Template talk:Mergewith/Archive
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Template:Mergewith. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
New format
I changed the format of this template to the one suggested by Violetriga on Template talk:Merge:
| File:Merge articles.gif | This article should be merged with [[{{{1}}}]]. If you disagree with this then please discuss this on the article talk page. |
Since the old template used to take a parameter "with" and the new one just uses the first argument, I went through and fixed references to this template in the 16 articles that use this. –MementoVivere 02:37, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- The problem is that nesting transclusion parameters inside a template invocation breaks. It would appear that you have failed to check the result of removing the
<nowiki>tags:
File:Merge articles.gif This article should be merged with [[{{{1}}}]].
If you disagree with this then please discuss this on the article talk page.
- I am attempting to fix it by substing the message box template. Wish me luck. --Phil | Talk 11:50, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)
Merge template changes
Can you be careful with all this changing of merge templates?
- Sometimes there is more info in the merge notice than just "this article should be merged", like "should this article be merged?" and "this article could be merged with either this or this, please discuss on talk page" which is being deleted when you change templates.
- Changing lots of templates is putting a strain on the servers. For temporary purposes, it is recommended to not edit templates and to implement them with subst: for now, lest we lose out watchlist and other nice functionality for the sake of server load. See Wikipedia:Avoid using meta-templates. - Omegatron 12:38, Apr 16, 2005 (UTC)
- I wonder if it was a bit unwise to first change the template, make lots of articles look broken, then wonder about what to do next. There are I think lots of articles which would need work now. That can be automated, but I am not sure to what degree. Oleg Alexandrov 14:59, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- There are a huge number of articles that look broken now. So is updating those articles to use the new template now encouraged or discouraged? And if it is discouraged, should the urgent item be removed from the Community Portal and that Wikipedia:Bandwagon page? Avocado 15:11, Apr 16, 2005 (UTC)
- I see a lot of these on my watchlist. What's going on? - Omegatron 00:01, Apr 17, 2005 (UTC)
The current template is far too cumbersome. It needs a lot of work. EreinionFile:RAHSymbol.JPG
