Template talk:Multiple issues

Active discussions

Please helpEdit

How do I add WP:COI in {{template:Multiple issues}} Infinitepeace (talk) 01:48, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[]

Here's an example usage: {{multiple issues|{{COI}}{{copy edit}}{{unreferenced}}}}
Remember to start a talk page discussion to explain the COI, as instructed at {{COI}}. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:44, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[]
@Jonesey95: Also asked at Wikipedia:Teahouse. The requesting user has been blocked. GoingBatty (talk) 01:06, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[]

Expand by language templatesEdit

Following User talk:Kanashimi#Expand by language templates in .7B.7BMultiple issues.7D.7D, I would like to discuss here whether or not Category:Expand by language Wikipedia templates should be grouped into {{Multiple issues}}. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 22:02, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[]

Getting rid of show/hide option, to fix autocollapse of navboxesEdit

It appears that whenever this template is loaded onto a page that also has navboxes, it will cause the navboxes to collapse. Example. A simple way to solve this might be to remove the show/hide option from this template. This template appears to default to show. And also the contents of the template aren't very dense, so in my opinion no need to give the option to collapse. Thoughts? –Novem Linguae (talk) 02:59, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[]

For those coming in cold, see Template talk:Navbox#Autocollapse. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:58, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[]

Problems when merging {{context}} tagEdit


I'm finding that this doesn't work properly with {{context|details=}}. The standalone version displays the details as it should, but they disappear in the merged version. This is in contrast to tags like {{expert needed|reason=}} which do still display the information. An example can be seen in this revision and this one of Fluctuation spectrum (before and after merging the Context tag respectively). I've also left a comment on the {{context}} talk page. Musiconeologist (talk) 17:13, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[]

@Musiconeologist: Hi there! The templates {{context}} and {{expert needed}} (and many other maintenance templates) use {{ambox}}. When the maintenance templates are used on their own, they display both the |issue= and |fix= parameters from {{ambox}}. However, when the maintenance templates are wrapped by {{multiple issues}}, it only displays the |issue= parameter from {{ambox}}. The {{expert needed}} template contains |reason= within {{ambox}}'s |issue= parameter, so the reason is shown in {{multiple issues}}. However, the {{context}} template contains |details= within {{ambox}}'s |fix= parameter, so the details are not shown in {{multiple issues}}. Hope this helps! GoingBatty (talk) 17:59, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[]
So the way to correct this behaviour would be to use the |issue= parameter for |details= in {{context}}? ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk)
18:17, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[]
@1234qwer1234qwer4: Yes, the way to correct the behavior (presuming there's consensus to do so) is for |details= to be in the |issue= parameter in {{context}}. GoingBatty (talk) 18:28, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[]
@GoingBatty: Am I right in thinking this would simply entail moving {{#if:{{{details|}}}|, especially: {{{details}}}}} from its current location in |fix=to the point in |issue= where the details should appear? (With any necessary adjustment to the text.) Musiconeologist (talk) 19:54, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[]
@Musiconeologist: You got it! Someone may want to first try it out in Template:Context/sandbox and set up some Template:Context/testcases. GoingBatty (talk) 20:00, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[]

Help improve / help to improveEdit

An infinitesimal nitpick, since I can't edit this template myself. It's one I might draw attention to if I was editing something for an author. I think the change of wording in today's edit from Please help improve it to Please help to improve it is bordering on incorrect. It seems to me there's a subtle difference in usage. Examples:

A big trolley will help you to carry the bags.
I will help you carry the bags.
Good proofreading will help to improve the article.
I will help improve the article.

For me, help improve is more appropriate fr a helpful person, and help to improve is more appropriate for a helpful situation or inanimate object. At the very least help to improve is slightly more formal in tone, which I dislike in this context.

It's a tiny and subtle difference, but I think the original was better. —Musiconeologist (talk) 22:26, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[]

@Tony1 Pinging who made the edit. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk)
22:28, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[]
I agree with the OP and with the original language. Please revert. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:07, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[]
"Bordering on incorrect"? Why? Tony (talk) 00:12, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[]
I expressed that more strongly than I meant. I'm not suggesting either version breaks any grammatical rule. For me it's no more than a slight awkwardness: a sense that there are two slightly different meanings (being a means versus being an agent) and that the words lean towards the wrong one. But obviously it depends very much on whether other readers perceive it that way too. It's the sort of thing that varies between countries and between age groups. —Musiconeologist (talk) 02:09, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[]
Musiconeologist – you wrote: "For me, help improve is more appropriate fr a helpful person, and help to improve is more appropriate for a helpful situation or inanimate object. At the very least help to improve is slightly more formal in tone, which I dislike in this context." First, I'm not on board with the distinction you proposed on the basis of person vs non-person. I partly agree with your point about formality; but I'd put it differently: "help improve" is less appropriate in a formal register, especially in written mode—and this is surely such a register. "Help improve" might be just fine in oral mode, depending on the context; but the "to" makes things a little clearer (and non-native speakers are likely to read the template too); and I'd say that "help to improve" is fine throughout the formal–informal spectrum. What first prompted me to add the word is that "help improve" is a bit gummy with its two neighbouring clusters of consonants, both containing "p". I find it easier to say and to listen to when they're separated by "to", which adds a nicer rhythm. It's really no big deal, and I do think it's a slight improvement in a very widely used text. Tony (talk) 12:24, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[]
I think that this is an ENGVAR situation - "help to improve" is correct British English; "help improve" seems American to me. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:22, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[]
Redrose, I don't believe this is the case. Do you have any evidence? Tony (talk) 03:23, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[]
Return to "Multiple issues" page.