Template talk:T

Template:T7789
If you're looking for the t-related character, see Template:T7789.
 * Template:T7789 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. &mdash;Gordon P. Hemsley&rarr; &#x2709; 20:42, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Purpose
What's this template for? --Joy &#91;shallot&#93;   11:04, 20 July 2005 (UTC)


 * This is an example template from meta:Help:Template. Initially used in examples in Template talk:If equal and Template talk:If equal g. (SEWilco 16:24, 20 July 2005 (UTC))

Little used
It appears that this template is little used and the name could possibly be put to better use. Does anyone even have this template watchlisted? (→ Netscott ) 19:28, 25 November 2006 (UTC)


 * This template on Meta is hardly used either with only 43 links to it. (→ Netscott ) 19:32, 25 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree that it seems little used. If it were renamed, t could become a redirect to tl (perhaps vice versa...?) and thereby mimic c. Regards, David Kernow (talk) 06:45, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Redirect to tl
As the demo version of this template is only referenced on meta (and is t0 there), I'm replacing this template with a redirect to tl to reflect its actual use on most, if not all English Wikipedia pages. --coldacid (talk|contrib) 18:42, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 13 August 2014
May the template's code be replaced with that in the sandbox (current as of this post), please? It retains t's primary role as if a redirect to tl, but, when its (first) parameter is plain, mimics the template c used for categories. In other words, as c is to cl, {{t|plain}} would be to tl. Working examples on the testcases page.

Sardanaphalus (talk) 20:17, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
 * This looks a bit pointless to me. Surely if you need a plain link you can just type out the wikilink yourself? Bear in mind that this template is used on more than 200,000 pages, and often several times per page. We don't want to make it unnecessarily complicated. — Mr. Stradivarius  ♪ talk ♪ 02:21, 14 August 2014 (UTC)


 * On second thoughts, perhaps yes, a piped wikilink isn't that much more complicated, otherwise use another template. (Is, then, c worthwhile..?) Sardanaphalus (talk) 08:53, 14 August 2014 (UTC)