User talk:Z929669
The Spice must flow! ~z929669
Talk 5:30:24 14 February 2021 (UTC)
20241222060519
Includeonly & Noinclude
As you can see here, make sure to close the starting includeonly before calling noinclude, it doesn't appear to matter for the parser but it helps keep things simple for the editor. Also, There's no need for multiple noinclude tags, just make sure there's one at the very end of what's to be included (without a linebreak or anything else in between). You also don't need a close at the end of the page since we don't want anything else on the page included. There's also Help:Template#Noinclude, includeonly, and onlyinclude on Wikipedia for a more detailed explanation. ~Farlo
Talk 18:25, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
- Got it thanks!
- Also, why do we have the notification templates (e.g., Big Small & Bug small) > the former is under wanted cat "Notification templates" shile the latter is under cat "Bug Small". The latter seems redundant.
- ~z929669
Talk 03:16, November 6, 2012 (UTC)
- Let's keep the conversations on the same page so we're not hoping back and forth :P Anyways, wait... what? All of the notifications are under Category:Notification Templates which is under Category:Templates. ~FarloTalk 18:52, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
- Let's keep the conversations on the same page so we're not hoping back and forth :P Anyways, wait... what? All of the notifications are under Category:Notification Templates which is under Category:Templates. ~Farlo
If you go to Special Pages > Templates, you will see what I mean ;) ~z929669Talk 19:07, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
Template formatting
It shouldn't really matter, but IMO it's better to start templates off with the parts to be included and adding all the "noinclude" information underneath it. It's just a habit of mine, is there any reason you do it the other way 'round? ~FarloTalk 08:57, November 4, 2012 (UTC)
- - Not sure what the above is referring to ... can you provide context?
- ~z929669Talk 18:36, November 5, 2012 (UTC)
- For example, in (template removed) you place all the "documentation" stuff at the top followed by the actual template. IMO it's better to place the actual template first so there's no confusion as to where the transclusion begins and it becomes a matter of one "<noinclude>" tag to distinguish where it ends and the documentation begins. ~FarloTalk 23:27, November 5, 2012 (UTC)
- For example, in (template removed) you place all the "documentation" stuff at the top followed by the actual template. IMO it's better to place the actual template first so there's no confusion as to where the transclusion begins and it becomes a matter of one "<noinclude>" tag to distinguish where it ends and the documentation begins. ~Farlo
- - It would seem though that the standard is the opposite, because SMW's "create a whatever" special pages do it this way.
- ~z929669Talk 03:15, November 6, 2012 (UTC)
- Then SMW and MW itself have different standards, although I couldn't tell you why. According to Help:Template and every template I've seen on Wikipedia the documentation is placed after the template itself, but like I said as long as we keep it straight it shouldn't matter. The biggest thing to watch out for with the "documentation first" method is any whitespace/linebreaks between the "<includeonly> and the start of the template. Does SMW require that you format it as such or is it just their preferred standard? ~FarloTalk 03:35, November 6, 2012 (UTC)
- Then SMW and MW itself have different standards, although I couldn't tell you why. According to Help:Template and every template I've seen on Wikipedia the documentation is placed after the template itself, but like I said as long as we keep it straight it shouldn't matter. The biggest thing to watch out for with the "documentation first" method is any whitespace/linebreaks between the "<includeonly> and the start of the template. Does SMW require that you format it as such or is it just their preferred standard? ~Farlo
Template:Fc wiki-specific color names
Hey, in the interest of making it easier (and more semantic) for people to use proper colors for pages, I propose editing fc to match my test at User:Proton/Fc. This way there can be a centralized location for semantic color-coding, which then makes it easy to change the color scheme a little or a lot at a time. Let me know if you think it would benefit from any additions or changes :). —Proton[talk] 18:45, June 28, 2015 (EDT)
end
