Template talk:Discussion top

Template error
When using an external link (in terms of formatting: ) in closing comments, the entire closing comment does not show. Removing the link solves the issue. Obviously, diffs can be an important part of a discussion archive. Can someone template/tech savvy please review the template code to see what might be causing the problem? Thanks! Vassyana (talk) 11:38, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Documentation subpage
This template is used to archive discussions on a talk page or a noticeboard. Place this template below the header containing the discussion, then place Template:Discussion bottom at the end of the discussion. Again: '''Place it below the header. Do not include the header, it will break archiving bots!''' Example: == Header == Hi, I would like to discuss...
 * Replace:


 * With:

I have already created the doc subpage. G.A.S 07:38, 14 August 2008 (UTC)


 * ✅ Although, for the sake of clarity, I preserved the closing div inside noinclude, and slipped the template category onto the doc subpage. Thanks. – Luna Santin  (talk) 07:52, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion
__meco (talk) 09:38, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: - It is only used on less than 5 pages (though I'm sure it is used on more via substitution. Don't see any real benefit in adding the TfD tag given that it is only used on archives and other pages that have no visibility. - Rjd0060 (talk) 15:44, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Are you sure you haven't clicked "whatlinkshere" for the template talk page rather than the template? – xeno  ( talk ) 15:47, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Signature
When I try to type in the result of the discussion and sign the comment, the comment doesn't appear on the page. Is there something in my signature that's messing with the template? -- Kraftlos  (Talk | Contrib) 06:33, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * The pipe. G.A.S talk 17:36, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

'read more' link
I'd link to create a 'read more' link on this template, which will link to a page (maybe a sub-page of the template? or a wikipedia space page?) which explains a little about the nature of wiki editing, that anyone can apply such a template, that you should consider it as an edit, but that ultimately it reflects one editor's interpretation of the direction / consensus / status of the thread - that sort of thing.... thought this was a decent spot to note :-) Privatemusings (talk) 10:02, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Replace "archived" with "closed"
I would like to replace "archived" with "closed" (although "ended" could be used instead of closed) because archived usually implies the use of an archived page. -- PBS (talk) 03:35, 13 March 2010 (UTC)


 * ✅. Not by me, but somebody at some point seems to have fixed this. – void  xor  21:07, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

Standardise usage
Instead of the "1=" can we have it changed to "result ="? -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 05:47, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
 * No we couldn't change it because all the current uses will be using 1=. But an alternative parameter (result=) could possibly be added if this is considered important. &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:51, 10 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Having both is a good option. No point changing all the "1=" occurrences I guess. The form "result =" is a very common parameter and every time I use this template I forget that it is not used on it. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 21:51, 10 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Actually, neither the 1= nor any new 'result=' are necessary. The following will work just fine:
 * -- RA (talk) 20:20, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
 * -- RA (talk) 20:20, 11 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Ah yes. So it does. Still no harm in still having "result=" as well? It is common on templates now and is becoming second nature for me. Not sure what the majority do though. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 22:22, 11 June 2012 (UTC)


 * ✅; mostly harmless bit of consistency. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 08:53, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Edit please
Would somebody be so kind as to pass  inside the  there. That would, I think (based on my own little experiment), keep Discussion top templates from obtrusively flowing over my TOC. This proposed change other than the issue I am referring to, won't have any other visual impact I am fairly certain.

The exact code then would be If somebody could give another solution to this minor problem that would also be highly appreciated. --Thank you in advance. Mr T (Talk?)  [ (New thread?) ] 06:07, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Hmm. Not sure why ou want to insert the  into the middle of   -- Red rose64 (talk) 10:03, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh shit, mistake. Thanks. I corrected it. Mr T  (Talk?)  [ (New thread?) ] 06:53, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
 * OK, Yes check.svg Done -- Red rose64 (talk) 17:53, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 24 August 2015
Following, we should change  to   in this template to reduce the amount of whitespace between the section heading and template. That way, the template–heading combo would look much better and much more "flowing together". For an example, please see.

&mdash; Dsimic (talk &#124; contribs) 12:01, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
 * This looks sensible to me, so ✅ -- John of Reading (talk) 14:27, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you! &mdash; Dsimic (talk &#124; contribs) 21:57, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 7 January 2018
Remove "AND INTERWIKIS" from the comment. Interwikis are now stored in Wikidata. Magioladitis (talk) 20:32, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
 * ✅.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ &gt;ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ&lt;  21:49, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 7 January 2018
Please replace red with to match Discussion bottom and avoid tranclusion of a template within a template. Magioladitis (talk) 22:53, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done can't really see the point but done &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:23, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:COI top
Template:COI top has been nominated for merging with Template:Discussion top. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. czar 10:16, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Should this template be substituted?
Should this template always be substituted, always be transcluded, or does it not matter? JsfasdF252 (talk) 18:11, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 21 November 2020
Capitalize the D in "from Template:discussion" for this template and the discussion bottom for consistency with archive top JsfasdF252 (talk) 04:11, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: The text is in a hidden comment and capitalization of the first letter makes no functional difference. You are welcome to make the change in the sandbox so that it can be applied the next time there is a substantive change to this 10,000-transclusion template. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:56, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Edit request to complete TfD nomination
Template:Discussion top has been listed at Templates for discussion (nomination), but was protected so could not be tagged. Please add:

to the top of the page to complete the nomination. Thank you. JsfasdF252 (talk) 00:01, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅ * Pppery * it has begun... 00:11, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 3 March 2021
Add  after "discussion". JsfasdF252 (talk) 00:25, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. Also, you haven't even explained why. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 03:03, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * This change would allow one to determine the type of discussion. JsfasdF252 (talk) 05:06, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Wrap the header into a tag with a class
I suggest to do the same as for the Archive top template, see the request. The sandbox version. Jack who built the house (talk) 01:35, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅ * Pppery * it has begun... 15:07, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 29 June 2023
mw-archivedtalk class is added to (probably) all archival templates, except this one. So, suggesting to add it here too, per Tech news/Archive 10. Since @Izno was doing this work, I'd like to ask him if he has any objections. Thanks! &#8212;CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 22:08, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
 * ✅ Izno (talk) 04:56, 30 June 2023 (UTC)