Template talk:Template

is this a template for templates? &mdash;♥ Jedi ♥ Rogue ♥ 00:55, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * yeah -User:PanSola (talk to the [[Image:follower of Lyssa.png]]) 01:11, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * We should make a template to display the template template. [[Image:Felix_Omni_Signature.png]] 01:23, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I beat you to it. The template template can already use itself to display itself. See documentation. -User:PanSola (talk to the [[Image:follower of Lyssa.png]]) 02:11, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Bugs
--mendel 13:25, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) It breaks on.
 * 2) It redlinks on.
 * 3) It swallows named parameters in ..


 * On example 1, that's because it only works for templates in the Template: namespace. Probably an overlooked limitation, but I haven't seen a lot of complaints about it.
 * On example 2, it treats "subst:" as part of the template name, which is why it redlinks. I'd call that a feature.
 * On example 3, I'd say that's also an overlooked limitation, but unlike example 1 I'd say this one should definitely be fixed. The odd thing is that it passes the #if: test, it just doesn't display. Even using template:= doesn't get around it:  &mdash;Dr Ishmael [[Image:Diablo_the_chicken.gif]] 17:01, 10 June 2008 (UTC)


 * It is because it prepends Template: even if the parameter starts with a colon.
 * It's not a feature because in docs you need to explain subst: as well, and this template should be able to do it. It just doesn't, so it's an absent feature.
 * I don't see how it can pass the #if test. But I've been thinking that expansion of parameters has been poorly documented - the docs seem to state that a = must be present in cleartext (and I seem to remember having confirmed that experimentally), but I've come across cases where that isn't the case (which is why breaks when you're using it as unnamed parameter). The only way you can get it to work is by using the HTML code for =. Or finding a parser function that lets you enumerate named parameters.

--mendel 18:23, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

What's wrong with using nowiki tags all the sudden? --- -- (s)talkpage  18:28, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Take too long to type and don't link to the template. Don't mess with our toys. ;) --mendel 19:08, 10 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Linking isn't that hard... O-o' --- [[Image:VipermagiSig.JPG|Ohaider!]]-- (s)talkpage  19:10, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I'd like to see you do it within nowiki tags. ;-P --mendel 19:19, 10 June 2008 (UTC)


 * --- [[Image:VipermagiSig.JPG|Ohaider!]]-- (s)talkpage  19:21, 10 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Way less readable and a lot more work than . BTW, now that I have your attention, could you comment on User:M.mendel/Wikibase if only to say why you didn't read it? Unclear? Too long? Irrelevant? --mendel 19:26, 10 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Imho, that's not much trouble. Troubleshooting a template is, for me. I'm no wikicode mage. About the Wikibase shizl; I indeed didn't read it. Why? You lost my attention after I read 3 sentences. In words and thoughts: *reads* "Ok what was that about? Meh, I'll just listen to Ayeron". --- [[Image:VipermagiSig.JPG|Ohaider!]]-- (s)talkpage  19:34, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Missing Feature #4: when discussing templates to be (or templates to be moved), they may be nonexisting, so a redlink protection as in would be nice. --mendel 10:22, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Redundant
Why do we have this template, it seems realy redundant... we have Template:tl so why do we need this one? -- Shadowphoenix  19:07, 17 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I'd say it's because "tl" is a very non-intuitive name for it. This one is also much more heavily used, tl only had 6 links (which mendel edited earlier today).  &mdash;Dr Ishmael [[Image:Diablo_the_chicken.gif]] 21:56, 17 July 2008 (UTC)


 * This template has more features: it can do more parameters, and automagically prevents redlinks from showing up on "wanted templates". I forgot how to do subst: though. --◄mendel► 22:32, 17 July 2008 (UTC)