Template talk:Vip

Untitled
Usage:

Expansion:

A page link that depends on a parameter is assumed by the system to be a link to a nonexisting page and therefore rendered as a link to the edit page. To avoid this, external link style is used.

What the heck happened to this thing? It's a mess! And it isn't working on the WP:VIP page any more. RickK 19:07, Aug 14, 2004 (UTC)


 * Hmm, it seems to be working just sometimes for whatever weird reason. Seems to be a bug. --Conti|&#9993; 19:29, Aug 14, 2004 (UTC)


 * There are at least two problems:
 * A particular templates will not get expanded more than 5 times on the same page. This is bad for the WP:VIP page, where the template could be used hundreds of times.
 * I reported this as a bug at http://bugzilla.wikipedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=55
 * The sometimes expands to the value of the user parameter passed to the template, and sometimes expands to "{" followed by the expansion of  }, followed by "}".  This makes the template page itself look funny, even though the expansion in normal use should look better.
 * &mdash;AlanBarrett 10:54, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Please don't use this template
Have you checked to see what kind of performance hit evaluating this template a thousand times has? Note that you can't use this template as a subst:, which is the only way it might truly be useful... instead it must be regenerated each time by evaluating this mess of brackets, and the relevant wikitext isn't available from VIP for cutting and pasting to another page, such as an RfC.

Kind of like Gnu copyright; once you start using Template:ViP, it's hard to stop. +sj + 23:55, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * I'll change the instruction on WP:VIP to subst:. There should be no problem with it then, I think. --Conti|&#9993; 00:19, Aug 19, 2004 (UTC)

merge with Template:User?
This is very similar to another template. "User" seems to be a more general name for this template function. Any objections to changing the WP:VIP instructions, redirecting this template, and eventually orphaning it? -- Netoholic @
 * Template:User is definitely nicer, named parameters aren't necessary here. I'm all for changing WP:VIP to using T:User, but this one cannot be redirected, as the calling syntax for templates with named parameters doesn't work on templates with positional parameters. Changing all the pages on which it's used isn't viable I think, and even if it were you'd be changing people's signatures too, so I'm not sure it'd be a good idea. --fvw *  01:23, 2005 Feb 2 (UTC)
 * That is really frustrating. I told Sam Spade a while ago that he shouldn't use this template as a signature. Bah, it's his own fault. -- Netoholic @ 01:57, 2005 Feb 2 (UTC)
 * I originally created this template for Vandalism In Progress, hence the name (I was never good in such things). Template:User seems to do the job as well, and as the creator of this template I just want to say that I don't oppose the merge, however it will be done. :-) --Conti|&#9993; 01:34, Feb 2, 2005 (UTC)

WTF?
I don't mind if you want to merge this page w that page, or ruin my signature, or whatever you think your doing, but explaining things to me in a sensible manner might have been a good idea. This is no way to communicate. A link here might have been nice, or an explanation of what the major malfunction is. I'd like to hear from someone other than Netoholic, if you please. 21:46, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * Template:vip was not created to be used for your signature. Your use of it is a growing drain on the server resources. Normally, a signature is just text on a page, by using a template, the system has to keep track not only in case the template changes, but also all the pages that link to it.  What a mess.  I did ask kindly a while back. -- Netoholic @ 21:54, 2005 Feb 7 (UTC)

If anyone other than Netoholic would like to communicate, I'd be greatful. I frankly don't know what the heck he's talking about. 22:14, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * OK, I think I know what Netoholic was talking about now. How is this? (Sam Spade | talk | contributions) 11:53, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)