Template talk:Undue weight section

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Template talk:Undue which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 14:00, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Template talk:Undue weight which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 00:00, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No "reason" or "date" parameters

While transcluding this template, I noticed that there are no documented parameters. Is there a reason for that? RadioactiveBoulevardier (talk) 07:36, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RadioactiveBoulevardier, what are you referring to? I see a #Parameters section that has been there for at least several years containing two documented parameters. That said, this template should probably be merged into Template:Undue weight, with a new, |section= parameter added there. Mathglot (talk) 09:32, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I think I meant that it's missing TemplateData. I’m not sure what "1" and "to" parameters are, but at least there's a "date" one.

About merging, well, you're welcome to put it up for discussion, but it seems to serve a useful purpose, despite the low transclusion count. RadioactiveBoulevardier (talk) 16:54, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Serves a useful purpose" is a rationale for merging as opposed to deletion, not a rationale against merging. Templates that are near duplicates except for a single feature are almost aways merged as redundant. Sometimes the divergent one is kept as a template wrapper for the general template, but with a pre-set parameter, when it serves a useful shortcut fuction. But {{Undue weight section|...}} isn't much of a shortcut for {{Undue weight|section=y|...}} anyway. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 17:56, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that was exactly my thought, as well. I'd raise it myself, but too busy at the moment; I'd certainly support a merge + wrap.

By the way, RadioactiveBoulevardier, here's a tip: you can always include params |reason= or |date= in any template, regardless whether it is documented or not. In most cases, this won't translate into anything visible on the rendered article page, however, it will remain in the wikicode and visible to other editors where it may be helpful. For this reason, I frequently use param |reason= for its documentary value, even when the template doesn't support it, and I encourage anyone who wishes to do the same. Mathglot (talk) 20:05, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nice tip, thanks! RadioactiveBoulevardier (talk) 20:12, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@RadioactiveBoulevardier:, I just tweaked the description of param |to= which also mentions param |1=; please see if it makes more sense to you now. And if not, can you tell me where the difficulty lies? You may also just edit it yourself, if you wish. Mathglot (talk) 20:15, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]