Template talk:Redirect?

Category version of this template?
I've used this template to delightful effect @ WT:Cleanup, and then realized a category version would be similarly useful. I don't CfD much, but y'all do. Would y'all find a category version of this template useful? That is, a new template like Category redirect? that displays either an italicized cat name if it's a redirect, or displays normally if not? The only caveat is that, being an expensive function, only 500 would be allowed on any particular page/CfD. ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf) 15:26, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

for good measure. ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf) 15:33, 30 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the ping, @Tom.Reding. But I can't think of a situation where this would be helpful overall.
 * A CFD listing consists of one or more entries of the form
 * or
 * The only way that this could help if each category was wrapped in the new template, which I'll call CategoryRedirect?, so those entries would have to be written as:
 * or
 * That could be built into WP:Twinkle, but many CFD noms don't use Twinkle, so they would be omitted. And multiple-cat noms can't use Twinkle ... so for a lot of nominations, this template would have to be applied manually.  That adds extra work for the nominator, with low benefit because the incidence of redirects is low.
 * Then, if the consensus is to merge or rename, we have a further problem. The closing admin implements the decision by copying the CFD listing line to WP:CFDW, where the bot uses those lines as its instruction.  But the bot won't recognise the markup with the template, so the bot would need to be recoded.
 * So, on top of the fact that use of this template would break some CFD listings when the page has more than 250 categories listed), it seems to me to cause a lot of problems for rare and minor gain. -- Brown HairedGirl  (talk) • (contribs) 21:24, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
 * or
 * That could be built into WP:Twinkle, but many CFD noms don't use Twinkle, so they would be omitted. And multiple-cat noms can't use Twinkle ... so for a lot of nominations, this template would have to be applied manually.  That adds extra work for the nominator, with low benefit because the incidence of redirects is low.
 * Then, if the consensus is to merge or rename, we have a further problem. The closing admin implements the decision by copying the CFD listing line to WP:CFDW, where the bot uses those lines as its instruction.  But the bot won't recognise the markup with the template, so the bot would need to be recoded.
 * So, on top of the fact that use of this template would break some CFD listings when the page has more than 250 categories listed), it seems to me to cause a lot of problems for rare and minor gain. -- Brown HairedGirl  (talk) • (contribs) 21:24, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Then, if the consensus is to merge or rename, we have a further problem. The closing admin implements the decision by copying the CFD listing line to WP:CFDW, where the bot uses those lines as its instruction.  But the bot won't recognise the markup with the template, so the bot would need to be recoded.
 * So, on top of the fact that use of this template would break some CFD listings when the page has more than 250 categories listed), it seems to me to cause a lot of problems for rare and minor gain. -- Brown HairedGirl  (talk) • (contribs) 21:24, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
 * So, on top of the fact that use of this template would break some CFD listings when the page has more than 250 categories listed), it seems to me to cause a lot of problems for rare and minor gain. -- Brown HairedGirl  (talk) • (contribs) 21:24, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
 * So, on top of the fact that use of this template would break some CFD listings when the page has more than 250 categories listed), it seems to me to cause a lot of problems for rare and minor gain. -- Brown HairedGirl  (talk) • (contribs) 21:24, 30 April 2021 (UTC)