Template talk:Archive bottom/Archive 1

Archive 1

Untitled

This wording is confusing and contradictory. "Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page." Huh? In other words, "edit this page, if necessary, but don't edit this page." Is there any case where this would be more useful than {{Discussion bottom}}? If no-one objects, I will redirect this there in a week. Grandmasterka 22:29, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Editproc

{{editprotected}}

Please add {{documentation}} to page, tnx. Nasa-verve (talk) 17:30, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Done - Rjd0060 (talk) 21:37, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Documentation page link

Please link to Template:Archive top/doc to serve as documentation for this template. This template doesn't need its own separate documentation. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 12:37, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

 Done Tra (Talk) 18:51, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

ANI variant

When used on ANI, this template (and its brother template, {{archive top}}) will now omit "Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page". Additionally, I've removed the "such as the current discussion page" portion of the message due to the confusing nature of the language (basically, "don't edit this page if you have a comment, but edit it if you have a comment"). m.o.p 05:35, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Edit request re: documentation

The documentation is discombobulated. Please change the following code:

<noinclude>{{doc|Template:Archive top/doc}}
</noinclude>

To:

<noinclude>
{{doc|Template:Archive top/doc}}
</noinclude>

It's a simple line break that is screwing up the documentation. It works: I tested it in the sandbox: [1]. Rgrds. --64.85.214.140 (talk) 05:53, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

• Done. Thanks, LittleMountain5 06:18, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Safesubsting parser function

Since this template is often substituted rather than transcluded, can someone add {{{|safesubst:}}} before the "#switch" tag, like in the sandbox? This prevents the parser function from being kept in the wikicode if the template is substituted; see this test (the first part is the substituted current template, the second part is the sandbox version). SiBr₄ (talk) 08:12, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

• Done it is now subst: friendly using <includeonly>safesubst:</includeonly> — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(t • e • c)} 14:45, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

  Thanks. SiBr₄ (talk) 18:01, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 29 December 2019

Please add

{{subst:tfm|ACR bottom}}

Per Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019 December 29#Template:ACR bottom. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 20:17, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

 Done qedk (t 桜 c) 21:00, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

Please add noinclude tags around the notice, because subst-ing the {{Archive bottom}} template currently drags in a copy of the merge notice and its category. See for example Talk:E.H. Gibbs House. -- John of Reading (talk) 16:39, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

 Done Done by MSGJ. qedk (t 桜 c) 17:41, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 16 February 2020

Please add:

<noinclude>{{subst:tfm|RM bottom}}</noinclude>

Then add to Template:RM bottom:

<noinclude>{{subst:tfm|Archive bottom}}</noinclude> –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 04:46, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

 Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:56, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Template talk:Rfc top which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 12:33, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 17 July 2020

Please remove the line break after the TfD's </noinclude>. It's causing an extra linebreak when using some tools. – Thjarkur (talk) 18:15, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

 Done Nardog (talk) 18:22, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Edit request to complete TfD nomination

Template:Archive bottom has been listed at Templates for discussion (nomination), but was protected so could not be tagged. Please add:

{{subst:tfm|help=off|1=Archive top}}

to the top of the page to complete the nomination. Thank you. JsfasdF252 (talk) 00:00, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

 Done * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:14, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Edit request to complete TfD nomination

Template:Archive bottom has been listed at Templates for discussion (nomination), but was protected so could not be tagged. Please add:

<noinclude>{{subst:tfm|help=off|1=Discussion bottom}}</noinclude>

to the top of the page to complete the nomination. Thank you. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 03:44, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

 Done Matt Fitzpatrick (talk) 04:23, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

"Template:Zz" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Template:Zz. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 3#Template:Zz until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 03:09, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 14 May 2021

This page gets listed in Special:LintErrors/stripped-tag because of having </div> without the balancing <div> tag. Functionally this is correct since this template is paired with {{Archive top}} which has the opening div tag. So a div tag wrapped in noincude needs to be added to remove the page off Linter report.

So add <noinclude><div></noinclude> immediately before the second </div>. You can see that this works in Template:Archive bottom/sandbox. ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ (talk) 06:20, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

 Done. There is no need to put edit requests on each page that needs edits like this. I am getting to them over time. If you want to make a list of linked templates that need this edit and drop them on my talk page, you are welcome to do so. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:13, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Which "appropriate discussion page"?

Shouldn't there be a parameter to allow one to provide a link to "the appropriate discussion page" – or to omit the sentence "Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page." entirely if no appropriate discussion page can be identified or if the reason for closing the discussion was that the topic itself is inappropriate?  --Lambiam 08:32, 21 July 2021 (UTC)