Template talk:Wikify/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Edit request

{{Edit protected}} Add

<noinclude>{{Tfm|Wikify|Dead end}}</noinclude>

Already added at {{Dead end}}, I believe TfD is starting or started. WikiCopter (radio • sorties • images • simplicity • lost • defense • attack) 19:38, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Done Dabomb87 (talk) 21:33, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

{{Edit protected}} Please revert the above edit. TfD concluded. --Bsherr (talk) 00:55, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Done. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 01:35, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Edit request

<!--{{Wikify}} begin-->{{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACE}}|{{<includeonly>subst:</includeonly>NAMESPACE}}|<includeonly>[[Category:Pages with incorrectly substituted templates|{{PAGENAME}}]]</includeonly>|}}{{Ambox
| type  = style
| image = [[File:Ambox wikify.svg|50x40px|link=|alt=]]
| text  = This {{{1|article}}} '''may need to be [[Wikipedia:Glossary#Wikify|wikified]] to meet Wikipedia's [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style|quality standards]]'''. Please [{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} help] by adding [[Wikipedia:Linking|''relevant'' internal links]], or by improving the {{{1|article}}}'s [[Wikipedia:Layout|layout]]. {{#if:{{{date|}}}|<small>''({{{date}}})''</small>}}
}}{{DMCA|Articles that need to be wikified|from|{{{date|}}}|All articles that need to be wikified}}<!--{{Wikify}} end-->

to

<!--{{Wikify}} begin-->{{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACE}}|User|[[:Category:Pages with incorrectly substituted templates|{{PAGENAME}}]]|}}{{Ambox
| type  = style
| image = [[File:Ambox wikify.svg|50x40px|link=|alt=]]
| text  = This article '''may need to be [[Wikipedia:Glossary#Wikify|wikified]] to meet Wikipedia's [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style|quality standards]]'''.
{{hidden|1=Please [{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} help] by adding [[Wikipedia:Linking|''relevant'' internal links]], or by improving the article's [[Wikipedia:Layout|layout]]. For more information, click [show] to the right.|2=<div>{{#ifeq: {{{deadend|}}}{{{links|}}} | yes | :# '''Add wikilinks.''' Make links to other articles by putting "'[['" and "']]'" on either side of relevant words (see [[WP:LINK]] for more information). Please do not link terms that most readers are familiar with, including common occupations, well-known geographical terms, and everyday items.
 |}}{{#ifeq: {{{lead|}}} | yes | :# '''Format the lead.''' Create or improve the [[WP:LEAD|lead paragraph]].
 |}}{{#ifeq: {{{headers|}}} | yes | :# '''Arrange section headers.''' Arrange section headers as described at [[Wikipedia:Guide to layout]].
 |}}{{#ifeq: {{{HTML|}}}{{{html|}}}{{{markup|}}} | yes | :# '''Replace html tags with wiki markup, where appropriate.''' The use of many html tags is discouraged where wiki markup equivalents are available: for example, replace <code><b>bold text</b></code> with <code>'''bold text'''</code>. However, this does not apply for all html tags: e.g., <code>H<sub>2</sub>O</code>. See [[Help:Wikitext examples]] for a useful list of common wikitext and non-deprecated html tags.
 |}}{{#ifeq: {{{infobox|}}} | yes | :# '''Add an infobox if applicable.''' Add an [[Wikipedia:Infobox_templates|infobox]] if it is appropriate for the article. |}}
:#'''Remove the {{t|wikify}} tag from the top of the article.'''</div>|fw1=normal|ta1=left|headerstyle=padding-right:3em;}}{{#if:|<small>''({{{date}}})''}}
}}{{DMCA|Articles that need to be wikified|from|{{{date|}}}|All articles that need to be wikified}}<!--{{Wikify}} end-->

Some discussion here, sandbox here and here. WikiCopter (♠ • ♣ • ♥ • ♦ • simple • commons • lost • cvu • onau) 23:52, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

P.S. The documentation will have to be updated. WikiCopter (♠ • ♣ • ♥ • ♦ • simple • commons • lost • cvu • onau) 00:30, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Which version of the testcases is represented above? --Bsherr (talk) 02:01, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Ditto that question. User:AirplanePro/Sandbox/Wikify does not display well on my browser. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:37, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

The top section on the current version of the testcases. My sandbox (and other subpages) are more designed for style than browser compatibility, sorry. WikiCopter (♠ • ♣ • ♥ • ♦ • simple • commons • lost • cvu • onau) 21:28, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Better? WikiCopter (♠ • ♣ • ♥ • ♦ • simple • commons • lost • cvu • onau) 21:31, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

So, just to confirm, you're proposing replacing the template with User:AirplanePro/Sandbox/Wikify, yes? --Bsherr (talk) 20:20, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Yes, minus my userbanner. WikiCopter (♠ • ♣ • ♥ • ♦ • simple • commons • lost • cvu • onau) 06:15, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Not done for now: I'm going to decline this for now. For some reason the text is flowing outside of the box on my browser (Firefox). I can supply a screenshot if needed, but this will need to be fixed before deploying. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:58, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

I don't have firefox (explorers on a safari are much better than a fox on fire) but if you could get me a screenshot or help yourself, that would be highly appreciated _{One reason to get IE!!} WikiCopter (♠ • ♣ • ♥ • ♦ • simple • commons • lost • cvu • onau) 06:10, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Any progress on resuming this one? -- Magioladitis (talk) 01:43, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Nobody's responding, turned the {{editprotected}} template back on. WikiCopter 05:33, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

P.S. On the current template it says "click [show]," but there isn't a show button. The code above would remedy that. WikiCopter 05:38, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

There's a show button - its on the right side of the template. We already totally remade the template, so I don't think this edit request is needed. Nolelover ^{It's almost football season!} 13:18, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Edit request on new template

Hi, please review the following proposed changes.

1. Change "html" to "HTML" in "See Help:HTML in wikitext for a useful list of common wikitext and non-deprecated html tags".
2. The "or check Wiki markup" part of the "for more details" sentence seems unnecessary.
3. Unbold "if it is appropriate for the article" under #4 about infoboxes.

Thanks. Guoguo12--Talk--  19:14, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

They seem uncontroversial and no one has voiced any objection.  Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:40, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Guoguo12--Talk--  01:30, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Another edit request

Hi, I'd like the date marker moved, but I think it would be best if I explain this one with examples. This is the way it is right now: current. This is how I think it should look: proposed. Notice where the "(May 2011)" is in the proposed version. Anyway, that's the proposal. I sure hope that made sense. Guoguo12--Talk--  01:30, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

I've made a few changes to Template:Wikify/sandbox. Can you check if these are okay? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:11, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes, moving that line of code ({{#if:{{{date|}}}|<small>''({{{date}}})''</small>}}) to right after "..improving the article's layout" will do it. Like Guoguo said, it will look like this, and that will shorten the template by a full line. Good idea to put the extended instructions in another template, BTW. Nolelover ^{It's almost football season!} 14:52, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Someone should also fix the new "show" link. It doesn't work right now. De728631 (talk) 18:22, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Could you give an example? The current {{wikify}} template appears to be working. Nolelover ^{It's almost football season!} 18:27, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

The template reads "Click [show] for more details but there's no link behind [show]; it's not highlighted in blue script and it can't even be clicked. See the template page and also Greenwood, Georgia. De728631 (talk) 18:53, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

And now I've discovered the tiny link on the outer right edge. Honestly I find that very confusing. Can't you just place the link inside the main text? De728631 (talk) 18:55, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Admin, could you please make the sentence mentioned read, "Click [show] on right for more...". That should solve De728631's problem. Guoguo12--Talk--  19:07, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Ahh, I see. Sorry about the confusion De728631, and Guoguo's addition should fix that. Nolelover ^{It's almost football season!} 19:18, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Good idea, Guoguo, that should work. And while the editors are at it, please remove the whitespace in |layout]]. {{hidden|1=Click because it makes the last line "Click..." appear a little bit indented. De728631 (talk) 19:56, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

...but remember that the line of code {{#if:{{{date|}}}|<small>''({{{date}}})''</small>}} needs to go right in between there. Hehe, I pity the admin who has to sort through this... Nolelover ^{It's almost football season!} 20:13, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

(←) I've moved the tutorial thing to separate subtemplate so you guys can edit it to your heart's content. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:04, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks MSGJ! Nolelover ^{It's almost football season!} 21:42, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Crazymonkey1123, 1 June 2011

It shows the documentation twice. I can't find anything wrong with the code though. That's weird. Crazymonkey1123 (Jacob) ^{T or M}/_{Sign mine} 05:10, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

I purged and made dummy edits to both the documentation and the template and nada. Bizarre.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:45, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

It is bizarre. In case it could be part of the problem, part of the template is transcluded from Template:Wikify/tutorial. Guoguo12--Talk--  23:22, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

It's this edit where the duplication arises. Something's transcluding that calls {{documentation}} a second time.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:09, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Ok, that's weird. I copy-pasted the code to a subpage, and there's only one set of documentation there. I was gonna remove it bit-by-bit to see if I could figure out what the problem was... [stwalkerster|talk] 01:16, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

I've got it. There's a glitch in the multiverse. We're transcluding another English Wikipedia's {{wikify}} documentation. We probably just need to collapse some abberant wave functions.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:30, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

I've put {{adminhelp}} up on my user talk page (odd problem with Template:Wikify here) to try to draw more administrators into fixing this. I will also shortly open an WP:AN/I thread if needed. Crazymonkey1123 (Jacob) ^{T or M}/_{Sign mine} 01:34, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

I have took the adminhelp of my talk page because it appears the problem has been found. Let me know if you want me to put it back up. Crazymonkey1123 (Jacob) ^{T or M}/_{Sign mine} 01:38, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Uh, did you take it down in response to my last post? You realize that's a joke, right?--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:32, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Crazymonkey1123 says in a very sarcastic slow voice: haha very funny huh? Crazymonkey1123 (Jacob) ^{T or M}/_{Sign mine} 02:46, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Hilarious, in fact. Allow me to try something, please. Will an admin please replace "{{DMCA|Articles that need to be wikified|from|{{{date|}}}|All articles that need to be wikified}}" with "<includeonly>{{DMCA|Articles that need to be wikified|from|{{{date|}}}|All articles that need to be wikified}}</includeonly>"? I don't think it will work but it's worth a shot, since it was one of the things changed in the aforementioned edit ([1]) found to be the cause of the double transclusion. It won't affect the template's transclusions (20,000+), as far as I know. Guoguo12--Talk--  02:47, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

 Not done. {{ambox}} auto-includes the {{documentation}} when on a template page, causing the double transclusion.  Fixed by Prodego (talk · contribs). T. Canens (talk) 06:51, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Link to cheatsheet

I noticed the template currently links to Help:Wiki markup. That seems to be a bit overwhelming for the kind of editors who produce articles needing the code to be converted into wiki format. If they wanted to improve it, I believe the Cheatsheet would be much more adequate and encouraging. More experienced editors would easily find the link to Help:Wiki markup from the Cheatsheet's "see also" section. What do you think? --Waldir ^talk 18:40, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Since there was no opposition, I just implemented this. --Waldir ^talk 08:54, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Parameter addition

One of the problems that has been cited with the Wikify template is that most editors believe the only problem is a lack of Wikilinks. To avoid this problem I have created a new version of the Wikify tag in my sandbox. The new version would add one more parameter to the tag which would allow taggers to give a reason. Currently my version of the Wikify tag looks like this

If you add a reason {{User:Ryan Vesey/Template sandbox|reason=Insufficient wikilinks and the article is lacking an infobox}} you get User:Ryan Vesey/Template sandbox|reason=Insufficient wikilinks and the article is lacking an infobox Is there any opposition to this or should I make a formal edit request now? Ryan Vesey Review me! 15:09, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Why force the use of the new parameter immediately? Just make it optional first, and see how people like it. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 21:05, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Can you clarify? All parameters are optional. Ryan Vesey Review me! 21:08, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

It's optional, but you decided to visibly poke the tagger, as well as everyone else, when the parameter is not specified. That can be useful, but also annoying. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 21:35, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I'll modify that. Ryan Vesey Review me! 21:42, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Here is my new version Ryan Vesey Review me! 21:45, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

I agree with the change. It has always bothered me as well that the template is both vague and over-reaching. Also, making the parameter entirely optional (i.e. invisible if not used) would not provide us with any insight on whether people like it or not, since most simply wouldn't even notice it in the first place. This version seems fine to me. --Waldir ^talk 08:54, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

To make the change, all you need to do is copy the content from User:Ryan Vesey/Template sandbox onto this page and change the documentation page for this template. Ryan Vesey Review me! 12:54, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Very nice. NLinpublic (talk) 15:11, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

How about:

? It would be better because you can see the reason easier. Anyway, I support. ~~Ebe123~~ (+) ^talk
_Contribs 19:48, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Hopefully finalized addition after discussion

I created this version from a combination of what Ebe123 proposed and the template I previously created. Ryan Vesey Review me! 19:54, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Please modify {{Wikify}} with the contents of User:Ryan Vesey/Template sandbox. The documentation page will need to be updated to say that a reason parameter can be added by inserting |reason=. Ryan Vesey Review me! 19:58, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

In addition, please make sure it is the template as it appeared in this version unless consensus has been found to change it. Ryan Vesey Review me! 23:07, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Hang on. So all 14,147 transclusions of this template will now show a message about not having a "reason" parameter? Our readers don't need to see internal stuff like this. I strongly suggest that nothing should be displayed if the reason parameter is not specified. — This, that, and the other (talk) 11:01, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Internal stuff....like a two inch notice at the top that tells them that the article "may need to be wikified to meet Wikipedia's quality standards" (whatever that means)? NLinpublic (talk) 15:53, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, if the readers haven't noticed the entire Wikify template by now, the line saying a reason has not been provided won't upset readers at all. If the message is not there, nobody will ever begin to add a reason (presumably) and the parameter will be fairly worthless. In addition, if the message isn't there, the template reads "The reason provided is: " This just looks like an unfinished template. Ryan Vesey Review me! 16:01, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Maybe a category for wikify templates with no reason would work. Then people that care can go add a reason or message the person who tagged the article. Maybe a bot could even be used to remove old wikify tags with no reasons after notifying the tagger. — Bility (talk) 21:46, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

I don't think it would be useful to remove tags which don't have reasons. That would just serve to leave a lot of articles which never get Wikified. Ryan Vesey Review me! 21:50, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

My thoughts exactly. If the old {{wikify}} tags are just arbitrarily taken off, we'll just be resetting the backlog to zero with no real benefit. NLinpublic (talk) 22:20, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

What an elimination drive! :) Ryan Vesey Review me! 22:42, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

What about the other two ideas associated with a category—finding templates with no reasons and notifying the taggers? — Bility (talk) 23:46, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

That would be a good idea; however, we would need to be careful. When the taggers tagged the pages there was no option to add a reason. I think it might be easier to hold some sort of mini-drive for people to add a reason from what they think is wrong. Ryan Vesey Review me! 00:27, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

More discussion on the parameter

Worm That Turned brought an issue with the parameter to my attention. Similar to This that and the other stated about the readers seeing that there is no reason. If the parameter says no reason has been provided the template goes from "There is a problem with the article, but the readers don't know what that problem is" to "There is a problem with the article, but the people at Wikipedia don't know what the problem is" (Not a direct quote). After discussing the issue, we came up with the idea to hide the information. Normal readers will not see that a specific problem has not been stated unless they click show (in which case they are interested and it doesn't matter). I will post a new version of the template shortly. Ryan Vesey Review me! 19:02, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

So I have modified the template. With a parameter stated:

User:Ryan Vesey/Template sandbox|reason=this page only needs more wikilinks Without a parameter stated:User:Ryan Vesey/Template sandbox
Please note that any changes to the template must be accompanied by a change to {{Wikify/tutorial}}. Now all changes are internal. Any comments? Ryan Vesey Review me! 19:20, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Looks good. Not as good IMO, but still good. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 19:26, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

I sort of like it when it directly states it; however, I think it is a fair compromise to address some of the concerns raised. It should just become common procedure while we are wikifying to click show to find out if a reason was stated. Ryan Vesey Review me! 19:28, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes, indeed. There's no change to the reader, but there remains the possibility that this could really change the way that articles are tagged for wikification. I like it more and more. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 20:13, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

I like this version the best. I wonder though if people will realize that there is a parameter section. Wouldn't most people just add {{wikify}}? Or would the knowledge just percolate through the wiki as the new template is implemented? --Kerowyn ^{Leave a note} 21:52, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

As a matter of fact, we're trying to coordinate with Twinkle to do this. Roughly, this is what would happen: whenever someone selects the "wikify" option from the tagging menu, a dialogue box would pop up asking for a) your reason b) checkboxes (if we do multiple parameters). {{cleanup}} does roughly the same thing. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 22:03, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Multiple params

I've added multiple params to the sandbox version: html, wikilinks, lead, headers & infobox so that if any of them are specified, the bulletted list only shows those that are tagged as needed otherwise it will still show them all:

• {{Wikify/sandbox|reason=Needs a lot of work}}

{{Wikify/sandbox|reason=Needs a lot of work}}

• {{Wikify/sandbox|reason=Lead and infobox need work|lead=yes|infobox=yes}}

{{Wikify/sandbox|reason=Lead and infobox need work|lead=yes|infobox=yes}}

• {{Wikify/sandbox|reason=Add wikilinks|wikilinks=yes}}

{{Wikify/sandbox|reason=Add wikilinks|wikilinks=yes}} Any thoughts? -- WOSlinker (talk) 12:24, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Personally, I think it might be to hard to implement. Without the help of Twinkle or AWB, we're pushing it just getting the one parameter to work as it is designed to do. I don't think that the multiple parameters would ever really catch on. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 14:04, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Exact changes to make

I will be posting below the exact coding that should be changed. I may not be able to continue taking part in this discussion so if consensus is reached please replace {{tl|Wikify/tutorial}} with {{Wikify/tutorial|{{{reason|}}}}}. A change will also be required of {{Wikify/tutorial}}. After |2= and before <small> please add {{<includeonly>safesubst:</includeonly>#if:{{{1|}}}|{{{1}}}|No reason has been cited for the Wikify tag on this article}} If there is any confusion, you can consult User:Ryan Vesey/Template sandbox and User:Ryan Vesey/Template sandbox/tutorial or shoot me an email. Ryan Vesey Review me! 03:38, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

I have added <code> tags in Ryan's cmts for visibility. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 14:13, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Alright, so nine users have commented in this discussion: five have been directly supportive, one indirectly supportive (by making his own slightly modified version) and two offered constructive criticism that was eventually taken on board. Without going into percentages, I'd like to think that we have attained some measure of consensus on this issue, so I'm submitting an edit request. To the admin - please make the changes outlined by Ryan above. This will result in the template a couple sections up in which a parameter is added to the hidden part of the template allowing taggers to give a more detailed reason why the article in question should be wikified. If this ER happens, I'll push for WP:TWINKLE (and maybe AWB) to add a dialogue box whenever someone selects {{wikify}} from their menu. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 14:26, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

I have deployed the changes with a couple of minor alterations:

• Kept the parameter named; I think the code is slightly clearer this way.
• I couldn't think of any reason for the safesubst, as this template is never substituted. So I left this off. If this was a mistake, please let me know!

— Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:40, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks MSGJ. I'd love to be able to make an intelligent sounding reply to your comments, but my eyes glazed over at "alterations". I'm afraid we'll hafta wait for Ryan there. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 16:06, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

You know what, there's one thing I did screw up in this edit to Ryan's exact coding post when I added the code tags. I removed the bold from around the message. MSGJ, can you add three apostrophes as shown here, before and after the "{{" and "}}" tags? The end result is that the "No reason has been cited for the Wikify tag on this article" will be bold and much easier to see. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 16:14, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Fixed. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:20, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 16:38, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

The changes were correct, I copied some of the code from {{Nowikify}} and there were slightly different scenarios. Ryan Vesey Review me! 20:43, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

With Javascript disabled

When reading Wikipedia with Javascript disabled, the Wikify template now looks completely horrible. Perhaps nobody else thinks that's important, but I try to keep JS disabled whenever possible. If its appearance can be made conditional on whether JS is enabled or not, perhaps someone would think about this.

Please don't reply to this IP address's talk page. Discuss this here if you like, and either change the template or don't. --70.48.228.46 (talk) 19:52, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Edit request on 12 April 2012

This template needs to be made smaller in its unexpanded form. Either the second sentence should be deleted or the third sentence should be moved into the preceding paragraph.

 Liam987  16:28, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

 Not done Please start a discussion and get consensus for this change before requesting the edit. ‑Scottywong| babble _ 16:10, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 13 May 2012

Create a wikilink in the word reason to this template, so that users wanting to add a reason can read the reference on how the reason= parameter is used. Diego (talk) 19:17, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Diego (talk) 19:17, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

If I am understanding your request correctly, the change will actually occur to {{Wikify/tutorial}}. The part that reads

No reason has been cited for the Wikify tag on this article.

should become

No [[Template:Wikify|reason]] has been cited for the Wikify tag on this article.

so that it appears like

No reason has been cited for the Wikify tag on this article.

Correct? If so, I have no problem with that, it sounds like a good improvement. Ryan Vesey Review me! 20:23, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Actually, I do have one question. How would editors know that clicking the link would lead to the Wikify page which would tell them how to add a reason? Ryan Vesey Review me! 20:25, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, the idea is not bad, the solution is silly. Either we have to tweak that message or we have to create a tutorial. The doc is not bad, but not really helpful. mabdul 20:37, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

I almost think the information on the reason parameter should be listed under a new section heading saying parameters. I'll play around with the template in my sandbox to see if I can't come up with an alternative solution that works. I do think that wikilinking reason would be better than nothing at all. Ryan Vesey Review me! 20:40, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Possible alternatives

I created these in my template sandbox, sorry for all of the wikimarkup, I need to substitute anything I put here and I had to substitute the tutorial into the template.

In this example, a small tutorial is added within the template if no reason is given.

The next example includes the same message but slightly bigger

This example is the same as the first; however, "Your reason here" is replaced with "Lorem ipsum"

This final version is a combination of the second and third. It uses Lorem ipsum and also the slightly larger text.

I will look into other alternatives later if people don't like this due to the extra content, but what do you think? Ryan Vesey Review me! 21:10, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

• Sure the idea of having a category that lists articles that need to be wikified with a reason sounds good, however i propose a slightly modified version of your "tutorial": You can add a reason by changing the tag to {{Wikify|reason=Your reason here}} or You can insert a reason using the |reason= parameter, like this: {{Wikify|reason=Your reason here}} (because we don't want them accidentally removing the |date= parameters when they change the tag). benzband (talk) 09:25, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

I like that, I also have no problem with removing the be bold reference. We should probably get a bit more discussion first but if we can get consensus I think we should create a request to add

<small>You can insert a reason using the {{para|reason}} parameter, like this: <code>{{tlx|1=Wikify|2=reason=Your reason here}}</code></small>

to the end of the default wording when a reason parameter isn't used at {{Wikify/tutorial}}. Ryan Vesey Review me! 14:41, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

In reference to my category idea, I think I need to gain consensus at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Wikify to create the category first. Ryan Vesey Review me! 14:42, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Support for an edit request

To ensure that we have consensus please remark here if you support the following edit request. <small>You can insert a reason using the {{para|reason}} parameter, like this: <code>{{tlx|1=Wikify|2=reason=Your reason here}}</code></small> should be placed at the end of the default wording when no reason is added at {{Wikify/tutorial}} to create a template that looks like this.

• Support Obviously Ryan Vesey Review me! 15:33, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
• I think adding a "reason" parameter is done on so many templates, that I see no reason for garnering support. Just do it. Debresser (talk) 15:49, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Just as a note, we went through a long ordeal of adding the reason parameter already. This is support for the notice within the template that explains how to use the reason parameter. Ryan Vesey Review me! 15:54, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Oh, sorry. In that case I have no opinion. Debresser (talk) 23:27, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

• Support, this version is better than what I proposed (which was simply a link to Template:Wikify). The explanation above is what's needed. Diego (talk) 17:13, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
• Support. benzband (talk) 09:33, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
• Obvious support - I don't know why we didn't think about this earlier...we have the parameter, but there's no instructions on the template itself for using said tool. Given the drop down menu, we have a great spot just right for it. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 12:56, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Edit request

I request that <includeonly>[[Category:Category:Articles that need to be wikified with reasons given]]</includeonly> be added directly after {{{reason}}} on {{Wikify/tutorial}}. This is a purely administrative change which will add articles with reasons to the category. An example of this can be found at User:Ryan Vesey/Template sandbox/tutorial. Ryan Vesey Review me! 15:47, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Done. Danger! ^{High voltage!} 22:11, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Edit request

This edit should be made at {{Wikify/tutorial}}. <small>You can insert a reason using the {{para|reason}} parameter, like this: <code>{{tlx|1=Wikify|2=reason=Your reason here}}</code></small> should be placed after the sentence "No reason has been cited for the Wikify tag on this article." If desired, the entire content of User:Ryan Vesey/Template sandbox/tutorial (revision link) can replace the current content. Three people have directly supported this change, Diego, Benzband (he created the final version of the change), and myself. Mabdul stated that he agreed with the concept of the idea in its infancy. Debresser has no opinion. There are no opposes to this change. Ryan Vesey Review me! 05:31, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit protected}} template. You don't provide a link to the discussion you refer to, so I can't verify that there is consensus for this change.  Sandstein  07:51, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Two sections up :P Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 13:14, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. Done.  Sandstein  17:46, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Wikify vs Dead end

We now have "reason" parameter and other parameters for wikify, why do we really need dead end? Or, we can switch the question and ask: Should wikify deal with wikilinks or leave this job solely to dead end? Not having two templates dealing with the same problem serves simplicity and reduces number of displayed tags on the page. -- Magioladitis (talk) 12:06, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

I think we should get rid of dead end. Wikilinks are the primary aspect of {{Wikify}} and it deals with them just as well as dead end does. I'd be in favor of redirecting dead end to wikify. Ryan Vesey 13:19, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

I am good either way. -- Magioladitis (talk) 13:26, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

If we were to get rid of {{dead end}}, would you suggest that AWB adds {{wikify}} with the reason parameter instead? Is there any other tool that adds {{dead end}}? (Twinkle?) Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 02:10, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

I would say in this case, deadend becomes a parameter of wikify i.e. {{wikify|deadend=yes}}. Twinkle and AWB add wikify. deadend.

The same question could go of course for {{HTML-cleanup}} and perhaps more. I think it's time to clear something: Do we need wikify as a multi-purpose tag or not? If yes then we should make it more Multiple issues like. Otherwise, we should delete it. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:59, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

IMO, {{wikify}} should just refer to wikilinks, and we should use other maintenance templates for other issues. However, my opinion has been in the minority. GoingBatty (talk) 00:05, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

In fact, I support the same too. That's why I created HTML-cleanup. If we add parameters to wikify sooner or later it won't be much different from Multiple Issues. -- Magioladitis (talk) 00:14, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Moreover, the old trick was awful: If we followed the rules exactly, if a page needed more wikilinks we should add both dead end and wikify. -- Magioladitis (talk) 00:16, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

• Comment Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Wikify#No more wikify template. Don't be afraid to point out any templates I missed. Ryan Vesey 00:38, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 10 August 2012

Please add the following after the all parameter

| cat2  = Articles covered by WikiProject Wikify
| all2  = All articles covered by WikiProject Wikify

This is in line with expansion of WikiProject Wikify that requires a larger container category. See discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Wikify#No more Wikify tag.  Ryan Vesey 13:55, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

 Done Magioladitis (talk) 13:57, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Sent to TfD

Please note that I sent this template to TfD Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2012 August 10#Template:Wikify. Ryan Vesey 14:17, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

See that discussion, that this editor seems to have some misplaced ideas and is acting on them. Debresser (talk) 14:42, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

This template is deprecated

TfD closed and the consensus is to replace Wikify with other tags. I started a discussion in Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Wikify#Template:Wikify_is_deprecated. -- Magioladitis (talk) 10:14, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

How will the average editor know that this template is deprecated? Should there be a note on the template itself to that effect? DoctorKubla (talk) 17:12, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

As soon as we arrange some criteria when to add dead end I guess we can redirect there or change the page to a dab page as the closing admin suggested. -- Magioladitis (talk) 18:35, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

I like the suggestion, but was surprised because it came out of left field. We'll have to have some discussion on that. The various tagging tools (Twinkle/curation toolbar) should be removing the template. In addition, we might make modifying the template part of the drive in October. Ryan Vesey 20:07, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

As I understand it, though, we can't delete/redirect the template until we've cleared the backlog, and we can't clear the backlog as long as people are still using the template. And people are still using it. I thought it would help if there was an unobtrusive note on the template saying "This template is deprecated. Please consider using a more specific cleanup template", or words to that effect. Otherwise the vast majority of editors won't know that it's been deprecated. DoctorKubla (talk) 18:01, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

I agree. We have to change the text displayed at least. I agree with the text proposed by DoctorKubla. -- Magioladitis (talk) 18:14, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Also AWB continues to automatically place it, which is going to have to stop if we want to clear the backlog. benzband (talk) 19:04, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

I can do that very easily after we first set the rules for dead end. My suggestion is that the link number criteria of wikify are moved to dead end. -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:07, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Yeah let's do that ASAP. benzband (talk) 19:19, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

But really short articles sometimes they can't have 3 links (example). benzband (talk) 19:24, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

The editor used an older version. This is now fixed. I'll contact him. -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:31, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

rev 8335 fixes the bug. -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:45, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Current criteria are described in Wikipedia:AWB/GF#Tagger_.28Tagger.29. -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:11, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Check discussion in Template_talk:Dead_end#Autotagging.2Fautountagging_with_AWB. -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:25, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

I have expanded the "see also" section with some of the alternatives mentioned in the TfD. It would be helpful if other editors who were involved in that and other discussions would check this and see that it matches similar lists that may be offered in editing tools. – Fayenatic London 22:20, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Related category

Please see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2012 September 24#Category:Articles that need to be wikified. – Fayenatic London 22:02, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm starting to regret starting that CfD. What we really need to do is start a centralized discussion regarding the following:

1. What to do with Category:Articles that need to be wikified (CfD ongoing).
2. What to do with Category:All articles covered by WikiProject Wikify (CfD ongoing).
3. What {{Dead end}} should apply to.
4. How to let editors know {{Wikify}} is no longer to be used.

Does anyone else think we should combine all of these discussions into one RfC? Guoguo12 (Talk)  22:37, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

I think the CfDs are muddying the waters a little, and an RfC would only compound the problem. Clearing the backlog should be our only priority right now. DoctorKubla (talk) 07:52, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

There is a proposal for {{Dead end}} at Template talk:Dead end#Proposal to re-create Template:Internal links which sounds sensible to me.

We could create a new Category:Articles with too few wikilinks and populate it instantly by putting this category into the code of template:dead end in place of Category:Articles that need to be wikified.

I tend to agree that replacing {{Wikify}} with more specific tags should be the priority.

If Guoguo12 wishes to withdraw the CfD, I will close it as Withdrawn. – Fayenatic London 12:17, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 23 November 2012

this is poorly written by someone who obviously has no knowledge of the technique please remove this immediately . 2600:1003:B006:776:8381:7A5E:653E:73AD (talk) 20:07, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:56, 23 November 2012 (UTC)