Template talk:Template link general/Archive 1

Need version without nowiki
Requested moves/Technical requests/Instructions (Special:PermanentLink/938164624) is currently broken because someone changed tlsp to use this template and this template does a nowiki wrap to disable the formatting.

In practice, it is quite common to want to include some manual formatting in template parameters, such as italics for things that the user should fill in. Tlg should get a wiki-enabled version. To do so, replace the chunk with  with:

, you want to use, which gives ; you didn't have the second parameter. Primefac (talk) 15:26, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Requested move 21 November 2020

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: IAR closed, moved. If someone doesn't like it, they are more than welcome to open an RM for going the opposite direction. Primefac (talk) 12:00, 21 November 2020 (UTC) Primefac (talk) 12:00, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

– Match name with template. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:53, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Module:Tlg → Module:Template link general
 * Support, obviously. I was going to just move it but I guess this would make it official? Primefac (talk) 02:18, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
 * There is a request at Requests for page protection to fully protect Module:Tlg. It seems to make sense for the move to happen first, then fully protect. Per IAR or whatever, I suggest you do that now, putting me down for a support if it helps. At any rate, leaving it half done doesn't seem desirable. Johnuniq (talk) 04:08, 21 November 2020 (UTC)


 * The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Number of parameters
, I was looking at the module and noticed that it is capping the number of parameters at 10, similar to the "old" pre-module functionality. Was this an intentional choice, or primarily stylistic to match that old functionality? Primefac (talk) 13:30, 21 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Primefac, it's primarily to match the old thing. Artoria2e5 🌉 20:05, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Cool. Can you (or, who helped with the original implementation) think of a reason why we should keep it capped? My main thought would be because one doesn't necessarily need to show more than ten params. Primefac (talk) 20:07, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
 * If there is a need for it, we can probably increase it by changing the number "12" in the Lua code to something higher. I am definitely not a Lua programmer, though. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:36, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I guess there's never been a concern before, happy to leave as-is. Primefac (talk) 01:16, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
 * If we are using a module now, I see no valid reason for this restriction. It could easily be unrestricted now. I've actually run into issues where I did not have enough parameters (making me use encoded pipe symbols ), see Template:Wd/doc/examples. Therefore, I'd say to remove the cap.  Thayts   •••  22:16, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅. Primefac (talk) 15:15, 28 December 2020 (UTC)