Template talk:Talkback/Archive 1

Template for Articles
I was wondering if there was a template for articles similar to this one. This template doesn't seem to support any page outside the User_talk: namespace. Maybe the template could be expanded to include all talk namespaces as well. --Nn123645 (talk) 07:04, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Not a bad idea. In fact, the Dutch version has something like that built in, though it's a bit of a hack. I'll see about putting it in here as well. — Edokter  •  Talk  • 15:44, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I clairifed it better the first time I wrote about it, here is my post from User talk:Komusou


 * Hey, I was wondering if there was a similar template to the talkback template for more than just the User_talk: namespace. If not I was wondering if it would be possible to expand the template to include a variable to allow to set the page for different namespaces. For example instead of it saying:


 * "Hello UserA you have new messages at UserX's talk page."


 * The message could read:


 * "Hello UserA you have new messages at the ArticleZ talk page." --Nn123645 (talk) 21:19, 8 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I know, that's what I ment as well. — Edokter  •  Talk  • 21:22, 8 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for adding it :D. --Nn123645 (talk) 23:01, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Another thing I was wondering is it would be possible to include a timestamp on the talkback. Usually when I have been adding talk back I add it with 5 tildes after it, but it would be nice if it was built into the template. This would be useful because not everyone removes it from their talkpage and if you have more than one talkback template on the page, or a talkback template that has been there for months it can get confusing. --Nn123645 (talk) 20:53, 9 January 2008 (UTC)


 * No, that would only work when the template is substituted, which should not be done. Don't be afraid to remove the template that you have placed yourself from other people's talkpage. — Edokter  •  Talk  • 20:57, 9 January 2008 (UTC)


 * should work. - LA @ 19:48, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Would anyone object if I added a time stamp to this template? LA (T) @ 10:03, 16 August 2008 (UTC)


 * That only works when the template is substed, which it never is. — Edokter  •  Talk  • 18:13, 16 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Edokter, trust me, it will work even when it is not substituted. :) LA (T) @ 21:25, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
 * If you added, even with  , the   will substitute the time the person added it to the Tb notice and not change. Though you could try  ...  Math  Cool  10  Sign here! 19:53, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Doesn't work unless subst:.  Math Cool  10  Sign here! 01:17, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

A Talkback template with timestamping
I have a test template in my user space, if anyone is interested. The users would have to add the manually, but the test allows for up to 9 replies by just typing. See the talk page for what it looks like and suggest changes. LA (T) @ 10:17, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Definition
What's an interlocutors? Other versions are possible, such as an asymmetrical one not requiring your interlocutors to use Talkback... --Sultec (talk) 02:31, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Further instructions on talk page notice...
I was wandering if adding a pointer to username would be a good idea to the mesage box placed on one's own talkpage, i.e., as currently an editor will get the 'insert username' error and have to come to the template to resolve this misssing piece of info? LeeVJ (talk) 18:47, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * So… I wasn't the first one who thought about it… :-) Just wanted to say that I just did it and hopefully nothing got broken in a process. Skarebo (talk) 12:12, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Ahh, that's better .. and it doesn't seem you've broken it! Cheers! LeeVJ (talk) 00:41, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

TOC defaulting

 * First up, the image will now link to the same destination as the message, just for convenience.
 * More importantly, I've changed the code so that the template defaults to going to the page's table of contents if you haven't specified a section, like so;

gives

gives


 * If anyone encounters any problems please revert my changes and notify me so that I can fix them. Thanks! Master of Puppets  Call me MoP! :)  03:10, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I can't see any difference in the two examples in this section. --Sultec (talk) 06:22, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * The first one will default-link to the table of contents of a page; the second one will use the parameter. Master of Puppets  Call me MoP! :)  06:39, 2 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Nice, but I did get rid of that corny AOL message... — Edokter  •  Talk  • 12:41, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Hehe, that's fine by my; I just couldn't think of what to put there. Master of Puppets  Call me MoP! :)  16:43, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Top of talk page
Why do the instructions say to put this on the top of the talk page? I would never look at the top of my talk page for a message (until I can't find the new message at the bottom). -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 12:24, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Well I guess that's been resolved. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 14:29, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, I removed it because no-one was doing ot anyway... — Edokter  •  Talk  • 21:26, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Stopping confusion
Would it be wise to unlink the talkback link in this template so editors do not inadvertently end up here to post replies to talk page messages? They just need to know to remove the from their userpage. They don't really need a link. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 19:31, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
 * No one has objected to my suggestion to unlink the in the template, so if there is no objection, would someone change the Talkback or Tb in the template to   or    -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 16:59, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
 * No one has has supported this suggestion either. The change would make navigating here cumbersome. The number of incidents is also too low to warrant removal of the link. — Edokter  •  Talk  • 17:13, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I oppose to changing it to  because per Edokter.  Math  Cool  10  Sign here! 03:11, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, I agree with Mufka. I think that very few people who receive this message will want to find their way here, and those who do are typically experienced enough to manage, as they do with any other template. The talkback template message is pretty self explanatory, and intuitive to use. The If-I-leave-you-a-message-do-so-and-so header boxes are widespread enough that the mention in the documentation isn't that important either. It's true that the number of incidents is not unmanageable. But the with "I am completely confused by this experience" kind of convinced me that the only links in the template should lead back to the conversation. That would include removing the link on "remove this message" (most will prefer clicking the corresponding section edit link anyway).  Amalthea  15:55, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for the help - I understand now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Romddal (talk • contribs) 20:53, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Spacing
Is it possible to remove the excess vertical spacing which appears above this notice (on my browser anyway). There seems to be an extra line space being produced somewhere. Martin


 * The space come from the .usermessage class, so it cannot be removed here. — Edokter  •  Talk  • 21:23, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Is there something better to use other than ? I store my talk messages to User talk:MathCool10/Archive/January 2009 (or equivalent for other months) and the Talkback messages say, "Hello, MathCool10/Archive," which seems stupid. Is there another thing we can use other than ? Thanks!  Math Cool  10  Sign here! 20:57, 11 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately, no. Unless the devs implement something like . —  Edokter  •  Talk  • 21:20, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

New Talkback template for WikiProjects
Talkback WikiProject I have created a new talkback template for WikiProjects.  Tyw7, Leading Innovations ‍ ‍‍ (Talk  ●  Contributions) 13:49, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Nice. Could use some documentation. — Edokter  •  Talk  • 22:10, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Link
Could the template be changed so that it links to the talk page, rather than the userpage, of the one who placed it? If I'm leaving a note, I'd rather have link to a section on my talk page, since it's not that likely that I'd be leaving a notice to someone else on my userpage. Nyttend (talk) 14:53, 16 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Um, the "new messages" does link to the user talk page. Martin 15:37, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

NO. That's not what Nyttend meant, or so I hope. This template should link to the talk page of the user who employs it. Anything else is just stupid. &mdash; Xiong &#29066; talk * 19:23, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

The "new messages" does link to the user talk page, but the user's name links to their user-page. This can be confusing, and it would be better to ONLY link to the talk page. --Misty Willows (talk) 18:39, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes I would support that. Or at least, the "new messages" part could be made bold. &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:01, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

I am baffled.
When I insert the, it takes a person to my user namepage, not my talk page. I have tried various alterations such as,  but each change results in broken links (i.e. "This page does not exist"). Directing someone to the user's talkpage, seems far more appropriate than wasting his time with a intermediate stopoff at a user's namepage. What am I doing wrong? Anne Teedham (talk) 14:46, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
 * It's the "new messages" that links to your talk page. Several other people have commented on this page that it would be better to delink the userpage, and I think it should be done now. &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:56, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I discovered the "new messages" too late! I was about to pop in here and sheepishly correct my stupidity, but you beat me to the punchline. *grin* Thanks!  I agree with you that the superfluous link to a person's namepage should be delinked. If someone is smart enough to find a person's talkpage, then that person (undoubtedly) will have no problem finding a namepage without a link. Anne Teedham (talk) 15:52, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
 * How's that looking now? &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:20, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Did something change? My most recent use of the template suggests NOT: my name still is linked to my namepage.  Are you implying that you have delinked it?  Anne Teedham (talk) 17:12, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, try purging your cache. &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 17:16, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Tried purging. Same thing.  This is what I've done so far: checked Preferences to place asterick, held down Ctrl, refreshed.... Ran that procedure two times without asterick appearing.  Got frustrated.  Logged out, then back in.  No asterick. Tried Preference/asterick again.  (Lots of saving and ctrl etc.) Then went to most recent template and checked for change.  Nothing.  But when I clicked my name it took me to my namepage ASTERICK now appeared.  Clicked asterick to PURGE.  Then returned to most recent template.  But...unfortunately the name still links, and it goes to my namepage (which, incidentally, is no big deal now that I understand that a person can click the new messages and be taken to the talkpage discussion).  So I am not really too worried any longer.  How's that sound? Anne Teedham (talk) 17:31, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

This is the current version. &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 17:50, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Ah! I see what's going on. The new version is different than the version which I have been checking as my most recent. So...I will leave my most recent as is, and use the new version the next time. When I do, it should like like this:

viola Thank you, Martin. It's been a gas. *grin*&mdash;Anne Teedham (talk) 18:03, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

template update fix /timestamp
Hello,. . You can [ remove this notice] at any time by removing the Talkback or Tb template.
 * In the current template tp=1 brings you to the article not the talk page. I've fixed it in the code above. It also allows for timestamps if you add  ts=  as a parameter. (e.g.    )  --Misty Willows (talk) 19:54, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Wouldn't it be better to use 5 tildes in place of the 4. The Wikipedia standard for time-without-name equals five. such as this 20:05, 13 March 2009 (UTC) &mdash;Anne Teedham (talk) 20:05, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, that was a typo on my part. I meant:      -Misty Willows (talk) 23:03, 13 March 2009 (UTC)


 * This will break section linking if the section is left empty (which is an opnional parameter). — Edokter  •  Talk  • 23:38, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, I tested it, and it didn't see Template:Talkback/testcases -Misty Willows (talk) 16:51, 14 March 2009 (UTC)


 * OK, that seems to work. Judging form my talk page however, it does break for template talk pages. It definitely needs better namespace support. — Edokter  •  Talk  • 22:29, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
 * How about implementing my changes since I can't. The namespace problem is a separate issue, and shouldn't get in the way of implementing timestamp.  -Misty Willows (talk) 22:38, 14 March 2009 (UTC)


 * ✅ Though I did change the font a bit. How does it look? — Edokter  •  Talk  • 23:27, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

In Wikipedia talk spaces
Template doesn't appear to be working for pages with the "Wikipedia talk" prefix as it tries to add a "Talk:" to the front of the link. -- Kraftlos  (Talk | Contrib) 03:10, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

 Kraftlos  (Talk | Contrib) 03:05, 15 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Known issue. The template only works in (article) Talk: and User talk:. Cross-namespace support to be added later. — Edokter  •  Talk  • 19:11, 15 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Edokter can you revert your change until you get done adding the namespace support? I really miss being able to link to Wikipedia space talk pages. —Nn123645 (talk) 04:04, 19 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I have edited the template in the sandbox to add namespace support and removed the tp parameter and replaced it with ns in this revision of the sandbox. We need to decide whether we want to leave tp in for backwards compatibility or totally remove it. —Nn123645 (talk) 06:09, 19 March 2009 (UTC)


 * tp=1 needs to stay, because the template is still transcluded on a lot of pages. Ohter then that, adding a ns=(namespace) seems like the way to go. Using all kinds different parameters defeats the easy use of this template. — Edokter  •  Talk  • 12:14, 19 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Switch statement for each talk namespace added in this revision of the sandbox. As far as ease of use goes, the ns parameter is pretty easy, its just a two or one letter code usually of the first letters of the words to describe the namespace (except in the case of the Wikipedia namespace). For instance, user talk is ut, file talk is ft, template talk is tt, article talk is t, etc. If you do not enter the ns parameter in that revision of the sandbox it will default to the User talk namespace, or if you enter the namespace parameter but enter a non-valid value or enter in a null value it will also default to the user talk namespace. Namespaces outside of the talk namespaces can be linked by typing ns=other, though I'm not quite sure why anyone would want to do this. —Nn123645 (talk) 20:55, 19 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't like the idea of users having to learn all these codes. In that case it would be easier to just leave the tp=1 (which I'm not a fan of either) in place so users can enter the full link. Remember that this template was initially designe with only user talk pages in mind. — Edokter  •  Talk  • 22:40, 19 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I think your misunderstanding. The revision I did in the sandbox supports both tp=1 (as you probably already know the way you have the tp parameter setup the 1 can be anything as it is only a #if not a #ifeq) and ns=(namespace code). The codes are quite simplistic and easy to learn, the full names for each namespace (wikipedia, wikipedia talk, template talk, etc.) can also be added so it would be basicly the same as it would by directly typing the link except it would be in the ns parameter rather than the link parameter. I would like to suggest we deprecate the tp parameter in favor of the ns as it seems the best way to go. If user's don't want to learn the codes for each namespace they could always just use the "other" code all the time and enter the full link title with the namespace (typing ns=other is the same as typing tp=1), or type in no code at all and have it default to the User talk namespace. While this template may have been designed only for dicussions on the user talk namespace it is clearly being used quite a bit for discussions on all namespaces. —Nn123645 (talk) 00:08, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Nn123645, your edits don't work right, when there is a section parameter. See Template:Talkback/testcases  ...  Misty Willows   talk  00:46, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * /me sighs. I'll have to see what's causing that. —Nn123645 (talk) 00:52, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Another version

 * I've just added a version in Template:Talkback/sandbox that will make both tp and ns parameters obsolete. It assumes that the page given in the parameter is a User talk page, unless it's explicitly pointing into another namespace. This works since we will never want talkbacks to point into mainspace.










 * Amalthea 01:07, 20 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Since for all I can say this is backwards compatible I say we implement this, unless anybody has concerns. Oh, and I fixed the issue mentioned above at #  too. -- Amalthea  01:31, 20 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Looks good to me, #titleparts is definatly better than using BASEPAGENAME alone. —Nn123645 (talk) 04:15, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * In the last example, I would like to see the #somesection be invisible, like it is in the second example.  ...  Misty Willows   talk  08:15, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, done. If there are no objections I'll copy it to the template this evening. -- Amalthea 12:12, 20 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I've optimized the code in /sansbox2; should be much more readable. I'm happy with the result. — Edokter  •  Talk  • 15:28, 20 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Hmm, I had to redo the part after the pipe since I made a mistake: It didn't previously work if you passed an explicit "User talk:Amalthea", and it gave a weird result if you passed a user talk subpage. Both should work now:










 * Amalthea 16:46, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, moved the new version from the sandbox to the template. -- Amalthea 20:02, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks Amalthea :D. I really appriciate yours and Edokter's work on this template. Edokter I greatly appricate making the code more readable. —Nn123645 (talk) 20:15, 20 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I think you overdid it on the formatting a bit... it took me an hour to analyse the code again. I've trimmed it back a bit. — Edokter  •  Talk  • 21:43, 20 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Hmm, oh well, I usually have the tendency to document and comment far too little, maybe I've overcompensated. :) Don't forget to copy it to the template page though when you're done, since I'd already moved it. In any case, the actual change was only in the piped part. I'm afraid that I don't see how it can be written any easier, without resorting to helper subtemplates at least. -- Amalthea 21:50, 20 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Done. I also moved /sandbox2 to /sandbox and merged the histories. — Edokter  •  Talk  • 21:57, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Change tp parameter to not default talkpage
I would like to request that the main template be changed back for links not to default to the Talk: namespace as changed in Edokter's edit as I have done this in this sandbox edit. —Nn123645 (talk) 06:14, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done Not only did this break Friendly and existing talkpage template usages, it also made it impossible to leave talkbacks for other discussion pages (WP, WT, Template Talk, ...). I'm gonna ask Edokter over for discussion, but I'm not going to be online for most of the day so sorry if I won't give timely responses. -- Amalthea 08:25, 19 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Indeed, mistake on my part. — Edokter  •  Talk  • 12:05, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Suggestion for template.
On names that end with an S, there should be just S apostrophe, not S apostrophe S (Ex: Eugene Krabs' talk page). Is there any way that it could be done? - Eugene Krabs (talk) 21:30, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, something could be written using the expensive hacks from Category:String manipulation templates, but that would only work up to a certain length and is rather expensive. The proper way would be to get the devs to install the StringFunctions – vote for 6455!. :) -- Amalthea 22:26, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I believe that Eugene Krabs's talk page would be correct, as you are a single person not plural. &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:29, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
 * It depends (see Apostrophe). I know that I learned at school to leave out the "s". -- Amalthea 09:02, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I learned that you always do that with names that end with an S or some objects (Ex: Carlos' hat got wet). However, with a word ending in a Z, you do put 's (Ex: Pizzaz's ice-cream was good). That's what I learned, anyway. - Eugene Krabs (talk) 18:04, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
 * It seems to down to personal preference somewhat. Personally I never omit the second "s" when it's singular. &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:15, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedia pages with incorrect protection templates
Please move the to the template page as  as it is incorrectly categorising talkback, the /doc subpage, and every [user] talk page with talkback or tb into the category Category:Wikipedia pages with incorrect protection templates. Note: The category is a hidden category.  Math Cool  10  Sign here! 03:43, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * The problem was actually being caused by Template:Usertalkback. --- RockMFR 05:54, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

If no parameter is given ( parameter), can a   be replaced as the username?  M C  10  |  Sign here!  04:12, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I think people mostly transclude this template. (It makes it easier for the other editor to remove it from their talkpage when they have replied.) Therefore substituting things won't work I think ... &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:08, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Right. It might however be useful to change the documentation to give usage as
 * Or pakage that into a new template like {{subst:mytalk}} which would leave the above. Amalthea  22:54, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Or pakage that into a new template like {{subst:mytalk}} which would leave the above. Amalthea  22:54, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Error template
Sorry to revert, but I firmly believe that we should not depend on other templates unless absolutely necessary. This prevents potential performance issues and allows portability to other projects. — Edokter  •  Talk  • 13:32, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
 * That's completely against all current practice. We use templates for convenience, not because they are absolutely necessary. &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:46, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
 * How is it convenient here? Templates save typing in articles. It won't save any typing here. And the error template is not available on all other projects, which is a valid reason not to include it. — Edokter  •  Talk  • 14:02, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I think it's convenient simply because it keeps the rather obscure and arbitrary definition of an "error" (any text matched by ) in one place, where it can be changed without AWB, if need be. In cases like these I don't worry about performance at all, and from what I hear the "new" preprocessor only evaluates conditional branches if it has to, i.e. if there is an error. I know that the template has been ported to other projects, but honestly I don't care about that too much either. It's easy enough to port the dependencies as well. FWIW, the template is also using tl, which admittedly is far more standardized.  Amalthea  14:56, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I have trouble understanding the supposed advantages of what you described. "Absolutely necessary" may be too bold on my part, but I still think the less nested templates, the better. Next to reducing dependancies, limiting transcusions casues less implact when someone makes an error in one of the templates. But that's just my philosophy. If you really think it has an advantage, then add it back. — Edokter  •  Talk  • 15:15, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
 * It boils down to a difference of philosophies, I guess. By default, I try to hardcode as litle as possible. Error is, I believe, in the same spirit as str left, ROOTPAGENAME, main other: It's trivial to hardcode either one of them, it has a performance benefit to hardcode them, but transcluding them helps with tracking, readability, and maintainability. Amalthea  16:13, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Talkback subst
I notice that Talkback subst was created today, as a duplicate of this template (without proper attribution, so technically it's a copyright violation). Personally, I don't see a reason why the talkback template should ever be substed onto pages. But if anybody sees use for it, it quite certainly should not live as a duplicate of this template, but take the content from here (through some parameter). Opinions? Amalthea 15:08, 12 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I can see no use for it; this template can be substed if need be (though it is not recommended due to the garbage dumped on the talk page, which is appearently what the new template is supposed to prevent). The only advantage of substing is reducing the ever growing number of transclusions. — Edokter  •  Talk  • 15:25, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Agreed. I've redirected it to this template. &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:42, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Clash with archives template?
When used with an archives template the image in the talkback box jumps out and decides to put itself a couple of lines down the page. It it doing this naughty carry on at my talk page and I can simulate it on this page as well. Am running the latest version of Firefox and it does not do it with Micro$oft IE7.-- Alan Liefting (talk) - 05:27, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm, this could be prevented here by using an absolutely positioned image and moving the text a bit to the right, but since this problem always has more widespread issues (like the misplaced edit links you also had on your talkpage, in addition to the misplaced image, if used the WP:BUNCHING workaround on your talkpage instead. Amalthea  11:15, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

In other skins
This template really doesn't look terrific under other skins. For example, in modern, the "new messages" bar is embedded tightly into the interface, doesn't use much padding and no border. The result of using the "usermessage" class is [ this]. And while modern is possibly the most popular alternative to monobook, similar thing happens with [ Cologne Blue] and [ Nostalgia] while under [ Chick] the image is a wreck. Миша 13 22:14, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * That looks a bit like a mess. I can hardcode the CSS, or use tmbox as a framework. — Edokter  •  Talk  • 12:19, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Suggestion
At present the usage of this template is

I'd propose to change this to, since that would allow for simply copying from the url-bar.

Please notice that what I suggest will work anyway. I only propose to make this the official usage. Debresser (talk) 12:48, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
 * If it works already then why change anything? &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:45, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Well the documentation can be changed. Rich Farmbrough, 14:01, 13 September 2009 (UTC).

I seem to remember it worked. It doesn't. But it should, because it is the easiest and most natural way. Debresser (talk) 15:06, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
 * If the second parameter is not defined then it will link to the TOC. This is also a useful feature, no? &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:13, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, definitely. But it should be easy to link to a section with "#". After all, that is how we link to sections all the time. Debresser (talk) 19:02, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Proposal
✅ Actually, after having a good look at the template, and doing a small test on the sandbox, I saw that it is precisely this feature, redirecting to the TOC, that invalidates links to sections. This also explains why I remember it used to work, because this feature was added only in October 2008. So I propose to remove the linking to the TOC. The TOC is anyways usually at the beginning. Personally, I have even found it annoying at times, to be redirected to the TOC rather, a few lines below the top, than to the precise top of the page. Debresser (talk) 10:49, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't have a problem with this. &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:20, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Neither do I, so, I've seen newly added talkbacks trying to link to the section that way, so it's probably a good thing to have that functionality back right away. I first thought that something like would look stupid like "new messages at Example#Some section header's talk page", but since we route the name through  the section part is chopped off.  Amalthea  11:42, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Sounds about right to me. But the template looks OK, is the problem that it inserts the "#" and so do you?  Where's your test code? Rich Farmbrough, 12:37, 5 October 2009 (UTC).
 * To whom are you replying? Amalthea  12:43, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * He was answering to a notice about this discussion on his talkpage. No, the problem is not that both the template and I add "#". As I said, the problem is the default anchoring to the TOC, which meshes with my anchoring through "#". It is fixed now. Thank you for your reply. Debresser (talk) 14:06, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Ah, I should have added a tick to make it more obvious that it had been changed already. Amalthea  14:30, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

mytalk description typo
you username > your username Eric talk 17:35, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * ✅, but you could have done that yourself, template documentation is usually stored in a subpage of the documentation itself. Amalthea  07:57, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I didn't see an indication of that when I looked over the edit protection message. Thanks. Eric talk 11:57, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * No need to apologize, just wanted to point it ot for the future. -- Amalthea 12:10, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Date parameter
I'd like to propose adding a date parameter to this template. Because sometimes you see a talkback template on a talkpage and would like to know when it was placed there. It's not a big deal, but it's small and informative. Debresser (talk) 16:18, 9 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Something like, rendering  . Debresser (talk) 16:25, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * The template already has the  timestamp parameter. Since the talkback template isn't substed onto talk pages, it needs to be provided manually though, that's why you don't see it used that much. Friendly automatically adds it.  Amalthea  18:05, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Could we add it automatically? Debresser (talk) 18:13, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Not without substitution, I'm afraid, the time parameter has to be placed in the talk page source in plain text, and that only works if you type it manually, use the five tildes, or subst it there. I've just modified an unused redirect to do the work for you, and default to the user who's placing the template, so you can now use {{subst:Talkback subst}}. Documentation is still outdated, the template name is cumbersome, and I'm unsure if the template signature should be changed to make it easier to pass a section anchor, currently you'd have to use an empty first parameter. Feel free, anyone, to tweak it at your will. Amalthea  19:27, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Then we come back to the original proposal, to add a date in the way outlined above. Debresser (talk) 00:13, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * You propose to include the  parser function in the template and you expect that it will then show the time the six letters  were added to some page source? How could that possibly work? Imagine there are several transclusions on one page, where would they get the required information? Feel very free to demonstrate this magic in the sandbox. The only way I can think of that doesn't require changing people's behavior (or MediaWiki) is to ask smackbot to date them post factum, but I don't think you'll find consensus for that.  Amalthea  02:01, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * You're right. But can't a timesignature be added automatically with some code involving includeonly? Debresser (talk) 02:10, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * In the end, you always need to have the timestamp as part of the source text of the talk page – there's nowhere else it can come from. The only way to get it there is by typing it manually, using the tilde macro, or having it placed there in the PST phase via a subst:. Amalthea  10:53, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I tried it, but you seem to be right. Ok, thanks. Debresser (talk) 13:08, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Could we have a parameter called date that does the same thing as ts as that is slightly unusual? -- Eraserhead1 &lt;talk&gt; 12:56, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
 * PS couldn't we use the Template:Timestamp to insert the current date automatically? -- Eraserhead1 &lt;talk&gt; 14:00, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

please delink from es:wp
Please remove the interwiki link to es, this template was seldom used and has been deleted as an unnecessary template. 
 * - ignore me; I just found it on the /doc subpage.  pablo hablo. 15:57, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Interwiki possibility
I'd like to propose an addition to this template to allow interwiki links by setting :

Any corrections or opposition? — MC10 (T•C•GB•[ L]•EM)  21:32, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Wait, it doesn't work yet. Fixing. — MC10 (T•C•GB•[ L]•EM)  21:48, 31 December 2009 (UTC) Fixed. — MC10  (T•C•GB•[ L]•EM)  22:28, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Please change the current code to the code written above to allow interwiki capability. — MC10 (T•C•GB•[ L]•EM)  03:26, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Done. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 08:23, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
 * This broke the testcases with anchored links, see the current Template:Talkback/testcases, so I've reverted it. In any case, could we find some implicit way to do this? Detect whether a link looks like an interwiki link using Str find? Amalthea  09:27, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
 * That would complicate the code a lot&mdash;you would have to input all of the language prefixes (es: fr: zh: etc.). — MC10 (T•C•GB•L)  17:42, 17 January 2010 (UTC)


 * The anchor links were broken because the &amp;#35; entities were replaced with a simple # sign, which breaks the link. I restored the entities in the code above and in the sandbox. Please do some more testing. — Edokter • Talk  • 20:52, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Which probably happened because the entities are properly rendered, and the code was copied from the rendered page instead of from the source. It should now display properly as well. — Edokter • Talk  • 20:57, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

-
 * Yes, what about interwiki link !


 * It doesn't work !
 * "interwiki=yes" is not a good solution ; "iw=fr" seems better. But best solution is :


 * &lt;STyx @ 17:07, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

CSS class
Why does this template use class="usermessage"? Is there a specific need for it to act like a mediawiki message, or is this a "neat design choice" kind of thing? — V = I * R (Talk&thinsp;•&thinsp;Contribs) 20:24, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, it was indeed initially intended to mimic the "You have new messages" box. That, and it allows the box to fit all the skins, as they all have different styling. — Edokter • Talk  • 23:44, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah. Well, that kind of sucks. The only reason I noticed (and hence, brought the subject up here) is because I recently customized the usermessage class in my personal CSS, and I've suddenly noticed that it's been affecting this template as well. I'd say that it's a bad kludge use the usermessage class here, but then I'm complaining because I've customized it, so... *shrug* It would be nice if you guys could find a different method to accomplish the same things though. (copying the directly relevant CSS from the class to be in a local div within the template seems to be an obvious possible solution, by the way) — V = I * R (Talk&thinsp;&bull;&thinsp;Contribs) 02:43, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Perhaps that would be better. Having looked through the skins, it doesn't look all that hot anyway, while other box templates look the same as in monobook. — Edokter • Talk  • 21:51, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks Edokter! — V = IR (Talk&thinsp;&bull;&thinsp;Contribs) 09:29, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

TB for talk pages
The word "Wikipedia" needs to be removed from the code to copy and paste, as it makes the link invalid - - it should look like this. Mjroots2 (talk) 10:01, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Why do you pass in "Wikipedia talk:2010 Bahrain Grand Prix" when you want to refer to "Talk:2010 Bahrain Grand Prix"? Amalthea  10:28, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Selfsubst
Proposed change in the sandbox that will automatically transform a mistakenly substituted talkback template into its unsubstituted form, and (while it's at it) fill in parameters   and , if they are missing. Any concerns/objections? Or improvements? Should the parameter 1, if given, be interpreted as the section parameter instead, i.e. not see substitution as a mistake, but as deliberate, and handle it much like ? Amalthea 15:39, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Remove this notice
Should we make the "remove this notice" link much more prominent and link it as  if a new parameter  is part of the template code? We could have such tools as Friendly and mytalk make use of this using  to fill in the new parameter. PleaseStand (talk) 01:32, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, in the sandbox of this template I have made the change to illustrate (on top of the one mentioned above). I have not yet written the editintros that it uses. PleaseStand (talk) 03:21, 15 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately is not possible, so I have removed that part. The link is still put in a more prominent location, and the editintro does the job of explaining how to remove the template. I think that for automatic removal we would have to put something into MediaWiki:Common.js to find-and-replace the notice out of the text based on the inserted timestamp. PleaseStand (talk) 20:02, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * The image is to big for the box in the one-line version from the sandbox, and overflows. For what it's worth though, you can have users automatically load a special script by appending something like  to the edit URL. The talkback template could then emit some UID which can be added to that URL, and used by the script to find out the talk back template to be removed (along with a section header, if there's nothing else in the section), and press the "Show changes" button. Just as food for thought. :)  Amalthea  16:54, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I put the sandbox back the way it was, with the exception of the editnotice link (and a font size increase on that line). As mentioned above, using JavaScript to remove the talkback notice is an idea that is quite interesting. PleaseStand (talk) 19:44, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Error message: emphasis on "username" isn't necessary
I don't think that the emphasis on "username" is necessary when displaying the error message because once that people see it, they know that they didn't specify the page name. If anybody agrees, they can remove it from the template and reply here. 3-5 file (talk) 02:43, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

The error message with the emphasis looks like this:

ERROR: Please enter the username parameter when using the Talkback template.

but without it, it would look like this:

ERROR: Please enter the username parameter when using the Talkback template.

--3-5 file (talk) 02:50, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Use for article talk pages - problem and thoughts
Some time back, I was cautioned not to use this to notify editors of a reply on an article talk page. On review, I decided that was good advice. I received such a talkback today, pointing to an article I was watching, but to which I had no desire to reply.

1st, I think that in the cases where it is used to point to a non-user-talk page, it needs to automagically include a signature, to keep to wp:talk page guidelines. I have no idea how that might be implemented. If it isn't practical, I think a note on the page should be added to that effect (edit to add)... to remember to add a signature.

However, I argue that such usage is not excellent. If I want to know when I get a reply on an article talk page, I watch it. If I have something to say, I say it. I think this is generally true.- Sinneed  16:04, 14 June 2010 (UTC) - edit -  Sinneed  16:08, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Signature
It would be really really nice if signatures could be supported within the template... 119.235.14.35 (talk) 11:20, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Edit request
After the "action=edit" part, please add the following code:

That code means that if the parameter does have a variable, it will add "&section=[section number here]" to the code. Hey Mid  (contributions) 09:02, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Any section number you pass in there is bound to get incorrect through page archiving though, no? Amalthea  09:06, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, but when archiving, it is not needed? Hey  Mid  (contributions) 09:08, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
 * But what about before? A talkback template is placed, but before the user sees it an archive bot comes in and removes one section above it, which makes the section numbering change. Amalthea  09:20, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Ahh, you are correct. But that would likely be unfortunate... however, is there a MediaWiki template or something for detecting the section number? Hey  Mid  (contributions) 09:23, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
 * There is no such template. — Edokter • Talk  • 12:55, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Could this template include the date it is inserted?
I do not know much template syntax so I am not sure if it is possible. Could this template include the date when it appears on a page? meshach (talk) 18:31, 8 October 2010 (UTC)


 * See the documentation on "How to add a timestamp". — <b style="color:#008">Edokter</b> • Talk  • 21:57, 8 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I should have read it more carefully. Thanks Edoker. meshach (talk) 16:33, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

What does this mean "removing the Talkback or Tb template."
... like we have to get into edit- text mode and remove the code that generates this box or is there some smart box we have to click in so the box goes away automatically and we're taken to where the talking is taking place or should take place? I'm confused. Thyou--SvenAERTS (talk) 00:30, 16 December 2010 (UTC)


 * It is indeed removing the code from your talk page manually. — <b style="color:#008">Edokter</b> • Talk  • 01:36, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Unclear usage guidelines
The section on usage seems rather unclear. Most importantly if fails to state where to insert the code. Is is being placed in the reader's own Talk page? Someone else's? Additionally it fails to give an example of a "non-user talk page," which might a confusing term, since many visitors think of Talk pages by the word on the tab: "discussion." Personally, I'm not sufficiently confident in my own understanding of this template to clarify this myself. I hope someone else with a better understanding can. JamesLucas (talk) 21:21, 5 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Also, the text in the box is misleading; it says to place, quote,, unquote on the page, but that gives a syntax error because of the required parameter.  I suggest changing the text to read  . --chrylis (talk) 05:03, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Add automatic signature?
Could this template automatically sign with the signature of the person who adds it? Not doing so means it doesn't auto-archive from talk pages, which is a bit of a nuisance. Mike Christie (talk – library) 16:06, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately not, as the template is typically transcluded. If it were usually substituted, this would be possible. –<b style="font-family:verdana; color:black">xeno</b> talk 20:20, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Could have a substitutable version. Or if really clever, we could detect whether it has been substituted and add the signature. &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 17:07, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't think that would solve the root problem; editors that would be mindful enough to substitute are probably already using the ts= parameter or a signature beneath it. –<b style="font-family:verdana; color:black">xeno</b> talk 17:24, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
 * That reminds me, I already wrote something to do that, see Template talk:Talkback/Archive 1. Had at least one open question that needed answering though. Amalthea  18:04, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Not sure about the answer; maybe try and see how talkback is typically substed when it is? –<b style="font-family:verdana; color:black">xeno</b> talk 13:39, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Separate question, perhaps, but why does the documentation for this template say it should not be substituted? Mike Christie (talk – library) 13:45, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Number of reasons probably, I'd say the most obvious would be to make it easier to remove. –<b style="font-family:verdana; color:black">xeno</b> talk 14:05, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Also because the syntax is quite ugly if not substituted. However, I'm going to fix it and make it subst'able, seeing no reason not to do so. Magog the Ogre (talk) 20:23, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Template talk page
Someone should give a section showing what to write for a template talk page. 84.13.50.235 (talk) 19:17, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Styling
This template currently uses its own hand-hacked styling rather than inheriting from the likes of tmbox. I've updated the sandbox to use tmbox (test cases) to demonstrate the difference.

In general, I'd rather we used the precooked template layout for message boxes where possible. There's an argument that tmbox is best for banners and that the wide / blue format currently used here is better for things like talkback or you've got mail, but if that's the case then a new "user message box" master template should be designed and used for these instead of them all having their own hand-coding.

Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 20:15, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I totally agree that TB and YGM could do with standardised coding through something like tmbox, but the tmbox version looks hideous. If something could be cooked up that lets message banners like these retain their colour and doesn't turn them turd-colour when they're transcluded onto a talk page, I'm all for it. <b style="color:Teal; font-family:Tahoma">HJ Mitchell</b> &#124; Penny for your thoughts?   00:50, 22 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Tmbox doesn't really fit; it's better suited for banners at the top. When I created this template, it used to inherit from .usermessage, but people didn't like the orange. I like the idea of creating umbox ("user message box") with associated CSS classes. That should give us the flexibility in the furure for any user generated messages. <span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS',sans-serif"> — Edokter  ( talk ) — 01:06, 22 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Done, with updates for both talkback and you've got mail in their respective sandboxes. Mind giving it a look over? Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 13:22, 2 March 2011 (UTC)


 * It's a good start, but there is lots of room for some improvements, like optional styling (YouveGotMail is now blue instead of green), and incorporating some generic (t)mbox functionality, like a type parameter (message, mail etc.). <span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS',sans-serif"> — Edokter  ( talk ) — 13:40, 2 March 2011 (UTC)


 * I figure it's better to release early and often and add new features as necessary rather than overthinking things from the beginning. As for the slight background colour change to YGM, I rather consider it a feature that our messages boxes use consistent background colours. If YGM's current shade is better than talkback's then we should simply switch both. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 02:04, 3 March 2011 (UTC)


 * I think it's good to have some distinction between Talkback and YGM, so a style or type parameter would not be a bad idea. <span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS',sans-serif"> — Edokter  ( talk ) — 03:00, 3 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Isn't having a different image for both sufficient? There's very little semantic difference between the two which would warrant them being having different "type" attributes. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 10:43, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

No username parameter
Please add a username parameter and/or the magic word; it was quite confusing when I received the error message, and discovered that there is no username= parameter, only the 1= parameter. Whoever placed the talkback template is most logically the one to talkback to, unless he/she specifies a different page to discuss matters on, which is covered by and other variables. Something like would be preferable. :| TelCo NaSp  Ve :|  02:33, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Noted. Need a bit of time to work it out though. <span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS',sans-serif"> — Edokter  ( talk ) — 03:12, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Yikes; the code is already ugly and intricate as is. I agree that a would be useful, but obviously only when the template is subst'ed, which it usually isn't. Magog the Ogre (talk) 05:20, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
 * That's actually a fairly easy change, one I already prepared in Template talk:Talkback/Archive 1. Amalthea  08:36, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
 * That's partially why Safesubst is better over regular subst, cause it also handles transclusions. :| TelCo  NaSp  Ve :|  20:12, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Well be my (our) guest. Magog the Ogre (talk) 08:44, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Proposal for a change
Could this template be changed, such that adding

to another users talk page will produce a wikilink to my talk page in the talkback template? The purpose of this is, that this would enable one to include it in your talk header and then simply paste that code onto another users talk page, while producing the correct wikilink to your talk page.

Not really the most important thing, but cool when you feel a bit lazy. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 10:24, 27 May 2011 (UTC)


 * The template already provides a link to the talkpage of the given user or page. Using tildes causes your signature to appear, and it is not possible to distill the talkpage link from that. <span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS',sans-serif"> — Edokter  ( talk ) — 11:36, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Screenshot update
Hi,

On the screenshot in this template, the one that highlights new section, it shows the old theme. I have created a new one but with the new theme. But i am unable to upload this. Maybe someone can help? Thannks --JetBlast (talk) 19:48, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Maybe because you need to upload it at commons, not locally, i.e. here: commons:File:New section small.png. Amalthea  21:16, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, i have just tried that, but there isnt an option to do it. I have just created an account on there to do it. --JetBlast (talk) 21:21, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Pointing to other talk pages
The guidance is unclear. A working example of pointing to a subsection on an article talk page would be immensely helpful. Please provide one. Thanks. Rubywine (talk) 19:55, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Brackets
Replace "Your username" with your username without "User:" prefix.


 * I believe should say,

Replace "<Your username>" with your username without "User:" prefix.—Biosketch (talk) 08:35, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

missing brackets.
I was translating this template in Dutch, and at this line #if:|Message added .}}

I noticed the IF statement didn't have two {{ in front of it. Is this an error in this template, or just a difference between the Dutch and the English wiki?--IIVeaa (talk) 13:29, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Recommended form: timestamp
Would it be preferable for default use to automatically include ? If so, is this workable? -- Trevj (talk) 10:08, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
 * That would only be possible when it's subst'ed, which is not very often. Magog the Ogre (talk) 09:51, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Related template?
I thought this might be relevant to mention in the /doc of, but wanted to get the input of others first. I've just created a template — (shortcut: ), which a user (let's call him/her "User A") can put in his/her messages left on the talkpage of another user ("User B").. Basically, what does is create a link that says "leave me a talkback". If User B clicks on the link, it will create a new section on User A's talkpage with the template already filled out and timestamped. I made this because I'm a forgetful person. I need talkbacks to remind me of stuff, and I'm constantly asking other users to leave a talkback on my talkpage. Some people do oblige, but many think it a waste of their time. Maybe if other talkback-lovers like me were to use on the pages of such users, we'd be more likely to get the reminder we need.

And that's my case for mentioning in the /doc of this template. Oh, and if you reply here... Please lmatb on my talkpage! ;) Cheers and happy editing, — Preceding signed comment added by Cymru.lass (talk • contribs) (If you reply here,lmatb 20:12, 31 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I think it is worth adding, after the template is fixed :) You demonstration above does not work properly. — Edokter  ( talk ) — 20:20, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh poo... I don't know why it did that.... I dunno how to fix it. I'm a total noob template-wise... Help! — Preceding signed comment added by Cymru.lass (talk • contribs) (If you reply here, please lmatb 06:51, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Many thanks for the fixes, Edokter! :) — Preceding signed comment added by Cymru.lass (talk • contribs) (If you reply here, please lmatb 23:43, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. There are more fixes coming though. You may want to change you sig to not use the template, as it is way too long. — Edokter  ( talk ) — 23:53, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh wow, you're right. Sorry bout that! I didn't know using a template in my sig would automatically subst it (I had tried to transclude it). That's definitely troutable... — Preceding signed comment added by Cymru.lass (talk • contribs) 18:06, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Just hardcode the link to your talk page; transcluding templates in sigs is not permitted either, see WP:SIG. — Edokter  ( talk ) — 20:33, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I am literally smacking my head right now. I have no clue how I missed that policy. — Preceding signed comment added by Cymru.lass (talk • contribs) 07:29, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Feature Request
Currently, the template supports linking to any page on the english wikipedia. Many times, users have to leave messages on a different language or a different project altogether. And then, this template doesn't work. One has to go to the talkpage and manually add a message(which pretty much ends the point of keeping the discussion in one place). So, I'd like to propose the addition of two optional parameters, project and language. These should be optional, which can be added in such situations, to create interwiki links instead of normal ones. These could basically contain the shortcuts to the project/language, like :m for meta, :wikt for wiktionary, :wikt:fr for the french wiktionary etc.--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 16:27, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

I see that there's been a previous attempt to add this functionality, maybe it would work if the parameters went into the code before the User Talk: code(using something with #if possibly?). Hope this works out.--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 16:35, 26 September 2011 (UTC)


 * I think that this would be very useful. I tried adding a tb template pointing to a page at Commons only to find out that it would point at User talk:Commons:Commons namespace:Commons article name. The Talkback template on Commons already supports this: produces User talk:Anything whereas  drops the "User talk:" part, allowing "anything" to contain any namespaces or interwiki prefixes. --Stefan2 (talk) 13:47, 24 December 2011 (UTC)


 * The problem is solved for interwiki user talk pages in the template in Bulgarian (basically the code is the same with an if checking for 'en', 'de', etc. in the beginning), you can see how it works here bg:template:talkback. I think other options could be easily added too but since the interwiki user page linking was what I needed I will leave the addition of more linking to other enthusiasts [[Image:Face-tongue.svg|20px|P|link=]] --Aleksd (talk) 08:48, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

This should have automatic signing rather than having someone need to type their name
Hi if you look at wikitea this uses a way where when you subst:wikitea it automatically puts the name in, that should probably be used for talkback too I think, it would save people having to type their name out? Especially since this is for one time messages it should probably be the standard to subst it anyway like with the WP:MLT stuff? I would have improved it myself but it's protected so just leaving this message here in hopes someone does something one day, lol -- Mistress Selina Kyle   ( Α⇔Ω ¦ ⇒✉ )  03:55, 9 February 2012 (UTC)


 * To enable convenient removal, we've long discouraged this template's substitution. Regardless, any major change in its behavior would be disruptive.  Why not simply create a separate version that does what you want?  —David Levy 11:08, 10 February 2012 (UTC)


 * because I thought it would be more helpful to everyone and not just me if they didn't have to type their name every time oh and that little bit of a lot of typing saved overall if you add it all up  you have a point about reducing spam when people are editing though that's why I started using tmbox for talk page messages instead of tables to make it easier for people editing, hmm. I wonder if there's any way to make it put someone's name in automatically withoust subst'ing? -- Mistress Selina Kyle   ( Α⇔Ω ¦ ⇒✉ )  11:32, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

← Here's some previous discussion about this: Template talk:Talkback/Archive 1, Template talk:Talkback/Archive 1. In short, yes, we can make substituting this template do something useful. would expand to, and would expand to. So far so good, but I'm unsure how to best interpret it if only one parameter is passed, like : Is Foo supposed to be a page name, a section name, or is it the user's name and the substitution was a mistake: Amalthea 12:26, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

ambox/mbox format
Just out of curiosity- is there a reason this template is not in the mbox or ambox form like many other templates in this form are? (template:cleanup, template:NPOV, etc.).  Liam98 7  14:41, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
 * It's actually using umbox, which is modelled after the mbox family. — Edokter  ( talk ) — 15:17, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

minor edit
Can someone change this:

Simple form: This is the simplest way to use this template:

Replace "Your username" with your username without "User:" prefix.

to this: Replace "Your username" with your username without "User:" prefix, and remove the "<>" brackets.

Because otherwise the person doesnt know to remove them. Sephiroth storm (talk) 18:12, 3 April 2012 (UTC)‎

Leading spaces
I have just discovered that a leading space in the section title parameter causes the template to fail to find the thread. I found this by pasting the example code from the doc page. I have amended the doc page, but a better solution would be for the template code to accept leading spaces in the parameters.  Spinning Spark  11:48, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

magic words
Would there be any way for a multi-level substiution if the template is not substituted with ? If we could make this template automatically display the user's name wouldn't it be possible to have a template with no required fields? -badmachine 06:13, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Change wording
As talkback templates are often (maybe even usually) left for only one message, it seems it would make more sense if it said "You have one or more new messages" instead of "You have new messages." If you want to keep it briefer, it could read "You have new message(s)." — JmaJeremy • Ƭalk • Cont   17:19, 9 July 2012 (UTC)


 * This template is patterned after the orange banner that automatically appears for users when new messages are posted on their talk pages, which contains the same wording (irrespective of quantity).
 * So if such a change is carried out, it should apply to both messages. —David Levy 18:20, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Remove extra bold
Can someone remove the extra  around the "Hello, Talkback. You have new messages at Example's talk page." text, as the text is already bolded by default by the  element, and Firefox is rendering the text as being doubly bolded? Specifically, just do a search for the text  in the source, and remove it. Thanks. — mc10 ( t / c ) 02:50, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
 * The with   is in the enclosing . Has that always been the case? -- Red rose64 (talk) 10:42, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done It looks like a relic left over from the original talkback template code - the meta-template umbox came later. I've removed the extra bolding. — <span style="color: #194D00; font-family: Palatino, Times, serif">Mr. Stradivarius  (have a chat) 09:46, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

bug
Bug when entering tildes:

and

— kwami (talk) 05:59, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
 * You're not supposed to sign inside the, because the two positional parameters are used to create a link (there is one other parameter ts, see below). The two positional parameters are (1) either the name of a talk page, or the name of the user whose talk page you are directing them to and (2) the title of a section on that talk page. Thus, creates a link to User talk:Kwamikagami, and  creates a link to Template talk:Talkback, as demonstrated on your talk page.
 * The ts parameter is used for a timestamp, which has five tildes, i.e. ts -- Red rose64 (talk) 10:34, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Sure, but just as you can use five tildes for a timestamp, you should be able to use three tildes for your name. — kwami (talk) 20:47, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
 * This template constructs just one link from the supplied parameters. Three tildes creates a string which by default includes two links - one to the user page and one to the talk page. It is difficult to extract the single link required from the default signature; but some users have custom signatures which have all kinds of extra links and fancy styling. How would the template know which link to use, and how would it extract it sensibly? -- Red rose64 (talk) 21:58, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I would think you'd be able to extract the talk-page link, but template syntax is pretty limited, so maybe not. It's just a surprise when you're used to signing that way. — kwami (talk) 05:28, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Untitled
--&#123;&#123;SUBST:WP:D&#125;&#125; (talk) 15:13, 12 January 2013 (UTC) please see new project governance for wikipedia
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. -- Red rose64 (talk) 16:17, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Two problems
1. For some reason, when I originally clicked on the link to this talk page, it could not be found. The URL had "/doc" in it. I had to edit the URL and remove the /doc.

2. In the usage section, the following instruction appears: "In the "Subject/headline" box, type "Re: User talk:username", where..." However, people don't really do this; they usually just say "Talkback". Can we simplify this instruction accordingly?

3dimen (talk) 06:06, 21 January 2013 (UTC)