Template talk:Rfa-question

Automatic second question number

Shouldn't it use {{#expr:{{{1}}}+1}} for the second question number instead? 178.42.215.223 (talk) 10:03, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

 Done in Special:Diff/1226961046 after almost seven and a half years. GTrang (talk) 21:04, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Named parameters

Does someone want to rewrite this template to also accept named parameters instead of just 1=, 2=, 3=? I propose those parameters should be question_number=, first_question=, second_question=.

Long term, this would let us move towards putting the named parameters in the examples. Right now the examples / sample code don't use parameters {{subst:Rfa-question|question number|your question}}, which means if the question has an equals sign in it, it has to be escaped with {{=}}, which requires a lot of technical skill. Adding named parameters would let us change the example to {{subst:Rfa-question|question_number=[# goes here]|first_question=[question goes here]|second_question=[optional second question goes here]}}, and eliminate the need for {{=}} escaping.

A recent example with six equals escapes:

{{subst:Rfa-question|6|It looks like back in 2021, you [https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/w/index.php?title{{=}}User_talk%3ABastun&diff{{=}}prev&oldid{{=}}1005789821 removed a message from your user talk page] and used the edit summary {{tq|Like I said, fuck off. You appear to have missed the whole point of Star Trek, from Gene's days to the present.}}. And [https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/w/index.php?title{{=}}User_talk%3ABastun&diff{{=}}prev&oldid{{=}}879025678 in 2019], you used the edit summary {{tq|You should apply some butthurt cream, there, Mr Snowflake}}. In general, what are your thoughts on leaving snappy edit summaries? Are there circumstances where it is appropriate?}}

–Novem Linguae (talk) 01:31, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Also accepting named parameters would be ok; forcing them would be extremely irritating, especially to such long names as that.

I think this could be more easily addressed by changing the comment on candidacy pages:

−

<!-- Use this template to add your question: {{subst:Rfa-question|question number|your question}}. If you have two questions, use {{subst:Rfa-question|first question number|your first question|your second question}}. Check [[Template:Rfa-question]] for further documentation. -->

+

<!-- Use this template to add your question: {{subst:Rfa-question|question number|2=your question}}. If you have two questions, use {{subst:Rfa-question|first question number|2=your first question|3=your second question}}. Check [[Template:Rfa-question]] for further documentation. -->

Template:= shouldn't be the go-to solution either way. —Cryptic 03:13, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

I was worried 1= 2=question1 3=question2 would be confusing because the numbers didn't match up nicely. But removing that first 1= mitigates that a bit. Yeah, this approach is probably the way to go. –Novem Linguae (talk) 03:37, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

 Done using Cryptic's approach in these diffs: 1, 2, 3. –Novem Linguae (talk) 03:47, 22 October 2024 (UTC)