Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2016 June 22



Template:No redirect

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was relisted here. (non-admin closure) ~ RobTalk 22:05, 1 July 2016 (UTC) Propose merging Template:No redirect with Template:No redirect conditional.
 * No redirect
 * No redirect conditional

IMO, there shouldn't be any case where we want a link with an unnecessarily complex target (with "&redirect=no" being appended), if a regular one would suffice. This is also about not giving viewers an incorrect hint about the target being a redirect. I therefore propose merging the code of into, falling back to its original behavior only if subst'd. Note that I couldn't properly tag the former, as it's fully protected. PanchoS (talk) 09:44, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Details3 & For-on-see

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was delete, very few remaining transclusions, and no objections. Also, appears to be a continuation of prior clean up work. Plastikspork ―Œ (talk) 03:28, 22 June 2016 (UTC) I've just made an improvement to details so that it supports multiple pages as part of its list, that is:
 * Details3
 * For-on-see

→  →

and it's now possible to do  →

and similar.

Previous cases have used details3 to implement lists with multiple pages:

→

Using details with a list of multiple pages is more elegant, and applies a set of standard improvements through its Lua implementation. We should migrate uses of details3 to use details instead, delete details3, and therefore simplify the hatnote system. For-on-see is along for the ride because it is a single-use meta-template for details3; it had 4 standalone uses which I've already replaced with details.

TfD regulars may recognize this hatnote system cleanup as a bit of a project of mine; previous similar TfDs have included About3 & About4 and Redirect6. {&#123; Nihiltres &#8202;&#124;talk&#8202;&#124;edits}&#125; 20:13, 14 June 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ RobTalk 02:21, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).