Template talk:Talk header/Archive 8

Why not yesarchive=no? Seriously, maybe keeping it backward compatible but adding archives={yes|no} and using that in the documentation would be substantially less confusing. —Cupco 02:03, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Can you add {{t|Find sources notice}} in this template so that we don't need to add it manually? --Tito Dutta (talk) 23:22, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

{{Editprotected|answered=yes}}

Would it be possible either (a) to add a parameter (|displaytitle= or something) that lets you rename what {{tl|Talk header}} calls the page it's on (i.e. "This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Foo article") to whatever you like; or (b) to make it check whether the page it's on contains {{tl|lowercase}} or {{tl|DISPLAYTITLE}} or whatever, and then to automatically change what it calls its page's title in the same way that that title is changed by the detected template/magic word? See e.g. Talk:IPhone 5. Thanks {{p}} It Is Me Here ^{t / c} 14:20, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

:Option a is possible, and I have added a new {{para|display_title}} parameter to the template sandbox. (I used the underscore so that it won't be confused with the DISPLAYTITLE magic word.) See the test case here for how it would work. I don't know of any way to implement your option b, but maybe someone who knows their html better than me could find a way. I'll leave this edit request open for now to get more opinions on the option b. In the meantime, let me know if you would like me to implement the sandbox version, and I can add the code to the main template if you like. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{(have a chat)} 17:52, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

::Yes please! Is there any easy way to also add it to the other members of :Category:Talk message boxes that use {{tl|PAGENAME}} or {{tl|ARTICLEPAGENAME}} (e.g. {{tl|Article history}}, {{tl|FailedGA}}, {{tl|AARportal}})? It Is Me Here ^{t / c} 19:01, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

:::File:Yes check.svg Done. Ok, I've updated the template and marked the edit request as done. If you want to add it to different categories you don't need to edit the template directly - you can just add the categories to Template:Talk header/doc. Best — Mr. Stradivarius ^{(have a chat)} 20:32, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

{{editprotected|answered=yes}}

Can we modify this template to cause it not to add "article" at the statement end when the template is used on the talk page of a list-class title? It seems odd to say "This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the List of bands whose leader is not the band's lead singer article." when "This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the List of bands whose leader is not the band's lead singer." seems more correct. {{User:My76Strat/OLS}} --My76Strat (talk) 08:50, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

:If it is not too problematic, the following code modification would allow it without any adverse effect to existing transclutions. Locate the following code: {{pagetype}}}}.}} and replace it with {{{page type|{{pagetype}}}}}}}.}}. If this edit is done, I'll update the documentation. Thank you. {{User:My76Strat/OLS}} --My76Strat (talk) 06:28, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

::I'm not sure that this is necessary, as the manual of style calls these kinds of pages "list articles". See Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lists#List articles. I'll leave this request open to get more opinions, however. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{(have a chat)} 16:07, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

:::I think that is a sufficient answer to establish this is at the very least not uncontroversial. It may be something to consider, but it certainly is not something that doesn't fit when current practices and policies have been considered. Thank you for assisting me Mr. Stradivarius; be well --My76Strat (talk) 07:08, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

This banner would be welcome on many more talk pages if there were a parameter for hiding or eliminating the header and guidelines. The archive links and search are almost always welcome. I much prefer this banner format versus right-floating archive and search boxes.

Parameters for either option (hiding or eliminating) would be nice. There are many talk pages already covered with guideline banners, and arbitration warnings, etc.. So even a show/hide box for the guidelines would not be welcome. A parameter to eliminate that part would be helpful in those cases.

This search template is great because many people such as myself prefer the narrow banner format used for archive links and search.

--Timeshifter (talk) 13:43, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

:Template:Archive box for pages which don't already have a talk header. The entire point of this template is the guidelines and header... --Izno (talk) 14:04, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

::Template:Archive box is right floating. I want a centered, narrow banner format with the search button to the right of the search form.

::Someone could create a separate template copying the relevant parts from this one, but that seems like overkill to me. It would be a lot easier to maintain one template and put a parameter in it to not show the guideline section at all.

::I could try to create a narrow banner with Template:Search box. Or I could go even more basic with mw:Extension:InputBox. But Template:Talk header is already using Template:Search box, and so creating another banner template is duplicating work that is already done. Plus there is maintenance to do, and I am not expert. --Timeshifter (talk) 13:53, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

:::Have a look at {{tlx|TWP Archive nav}} --Redrose64 (talk) 19:43, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

(unindent). Thanks, Redrose64. What I find interesting in that template is the fact that there is an image in it. That makes a standard talk message box of standard width. That is what I was looking for.

I had already found class="tmbox" but the box it produces is not standard width unless there is an image in the box too. See here to see an archive search banner using it. It does not use the full width of a standard talk message box.

{{User:Timeshifter/Sandbox31}} (User:Timeshifter/Sandbox31) has an image in it, and produces this wide box:

{{User:Timeshifter/Sandbox31}}

--Timeshifter (talk) 09:11, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

:::{{tl|search archives}} is another template that might work, but I agree with Izno that {{tl|talk header}} exists because of the included links and wouldn't be sutable for a modification like mentioned here.

{{archives|banner=yes|list=|small=|prefix=|root=}}

::: --My76Strat (talk) 10:37, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

:::::Those included links would still exist for those who want them. I saw {{tl|search archives}} awhile back. It does not produce a list of archive links. --Timeshifter (talk) 11:29, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

:Or there's {{tlx|archive banner}} as used on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Athletics. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:22, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

::From that template what does this mean exactly?:

{{#ifeq:{{{numeric|}}}|false|{{{list|}}}|{{#ifeq:{{PAGENAME}}|Archive banner||{{#ifeq:{{{index|}}}|true|Index,}} {{archives|banner=yes/list}}}}}}

{{#if: {{{extra|}}}|{{{extra|}}}}}

There is this: mw:Help:Extension:ParserFunctions - but I am a newb at this type of code. --Timeshifter (talk) 15:10, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

:OK - I assume that you know that {{{numeric|}}} etc. are replaced by the values of the parameters {{para|numeric}} etc. - so it comes out as:

::If the template is invoked with {{para|numeric|false}}

:::display whatever has been passed in the {{para|list}} parameter

::else

:::if the template is invoked with {{para|index|true}}

::::add a link to the /Archive index subpage

:::transclude the content of {{tlx|archive banner/list}}

::display a line break, then the content of the {{para|extra}} parameter

:The code {{#ifeq:{{PAGENAME}}|Archive banner||...}} is a bit of a red herring - it's there to prevent {{tlx|Archive banner}} tying itself in knots when displaying itself on its own page. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:58, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

(unindent). It is going to take me a few days, weeks, or months to figure out what you just wrote since I am starting from the beginning with that level of code. Is it really necessary to use that code? If I explain in the documentation where to use the template, and where not to use the template, wouldn't that work also? I am talking about using something like this on article talk pages: User:Timeshifter/Sandbox31. It does not use any complicated code.

{{User:Timeshifter/Sandbox31}}

--Timeshifter (talk) 19:00, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

User:Timeshifter/Sandbox32. {{User:Timeshifter/Sandbox32}}. This uses {{tl|tmbox}} and so its wikitext is simpler and more flexible. It produces a narrower banner too. It produces this:

{{User:Timeshifter/Sandbox32}}

--Timeshifter (talk) 06:06, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

I just want to support the OP's sentiment. I hate this template. I never place it anywhere, and I always remove it when there are no archives, or there is also a link elsewhere to the archives. Please find a way to make the default a collapsed version, a small version, or delete it altogether.Greg Bard (talk) 22:28, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

:I was thinking of putting the template from my sandbox up as a separate archive search banner. See: User:Timeshifter/Sandbox32. It is being used on the top of my user page where I have an archive. It is not on my user talk page since I don't keep talk page archives.

:I have been very busy. I may or may not get around to doing anything. If anybody else wants to use it as a separate banner, or modify it for a separate banner, feel free to do so. --Timeshifter (talk) 05:52, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

I believe that crime information should also be added to pages about cities, towns, etc.

I'm looking to move but I want to know if certain areas are safer then others and I'm not finding any of that information on here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Charmcaster14 (talk • contribs) 10:24, 4 February 2013‎

• This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Talk header template. Please see Help:Contents. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:40, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

I suggest adding a link from within this template to the article's feedback page, if it exists.

Bwrs (talk) 16:52, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

The entry for Sir Ken jones needs immediate updating. It is both contains information that is wrong and does not contain more recent information about the outcomes of enquiries that have been released in the past weeks. The former Chief Commissioner of Victoria Police, Simon Overland, has not been found to have committed any actions contrary to goods living practice and has been exonerated by the OPI findings and the Ombudsman. There is still one enquiry yet to report. Jones' accusations have unfounded and this needs correction on his entry page.Psyche13 (talk) 05:02, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

:File:Red information icon with gradient background.svg This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the template {{tlx|Talk header}}. Please make your request at the talk page for the article concerned. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:48, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

2 (East/West) were awarded to two athletes. Kevin Jones and Tyler Ebell — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.174.202.158 (talk) 22:55, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

:File:Red information icon with gradient background.svg This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the template {{tlx|Talk header}}. Please make your request at the talk page for the article concerned. DMacks (talk) 15:02, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

It is apparent now that All! cultures and groups posess the inherant possibilities of positive offerings to the worldwide forum hence i maintain that we all continue to strive for greater understanding and tolerance of each other and our various backgrounds as well as current circumstances. Let us strive to strengthen our faiths through available science and bolster our science theorems through deep faith. this is a vast cosmos let us share and partake of it wisely and as unselfishly as possible remembering that we all have differing levels of understanding and talents. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bcobb444 (talk • contribs) 01:33, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello

I am a sunni muslim from india who regularly visits wikipedia page as i find the information available is good & worthy. Recently i browsed a wiki page namely 'islamic calendar' which is loaded with a picture depicting the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). As it is a known fact across the world that Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) is the messenger of god & is praised by all muslims to have brought islam to the world. He is indeed the most sacred of all.

During his life he never took any picture nor allowed anybody to make a portrait of him as islam is totally against images of any human being to have lived. It is very disheartening to see the image which depicts the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) teaching few Nazi's the verses. I would request you to please edit the content which will remove the image. Also please use the tag line (PBUH - Peace Be Upon Him) every time after the prophet name comes on the page. Millions of muslims & non-muslims throng the wiki pages every day & this kind of wrong content will surely mislead them.

Please consider my request and do the needful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarwar123 (talk • contribs) 14:50, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

:File:Red information icon with gradient background.svg This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the template {{tlx|Talk header}}. I responded at your talkpage. DMacks (talk) 15:03, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

How do these people asking questions / making requests about various articles even get to this page? At first I thought maybe this template provides a "d" link to discuss the template, like many templates here do (especially those designed to appear in the main namespace), but it doesn't. So how are these people landing here, of all places? - dcljr (talk) 23:06, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

:I suspect that they are on the proper talk page, and then click "Edit" at the top. This differs from using a section edit link in several ways; one of those is that at the very bottom, you get a "View templates on this page" link, which upon being clicked, expands to a list of templates. One entry in there may be

:* Template:Talk header ([{{fullurl:Template:Talk header|action=edit}} view source]) (protected)

:I'm guessing they go for the first of these two and then the "Talk" link, and then (... doesn't sound very likely, does it?) --Redrose64 (talk) 07:24, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia's article on the Tarion Warranty Corporation states Tarion "registers" new home builders. I believe the correct description is they "license" new home builders.

further it is a concern among some consumers whether Tarion "resolves warranty disputes between builders/vendors and homeowners." It would be more accurate to add "for defects discovered within 2 years; 7 years for 'major structural defects'." The warranty has significant limitations for new home buyers.

The article states: "It's primary purpose is to protect consumers of new homes..." It might be more accurate to add that the Tarion board is composed primarily of builders appointed by the "Ontario Home Builders Association", 8 out of 13 members.

The article further states Tarion is "financed entirely by builder registration". It might be more accurate to mention that Tarion has a monopoly in new home warranties, and their warranty is mandatory under Ontario law. Further the warranty is usually passed on to the new home buyer by the builder in the overall purchase price.

ConsumersRus (talk) 18:28, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

:File:Red information icon with gradient background.svg This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the template {{tlx|Talk header}}. If you have problems with a specific article, please discuss at the talk page for that article. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:34, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

{{Edit protected|ans=y}}

Template:Talk header/sandbox now [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3ATalk_header%2Fsandbox&action=view&diff=577408085 contains changes which put the bold emphasis on starting a new topic]. Other bullet points have had the bold markup removed. This would be a subtle but important change (deemed non-controversial), proposed because I have recently observed the talk page of an editor displaying this template, but a new topic was not started. {{tl|Message}} currently uses the emphasis now proposed here. Thanks for reading. -- Trevj (talk) 10:08, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

:{{done}} in the spirit of WP:BOLD. This change may be reverted on request. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:02, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

::Nice pun! {{Thank you}}. Per WP:BRD, I'm open to discussion on this if reverted (although I'll probably only watch this template for a month at the very most). -- Trevj (talk) 18:28, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Are we allowed to use this template just to remind experienced editors of the rules? I think so! — Preceding unsigned comment added by StudiesWorld (talk • contribs) 20:15, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Following on from a thread at User talk:Jim Cartar#Talk:Château de Bercy ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jim_Cartar&oldid=611200867#Talk:Ch.C3.A2teau_de_Bercy permalink]). Pinging {{u|Viriditas}}, {{u|Pjoef}}, {{u|Erpert}}, {{u|Thumperward}}, {{u|Magioladitis}}, {{u|WhatamIdoing}} and {{u|Xeno}}, as the contributors to the last substantive conversations on this issue.

Is "should not be added to otherwise empty talk pages" still consensus? It's been [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Talk_header/doc&diff=prev&oldid=103131055 in the instructions for this template for over seven years now] (and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Talk_header/doc&diff=prev&oldid=283899543 bolded since 2009]), and this discussion following the last of the TFDs seems to have been the last time it was substantially discussed.

If opinion is now that it's appropriate to be added to low-traffic or otherwise-empty pages, then the wording of both the documentation and of the template itself needs rewriting. The current template as it appears on article talk pages, with the bolded This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject, appears to me to be make too much of a presupposition that the talkpage in question is problematic. I don't really oppose having a version of this on every talkpage, but the current wording doesn't reflect how low-traffic talkpages work. The "not for general discussion of the article subject" is a necessary warning on high-volume topics, but in the quiet nooks and crannies treating talkpages as forums has long been tolerated within reason. ("Does anyone know where I can buy a copy of this album?", "What are this museum's current opening hours?", etc.) If it is going to be used on pages regardless of traffic levels, it really needs either a full fork, or a "high-traffic=yes" parameter to switch the WP:NOTFORUM warning on and off - and of course, Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines#Creating talk pages would need rewriting.

I'm aware this is a perennial topic, but it doesn't seem to have been discussed in any kind of depth since this 2010 thread. Wikipedia today is a different environment, with rapidly rising numbers of people using mobile devices, and the talkpage banners (including this one) [http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikipedia look truly awful on the mobile site] as well as necessitating lengthy scrolling to get to the meat and potatoes (try finding the actual discussions on a banner-heavy talkpage like Talk:George W. Bush [http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:George_W._Bush in mobile format]). In my opinion, anyone adding to this clutter needs to show a good reason to do so, and "There is no need to add discussion warning templates to every talk page, or even to every talk page that contains a discussion" should continue to be enforced, but I can understand the arguments for having it on all or most talkpages. It ought to be decided one way or the other when it's appropriate to use this template. Mogism (talk) 09:16, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

: My impression is that the reason that there hasn't been any serious discussion of the matter in four years is because most people are basically satisfied with how things are now. People are discouraged from starting pages just to add boilerplate, but not tarred and feathered for it. The existence of said banner doesn't, in general, appear to be driving anyone to an early grave. As for the issues on mobile, there's plainly something wrong with the mobile stylesheet's handling of banner templates, because they all look awful: that should be fed upstream, as it's not just this template that suffers for it. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 15:26, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

:My two cents: I think you're conflating two separate issues.

:* No, don't turn a red-linked talk page into a blue-linked talk page just so you can have a page that is entirely empty except for the talk header template. If you put anything else on the page at all (WikiProject banner? Any other template? Your own comment?), then feel free to add this, but do not create a page whose entire contents is {{talkheader}}.

:* I don't care whether this template continues to tell people that this isn't a general forum for chatting. It's probably more useful than not, but I'd be willing to experiment with taking it out or handling it separately. WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:34, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

My opinion was and is that if the community thinks this is a message that should be always read then let's make it an edit notice for talk pages. So simple. We do not have to add it in all pages by using bots and resources. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:08, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

: The problem is that the template provides instructions that are required before a potential new contributor has even hit the edit button. Parts of it would work in an editnotice, but I think you'd get more pushback on including a large editnotice on every single talk page than we've ever had with this. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 11:38, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

This template should be abolished, and in cases were there are archives, an archives template should suffice. Agree with Magioladitis about creating a notice instead. Greg Bard (talk) 22:12, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

{{edit template-protected|answered=yes}}

Swift music contains elements of country, country pop, pop and pop rock.[290][290][291] She self-identifies as a country artist.[292] Rolling Stone asserts that, "she might get played on the country station, but she's one of the few genuine rock stars we've got these days."[293] Swift's own definition of country music "is really pretty simple. It's when someone sings about their life and what they know, from an authentic place ... One guy will write about how he grew up on a farm and fell in love and raised kids on that same farm. Some people sing about how, when they get sad, they go to the bar and drink whiskey. I write songs about how I can't seem to figure out relationships and how I'm fascinated by love."[292] She has said there will be "a huge temptation" to make an alt-country record as her career progresses.[48] The New York Times notes that, "There isn't much in Ms. Swift's music to indicate country – a few banjo strums, a pair of cowboy boots worn onstage, a bedazzled guitar – but there's something in her winsome, vulnerable delivery that's unique to Nashville."[294] The New Yorker believes she is "considered part of Nashville's country-pop tradition only because she writes narrative songs with melodic clarity and dramatic shape—Nashville's stock-in-trade."[295] The Guardian has said that Swift "cranks melodies out with the pitiless efficiency of a Scandinavian pop factory."[265] Swift's songs typically are categorized in the country genre, but what is surprising is that overall, Swift is indifference to category or genre. Her songs are country-pop because she writes narrative songs with melodic clarity and dramatic shape. However, her songs may also include R. & B. and rap and rock, evidence that she not only identifies with songs in other genres, but she performs them. Performance covers of Eminem's "Lose Yourself" and Beyonce's "Irreplaceable" in concert prove that Swift is a preternaturally skilled student of established values and will perform what she enjoys and is skilled at, despite genre limitations. Frere-Jones, Sasha. "Pop Music: Prodigy - the Rise of Taylor Swift." The New Yorker Nov 10 2008: 86-7. ProQuest. 15 June 2014 .

Dkline6 (talk) 20:48, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

:File:Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: this is the talk page for discussing improvements to the template {{tlx|Talk header}}. Please make your request at the talk page for the article concerned. Jackmcbarn (talk) 20:55, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

{{Reflist-talk}}