Template talk:Relevance inline

This template (Inline relevance cleanup tags) was considered for deletion on 2012 March 3. The result of the discussion was "no consensus".

Name

Should this be renamed to "Irrelevant inline"? {{Irrelevant}} is a redirect to the Off-topic message box. --Chealer (talk) 19:26, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Broken by recent changes

Template appears to have been broken by recent changes, eg see Denis MacShane#Foreign affairs interests where "1. REDIRECT Template:Relevance-inline" is left in the expansion. Rwendland (talk) 15:35, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This was caused by a double redirect, which have all been fixed since. Debresser (talk) 21:10, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Adds articles to test category

Articles using this template are being added to Category:Dovid which displays as a redlink in the article's categories. -- Brianhe (talk) 05:31, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. That's me, Dovid. This test category gave me an idea of how much these parameters are used. Which was necessary because {{Relevance note}} and {{Relevance-inline}}, which were merged, use them in different ways. As you see in this edit, the result of the test was that parameter usage is in favor of the the latter. The test category will be removed before the end of the day. Debresser (talk) 09:59, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Discrepancy between documentation and behavior

When editing visually, I was prompted to enter "no" for discuss to suppress the "discuss" link. I tried that, and it didn't work—it just tried to link to a section on the talkpage titled "no". I don't know how to fix this, or in which direction. ← PointyOintment ❬t & c❭ 15:01, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Section parameter?

I think it might be helpful to have a section parameter, to change the tooltip from The material near this tag may contain information that is not relevant to the article's main topic. to The material near this tag may contain information that is not relevant to the section's main topic.. I don't know how to add one. ← PointyOintment ❬t & c❭ 15:06, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Working "section" parameter

In this template's sandbox I have changed the template code so that the section parameter works as documented – or at least, any text in that parameter's value will suppress the "discuss" test, because I wasn't sure how to make it so only "no" or "n" or "0" in the value suppresses it. Does anyone approve of merging the changes into the template? Regards, DesertPipeline (talk) 16:31, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure why I said "section". I meant "discuss". Anyway, I've merged the changes into the live code now, with the "discuss" text only appearing if the parameter is defined. DesertPipeline (talk) 11:32, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reason parameter

When the tag is applied with default parameters ({{Relevance inline|date=(Month and Year)}}, it produces the following tool-tip message:

The near this tag may contain information that is not relevant to the article's main topic.

Adding the |reason= paramenter should be overriding the default tool-tip message, but instead it currently appends to the end of it, making an unnecessarily long message. The default message can be reduced for a more seamless inclusion of the added reason text. — CJDOS, Sheridan, OR (talk) 10:21, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Talklink not working

I cant get the |talk= working. It still leads to the generic page, not an article talk discussion section. ^[relevant?]. At least the documentation should be more clear (add "Talk:" ns is required? Which talkpage anyway?). @DesertPipeline: -DePiep (talk) 06:46, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]