Template talk:Simple help page editnotice
Appearance
(Redirected from Template talk:Simple help page editnotice/sandbox)
This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||
|
Template:Simple help page editnotice 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. This template does not have a testcases subpage. You can create the testcases subpage here. |
Centralized place for discussion about the launch of this template
[edit]You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Help Project#New editnotice to help fight WP:CREEP. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 04:47, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
Template-protected edit request on 10 December 2023
[edit]This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
See the sandbox diff for the changes that I request be made. It rewords the warning to be more clear and straightforward. waddie96 ★ (talk) 10:23, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
- Hmm. Editor waddie96, it appears that keeping the "to avoid instruction creep" up front is more clear and grammatically correct. So sorry, but I have to oppose this change. See no use for the comma after the phrase, though. Maybe that's just me? P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 16:35, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
- I think the proposed wording is good. I support this change. (Though nixing the comma in
pages, to
.) SWinxy (talk) 18:31, 10 December 2023 (UTC)- Okay, that's agreeable, it was that comma that threw me, definitely should be no comma in
pages, to
. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 18:58, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
- Okay, that's agreeable, it was that comma that threw me, definitely should be no comma in
- I think the proposed wording is good. I support this change. (Though nixing the comma in
- Completed. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 18:30, 11 December 2023 (UTC)