Template talk:Copied
 | Template:Copied is permanently protected from editing because it is a heavily used or highly visible template. Substantial changes should first be proposed and discussed here on this page. If the proposal is uncontroversial or has been discussed and is supported by consensus, editors may use {{edit template-protected}} to notify an administrator or template editor to make the requested edit. Usually, any contributor may edit the template's documentation to add usage notes or categories.
Any contributor may edit the template's sandbox. Functionality of the template can be checked using test cases. |
 | Text has been copied to or from this page; see the list below. The source pages now serve to provide attribution for the content in the destination pages and must not be deleted as long as the copies exist. For attribution and to access older versions of the copied text, please see the history links below.
|
|
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
Template-protected edit request on 1 April 2024
[edit] | This edit request to Module:Copied has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Make the change as described in this diff Toadette (April Fools Day!) 22:15, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
- Wait, not the template, but the module. Should've posted at Module talk:Copied Toadette (April Fools Day!) 22:17, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
Done Module talk:Copied redirects here so this is in the right place. * Pppery * it has begun... 02:29, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
Clarify where the template should go
[edit]Clarify if this template should go in the main article or the talk page. I think this is meant to be used in the talk page but it isn't very clear. I see at least one example of an article that used it in the main page see Chivalry Bookshelf. There is this line but it is not explicit enough in my opinion: "Adding this template on the talk page is not a substitute for attribution in the page history using edit summaries." J2UDY7r00CRjH (talk) 20:27, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
Merged-from nesting
[edit] | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
A previous template was made by Flatscan at the request of Otherlleft - now deleted, with reasoning of being 'redundant' with this template - to act as a nested version of {Merged-from}.
For this reason, I propose to change the default value of the to parameter to the article {Copied} is invoked on. Additionally/as a result, to should not need to be specified for each from1, from2, etc.. This way, the template would act easier as a nested version of {Merged-from}. It might also be accompanied by a stylistic change - such as removing the ambiguity of 'to or from' in the displayed tag.
As an example, see the {copied} tag at Talk:Customer relationship management. Tule-hog (talk) 02:26, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. —andrybak (talk) 14:27, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
- Request is in 'change... to...' format, so I am assuming it is only the full meaning thats unclear.
| Text has been copied to or from this page; see the list below. The source pages now serve to provide attribution for the content in the destination pages and must not be deleted as long as the copies exist. For attribution and to access older versions of the copied text, please see the history links below. |
- Observe {copied} requires values for
to1,to2, andto3. I propose (if possible) to automatically use the ARTICLENAME of the page the template is called on as either all thetoorfromvalues, when only the other type of values are provided. For example, if I only specify (to1,to2,to3), ARTICLENAME should be automatically assigned to (from1,from2,from3) - similarly in the reverse case. Tule-hog (talk) 15:14, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
- Observe {copied} requires values for
No redirect from
[edit] | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Add an option for the `from` argument to be a {{no redirect}} link.
Useful in cases where the 'from' article is now a redirect, since it is the history of that page that is of interest - not the article it redirects to. Tule-hog (talk) 19:18, 2 September 2024 (UTC)