| Revision as of 21:41, 29 March 2017 editAndy Dingley (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers160,445 edits →Template:Adr← Previous edit | Revision as of 21:42, 29 March 2017 edit undoAndy Dingley (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers160,445 edits →Template:AdrNext edit → | ||
| Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
| }} <nowiki> ], ], ]</nowiki>, and a host of other uses, such as {{adr|Broad Mountain||Lehigh Valley}} from <br/><nowiki>{{adr|Broad Mountain||Lehigh Valley}}</nowiki>, which without the repetition is far more easy to parse proof reading than <br/><nowiki>]</nowiki>. The amount of typing and confusion saved for the parenthesis and comma cases alone is tremendous. See the links and actual uses, not the simplistic reasons of the easy case cited by the nominator, who apparently feels he can spend my time for me. Let my tools be! // <b>]</b><font color="green">]</font> 20:17, 29 March 2017 (UTC) | }} <nowiki> ], ], ]</nowiki>, and a host of other uses, such as {{adr|Broad Mountain||Lehigh Valley}} from <br/><nowiki>{{adr|Broad Mountain||Lehigh Valley}}</nowiki>, which without the repetition is far more easy to parse proof reading than <br/><nowiki>]</nowiki>. The amount of typing and confusion saved for the parenthesis and comma cases alone is tremendous. See the links and actual uses, not the simplistic reasons of the easy case cited by the nominator, who apparently feels he can spend my time for me. Let my tools be! // <b>]</b><font color="green">]</font> 20:17, 29 March 2017 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Keep''' I'm surprised this template wasn't created earlier, as it makes inputting piped links easier. As for its effect on readability, I agree with FrankB that it makes code less cluttered, but the nominator is also right that it adds to the complexity for novice editors to learn, to which I can also add that it will prevent the editor wiked form formatting the link. I'm not sure how these three things weigh against each other, but if it's judged that it's undesirable to have this template visible in the source code, then the solution will be not to delete it but to make it subst-only. – ] 20:47, 29 March 2017 (UTC) | *'''Keep''' I'm surprised this template wasn't created earlier, as it makes inputting piped links easier. As for its effect on readability, I agree with FrankB that it makes code less cluttered, but the nominator is also right that it adds to the complexity for novice editors to learn, to which I can also add that it will prevent the editor wiked form formatting the link. I'm not sure how these three things weigh against each other, but if it's judged that it's undesirable to have this template visible in the source code, then the solution will be not to delete it but to make it subst-only. – ] 20:47, 29 March 2017 (UTC) | ||
| :: It would be OK if this template was used by subst: (although the ] does most of that), but as it is, this doesn't "make inputting piped links easier", it invents a whole new and unfamiliar syntax |
:: It would be OK if this template was used by subst: (although the ] does most of that), but as it is, this doesn't "make inputting piped links easier", it invents a whole new and unfamiliar syntax in addition to them. ] (]) 21:41, 29 March 2017 (UTC) | ||
| * '''Comment''' From my user talk: | |||
| :: == TFD Template:Adr == | |||
| :: You really ought look at the help and the many times used before nominating someone's tool for deletion. What kind of person takes away another persons tools? They'll kill you if you try that on a blue collar work site! I will state categorically, if you win this, my 13 years wading through poorly written prose by academically limited and overly inexperienced writers too lazy to run down a cite like are over, including and especially those taking days to prep, such as take hundreds of characters. Thanks for the hostile environment. // <b>]</b><font color="green">]</font> 20:25, 29 March 2017 (UTC) | |||
| : ] (]) 21:42, 29 March 2017 (UTC) | |||
| ==== ] ==== | ==== ] ==== | ||
Revision as of 21:42, 29 March 2017
| < March 28 | March 30 > |
|---|
March 29
Template:Adr
- Template:Adr (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
A truly pointless template, trying to replace the widespread and largely well understood use of WP:PIPELINKS with yet another template.
MediaWiki and Wikicode has a reputation for unfriendliness, true. Piped links are one aspect of this. But where Wikicode is unfriendly it is almost always when it presents more than one way of doing something, and flips syntax modes between them. This template makes things worse, not better. Andy Dingley (talk) 20:05, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
- An example: https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Ironworks&diff=772861274&oldid=767352697 Andy Dingley (talk) 20:06, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
- Keep, unlike pipetricking, the template does NOT clutter text (and allows abbreviation use too) when typing sequences with addresses such as Template:Adr, Template:Adr, Pennsylvania Template:BullR {{adr|Summit Hill|PA}}, {{adr|Carbon County|PA}}, ] versus Template:BullR ], ], ], and a host of other uses, such as Template:Adr from
{{adr|Broad Mountain||Lehigh Valley}}, which without the repetition is far more easy to parse proof reading than
]. The amount of typing and confusion saved for the parenthesis and comma cases alone is tremendous. See the links and actual uses, not the simplistic reasons of the easy case cited by the nominator, who apparently feels he can spend my time for me. Let my tools be! // FrankB 20:17, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
- Keep I'm surprised this template wasn't created earlier, as it makes inputting piped links easier. As for its effect on readability, I agree with FrankB that it makes code less cluttered, but the nominator is also right that it adds to the complexity for novice editors to learn, to which I can also add that it will prevent the editor wiked form formatting the link. I'm not sure how these three things weigh against each other, but if it's judged that it's undesirable to have this template visible in the source code, then the solution will be not to delete it but to make it subst-only. – Uanfala (talk) 20:47, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
- It would be OK if this template was used by subst: (although the WP:Pipe trick does most of that), but as it is, this doesn't "make inputting piped links easier", it invents a whole new and unfamiliar syntax in addition to them. Andy Dingley (talk) 21:41, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
- Comment From my user talk:
- == TFD Template:Adr ==
- You really ought look at the help and the many times used before nominating someone's tool for deletion. What kind of person takes away another persons tools? They'll kill you if you try that on a blue collar work site! I will state categorically, if you win this, my 13 years wading through poorly written prose by academically limited and overly inexperienced writers too lazy to run down a cite like this fix are over, including and especially those taking days to prep, such as take hundreds of characters. Thanks for the hostile environment. // FrankB 20:25, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
- Andy Dingley (talk) 21:42, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
Template:Concerns and controversies at the Olympics
- Template:Concerns and controversies at the Olympics (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Entirely redundant to Template:Olympic_Games_controversies and mostly made up of redlinks. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:13, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
- keep, but remove the redlinks. at the time of this post, this search shows that the links are not replicated in Template:Olympic_Games_controversies. Frietjes (talk) 13:58, 29 March 2017 (UTC)