{Tfd}} and {{Tfm}} templates showing up right next to each other came up. While there's no easy way to make sure that the Tfm/Tfd template shows up only once per page, we could add .tfd~.tfd{display:none;} to Template:Template for discussion/styles.css, which would make it so that if multiple Tfd/Tfm templates are present in a single parent element (paragraph, table cell, list item, etc.), only the first one will show up. This would largely mitigate the problem seen with templates like {{STN}} in that linked discussion.
The only downside is that if there are different templates in the same parent that are nominated for deletion/merging, only the first will show the message. However, if the alternative is to hide the Tfd/Tfm notice altogether, I think that this solution would be preferable.
What if the same parent is the topmost mw-parser-output? Adding * > might prevent this for navboxen and sidebars, which are unnested and singletons: *>.tfd~.tfd{display:none;} This leaves inline templates, oh well I guess. 172.97.141.219 (talk) 19:34, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
* > would still hide it for all navboxes/sidebars since they are direct children of the mw-parser-output<div>...</div>. You'd want :not(.mw-parser-output)>.tfd~.tfd,:not(.mw-parser-output)>.tfd~*.tfd{display:none;}--Ahecht (TALK PAGE)15:40, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That also works, and I guess it's more readable. I was relying on the fact that MediaWiki CSS security features will always automatically convert my * > .tfd ~ .tfd into .mw-parser-output * > .tfd ~ tfd. 172.97.141.219 (talk) 22:51, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
|tiny = <templatestylessrc="Template:Templatefordiscussion/sandbox/styles.css"/><spanclass="tfdtfd-datedtfd-tiny">[[{{{link|Wikipedia:Templates for discussion#{{{page|}}}}}}|‹SeeTfD›]]</span>
+
|tiny = {{Fix|text=TfD|link={{{link|Wikipedia:Templates for discussion#{{{page|}}}}}}}}
−
|tiny = <templatestylessrc="Template:Template for discussion/sandbox/styles.css"/><spanclass="tfdtfd-datedtfd-tiny">[[{{{link}}}|‹SeeTfM›]]</span>
+
|tiny = {{Fix|text=TfM|link={{{link|Wikipedia:Templates for discussion#{{{page|}}}}}}}}
I refactored your changes so that they don't use {{fix}} (since TfD is not cleanup), do use the tfd class (to enable hiding subsequent ones per the section above), and moved them to a new tinier keyword, keeping the existing tiny as is. --Ahecht (TALK PAGE)15:28, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My expertise on Wikipedia template development is nil, but my complaint seems to be motivating this change, so let me add my perspective.
For an ordinary user, ‹TfM› is every bit as confusing and distracting as ‹See TfM›. It's an unfamiliar annotation, and if they click on it, they land into a change discussion that pure gibberish to most them. Every one of them thinks "why the actual fuck do I need to see this"?
I hope I'm not coming off as somebody who's mad at template developers. You folks do work that's absolutely essential to those of us who just edit content. But you're a relatively small community, and I don't understand why you can't find a way to notify each other of template change discussions without munging content read by millions of Wikipedia readers.
My original motive was stylistic consistency. I don't know anywhere else ‹› is used, so I find those angle brackets too idiosyncratic.
That said, I wanted to replace tiny instead of making a new type. Having a separate tinier type might lead to less consistency and more complexity. Before #Hide subsequent inline instances was implemented, I weakly supported or was neutral about this current edit request. Now I weakly oppose or am neutral. If we don't add a new type, I would normal-support this. 172.97.141.219 (talk) 00:52, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
