Template talk:Cleanup - Revision history

Geewunling at 15:59, 8 November 2009

2009-11-08T15:59:49Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:59, 8 November 2009
Line 2:		Line 2:

	:It's a Junkion from Target 2006. -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 23:43, 25 January 2008 (UTC)		:It's a Junkion from Target 2006. -[[User:Derik\|Derik]] 23:43, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
	::I thought it was from [[The Big Broadcast of 2006]]. -- [[User:SFH\|SFH]] 23:48, 25 January 2008 (UTC)		::I thought it was from "[[The Big Broadcast of 2006 (episode)\|The Big Broadcast of 2006]]". -- [[User:SFH\|SFH]] 23:48, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

	Well, if you don't like it, here's something I made for a cleanup tag (I noticed that we didn't have any BM related messageboxes, so I made one):		Well, if you don't like it, here's something I made for a cleanup tag (I noticed that we didn't have any BM related messageboxes, so I made one):

Bluestreak7: /* Template Broken */ dead link

2009-11-01T21:02:56Z

Template Broken: dead link

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:02, 1 November 2009
Line 31:		Line 31:
	:::::If they don't fill in the date, it ends up in [[:Category:Wiki cleanup]] --[[User:Abates\|abates]] 18:40, 21 April 2009 (EDT)		:::::If they don't fill in the date, it ends up in [[:Category:Wiki cleanup]] --[[User:Abates\|abates]] 18:40, 21 April 2009 (EDT)

	I'm more talking about the fact that I could create ~~[[:~~Category:Senseless cleanup]] for those that don't state a reason if you guys want me to. And yes, I could automatically put all the reasonless ones in there.--[[User:Rosicrucian\|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian\|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 18:42, 21 April 2009 (EDT)		I'm more talking about the fact that I could create "Category:Senseless cleanup" for those that don't state a reason if you guys want me to. And yes, I could automatically put all the reasonless ones in there.--[[User:Rosicrucian\|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian\|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 18:42, 21 April 2009 (EDT)
	:Okay, I tried to make it so that it would ''force'' a current month/year stamp when you insert it. The following should do that.		:Okay, I tried to make it so that it would ''force'' a current month/year stamp when you insert it. The following should do that.
	::<tt><nowiki>{{subst:CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{subst:CURRENTYEAR}}}</nowiki></tt>		::<tt><nowiki>{{subst:CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{subst:CURRENTYEAR}}}</nowiki></tt>
	:...but it doesn't. I'm puzzled.--[[User:Rosicrucian\|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian\|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 18:55, 21 April 2009 (EDT)		:...but it doesn't. I'm puzzled.--[[User:Rosicrucian\|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian\|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 18:55, 21 April 2009 (EDT)

Rosicrucian: /* Template Broken */

2009-04-21T22:55:53Z

Template Broken

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:55, 21 April 2009
Line 33:		Line 33:
	I'm more talking about the fact that I could create [[:Category:Senseless cleanup]] for those that don't state a reason if you guys want me to. And yes, I could automatically put all the reasonless ones in there.--[[User:Rosicrucian\|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian\|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 18:42, 21 April 2009 (EDT)		I'm more talking about the fact that I could create [[:Category:Senseless cleanup]] for those that don't state a reason if you guys want me to. And yes, I could automatically put all the reasonless ones in there.--[[User:Rosicrucian\|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian\|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 18:42, 21 April 2009 (EDT)
	:Okay, I tried to make it so that it would ''force'' a current month/year stamp when you insert it. The following should do that.		:Okay, I tried to make it so that it would ''force'' a current month/year stamp when you insert it. The following should do that.
	:<tt><nowiki>{{subst:CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{subst:CURRENTYEAR}}}</nowiki></tt>		::<tt><nowiki>{{subst:CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{subst:CURRENTYEAR}}}</nowiki></tt>
	...but it doesn't. I'm puzzled.--[[User:Rosicrucian\|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian\|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 18:55, 21 April 2009 (EDT)		:...but it doesn't. I'm puzzled.--[[User:Rosicrucian\|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian\|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 18:55, 21 April 2009 (EDT)

Rosicrucian: /* Template Broken */

2009-04-21T22:55:34Z

Template Broken

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:55, 21 April 2009
Line 32:		Line 32:

	I'm more talking about the fact that I could create [[:Category:Senseless cleanup]] for those that don't state a reason if you guys want me to. And yes, I could automatically put all the reasonless ones in there.--[[User:Rosicrucian\|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian\|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 18:42, 21 April 2009 (EDT)		I'm more talking about the fact that I could create [[:Category:Senseless cleanup]] for those that don't state a reason if you guys want me to. And yes, I could automatically put all the reasonless ones in there.--[[User:Rosicrucian\|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian\|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 18:42, 21 April 2009 (EDT)
			:Okay, I tried to make it so that it would ''force'' a current month/year stamp when you insert it. The following should do that.
			:<tt><nowiki>{{subst:CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{subst:CURRENTYEAR}}}</nowiki></tt>
			...but it doesn't. I'm puzzled.--[[User:Rosicrucian\|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian\|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 18:55, 21 April 2009 (EDT)

Rosicrucian: /* Template Broken */

2009-04-21T22:42:45Z

Template Broken

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:42, 21 April 2009
Line 30:		Line 30:
	::::It would probably be a very good idea to create a default cleanup category if they don't add the date. Would this automatically happen for every article using the template, or only if the pages were edited and saved again? --[[User:Loudstone\|Loudstone]] 18:35, 21 April 2009 (EDT)		::::It would probably be a very good idea to create a default cleanup category if they don't add the date. Would this automatically happen for every article using the template, or only if the pages were edited and saved again? --[[User:Loudstone\|Loudstone]] 18:35, 21 April 2009 (EDT)
	:::::If they don't fill in the date, it ends up in [[:Category:Wiki cleanup]] --[[User:Abates\|abates]] 18:40, 21 April 2009 (EDT)		:::::If they don't fill in the date, it ends up in [[:Category:Wiki cleanup]] --[[User:Abates\|abates]] 18:40, 21 April 2009 (EDT)

			I'm more talking about the fact that I could create [[:Category:Senseless cleanup]] for those that don't state a reason if you guys want me to. And yes, I could automatically put all the reasonless ones in there.--[[User:Rosicrucian\|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian\|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 18:42, 21 April 2009 (EDT)

Abates: /* Template Broken */

2009-04-21T22:40:23Z

Template Broken

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:40, 21 April 2009
Line 29:		Line 29:
	:::I put a nag message on them. If desired, I can also make it automatically put them in a category so we can work through them.--[[User:Rosicrucian\|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian\|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 18:24, 21 April 2009 (EDT)		:::I put a nag message on them. If desired, I can also make it automatically put them in a category so we can work through them.--[[User:Rosicrucian\|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian\|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 18:24, 21 April 2009 (EDT)
	::::It would probably be a very good idea to create a default cleanup category if they don't add the date. Would this automatically happen for every article using the template, or only if the pages were edited and saved again? --[[User:Loudstone\|Loudstone]] 18:35, 21 April 2009 (EDT)		::::It would probably be a very good idea to create a default cleanup category if they don't add the date. Would this automatically happen for every article using the template, or only if the pages were edited and saved again? --[[User:Loudstone\|Loudstone]] 18:35, 21 April 2009 (EDT)
			:::::If they don't fill in the date, it ends up in [[:Category:Wiki cleanup]] --[[User:Abates\|abates]] 18:40, 21 April 2009 (EDT)

Loudstone at 22:35, 21 April 2009

2009-04-21T22:35:11Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:35, 21 April 2009
Line 28:		Line 28:
	::That's probably a good idea, as long as we change the template description as well (so that it doesn't say optional). But what do we do about all the old ones that don't have a reason listed? --[[User:Loudstone\|Loudstone]] 18:15, 21 April 2009 (EDT)		::That's probably a good idea, as long as we change the template description as well (so that it doesn't say optional). But what do we do about all the old ones that don't have a reason listed? --[[User:Loudstone\|Loudstone]] 18:15, 21 April 2009 (EDT)
	:::I put a nag message on them. If desired, I can also make it automatically put them in a category so we can work through them.--[[User:Rosicrucian\|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian\|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 18:24, 21 April 2009 (EDT)		:::I put a nag message on them. If desired, I can also make it automatically put them in a category so we can work through them.--[[User:Rosicrucian\|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian\|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 18:24, 21 April 2009 (EDT)
			::::It would probably be a very good idea to create a default cleanup category if they don't add the date. Would this automatically happen for every article using the template, or only if the pages were edited and saved again? --[[User:Loudstone\|Loudstone]] 18:35, 21 April 2009 (EDT)

Rosicrucian: /* Template Broken */

2009-04-21T22:24:13Z

Template Broken

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:24, 21 April 2009
Line 27:		Line 27:
	:I'd actually be in favour of making it compulsory. There are quite a few articles with ancient cleanup templates on them - the original reasons the template was placed there may have been long cleaned up, but unless you go digging in the history you can't immediately tell. --[[User:Abates\|abates]] 18:10, 21 April 2009 (EDT)		:I'd actually be in favour of making it compulsory. There are quite a few articles with ancient cleanup templates on them - the original reasons the template was placed there may have been long cleaned up, but unless you go digging in the history you can't immediately tell. --[[User:Abates\|abates]] 18:10, 21 April 2009 (EDT)
	::That's probably a good idea, as long as we change the template description as well (so that it doesn't say optional). But what do we do about all the old ones that don't have a reason listed? --[[User:Loudstone\|Loudstone]] 18:15, 21 April 2009 (EDT)		::That's probably a good idea, as long as we change the template description as well (so that it doesn't say optional). But what do we do about all the old ones that don't have a reason listed? --[[User:Loudstone\|Loudstone]] 18:15, 21 April 2009 (EDT)
			:::I put a nag message on them. If desired, I can also make it automatically put them in a category so we can work through them.--[[User:Rosicrucian\|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian\|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 18:24, 21 April 2009 (EDT)

Loudstone at 22:15, 21 April 2009

2009-04-21T22:15:47Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:15, 21 April 2009
Line 26:		Line 26:
	:Fixed. It's a one-character fix.--[[User:Rosicrucian\|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian\|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 18:10, 21 April 2009 (EDT)		:Fixed. It's a one-character fix.--[[User:Rosicrucian\|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian\|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 18:10, 21 April 2009 (EDT)
	:I'd actually be in favour of making it compulsory. There are quite a few articles with ancient cleanup templates on them - the original reasons the template was placed there may have been long cleaned up, but unless you go digging in the history you can't immediately tell. --[[User:Abates\|abates]] 18:10, 21 April 2009 (EDT)		:I'd actually be in favour of making it compulsory. There are quite a few articles with ancient cleanup templates on them - the original reasons the template was placed there may have been long cleaned up, but unless you go digging in the history you can't immediately tell. --[[User:Abates\|abates]] 18:10, 21 April 2009 (EDT)
			::That's probably a good idea, as long as we change the template description as well (so that it doesn't say optional). But what do we do about all the old ones that don't have a reason listed? --[[User:Loudstone\|Loudstone]] 18:15, 21 April 2009 (EDT)

Abates: /* Template Broken */

2009-04-21T22:10:56Z

Template Broken

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:10, 21 April 2009
Line 25:		Line 25:
	Okay, so right now the template shows the <nowiki>{{{2}}}</nowiki> when the optional descriptive text isn't entered. I'd be happy to fix it, I just need permission to do so :) --[[User:Loudstone\|Loudstone]] 17:44, 21 April 2009 (EDT)		Okay, so right now the template shows the <nowiki>{{{2}}}</nowiki> when the optional descriptive text isn't entered. I'd be happy to fix it, I just need permission to do so :) --[[User:Loudstone\|Loudstone]] 17:44, 21 April 2009 (EDT)
	:Fixed. It's a one-character fix.--[[User:Rosicrucian\|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian\|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 18:10, 21 April 2009 (EDT)		:Fixed. It's a one-character fix.--[[User:Rosicrucian\|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian\|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 18:10, 21 April 2009 (EDT)
			:I'd actually be in favour of making it compulsory. There are quite a few articles with ancient cleanup templates on them - the original reasons the template was placed there may have been long cleaned up, but unless you go digging in the history you can't immediately tell. --[[User:Abates\|abates]] 18:10, 21 April 2009 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:42, 21 April 2009
Line 30:		Line 30:
	::::It would probably be a very good idea to create a default cleanup category if they don't add the date. Would this automatically happen for every article using the template, or only if the pages were edited and saved again? --[[User:Loudstone\|Loudstone]] 18:35, 21 April 2009 (EDT)		::::It would probably be a very good idea to create a default cleanup category if they don't add the date. Would this automatically happen for every article using the template, or only if the pages were edited and saved again? --[[User:Loudstone\|Loudstone]] 18:35, 21 April 2009 (EDT)
	:::::If they don't fill in the date, it ends up in [[:Category:Wiki cleanup]] --[[User:Abates\|abates]] 18:40, 21 April 2009 (EDT)		:::::If they don't fill in the date, it ends up in [[:Category:Wiki cleanup]] --[[User:Abates\|abates]] 18:40, 21 April 2009 (EDT)

			I'm more talking about the fact that I could create [[:Category:Senseless cleanup]] for those that don't state a reason if you guys want me to. And yes, I could automatically put all the reasonless ones in there.--[[User:Rosicrucian\|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian\|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 18:42, 21 April 2009 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:40, 21 April 2009
Line 29:		Line 29:
	:::I put a nag message on them. If desired, I can also make it automatically put them in a category so we can work through them.--[[User:Rosicrucian\|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian\|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 18:24, 21 April 2009 (EDT)		:::I put a nag message on them. If desired, I can also make it automatically put them in a category so we can work through them.--[[User:Rosicrucian\|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian\|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 18:24, 21 April 2009 (EDT)
	::::It would probably be a very good idea to create a default cleanup category if they don't add the date. Would this automatically happen for every article using the template, or only if the pages were edited and saved again? --[[User:Loudstone\|Loudstone]] 18:35, 21 April 2009 (EDT)		::::It would probably be a very good idea to create a default cleanup category if they don't add the date. Would this automatically happen for every article using the template, or only if the pages were edited and saved again? --[[User:Loudstone\|Loudstone]] 18:35, 21 April 2009 (EDT)
			:::::If they don't fill in the date, it ends up in [[:Category:Wiki cleanup]] --[[User:Abates\|abates]] 18:40, 21 April 2009 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:35, 21 April 2009
Line 28:		Line 28:
	::That's probably a good idea, as long as we change the template description as well (so that it doesn't say optional). But what do we do about all the old ones that don't have a reason listed? --[[User:Loudstone\|Loudstone]] 18:15, 21 April 2009 (EDT)		::That's probably a good idea, as long as we change the template description as well (so that it doesn't say optional). But what do we do about all the old ones that don't have a reason listed? --[[User:Loudstone\|Loudstone]] 18:15, 21 April 2009 (EDT)
	:::I put a nag message on them. If desired, I can also make it automatically put them in a category so we can work through them.--[[User:Rosicrucian\|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian\|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 18:24, 21 April 2009 (EDT)		:::I put a nag message on them. If desired, I can also make it automatically put them in a category so we can work through them.--[[User:Rosicrucian\|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian\|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 18:24, 21 April 2009 (EDT)
			::::It would probably be a very good idea to create a default cleanup category if they don't add the date. Would this automatically happen for every article using the template, or only if the pages were edited and saved again? --[[User:Loudstone\|Loudstone]] 18:35, 21 April 2009 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:24, 21 April 2009
Line 27:		Line 27:
	:I'd actually be in favour of making it compulsory. There are quite a few articles with ancient cleanup templates on them - the original reasons the template was placed there may have been long cleaned up, but unless you go digging in the history you can't immediately tell. --[[User:Abates\|abates]] 18:10, 21 April 2009 (EDT)		:I'd actually be in favour of making it compulsory. There are quite a few articles with ancient cleanup templates on them - the original reasons the template was placed there may have been long cleaned up, but unless you go digging in the history you can't immediately tell. --[[User:Abates\|abates]] 18:10, 21 April 2009 (EDT)
	::That's probably a good idea, as long as we change the template description as well (so that it doesn't say optional). But what do we do about all the old ones that don't have a reason listed? --[[User:Loudstone\|Loudstone]] 18:15, 21 April 2009 (EDT)		::That's probably a good idea, as long as we change the template description as well (so that it doesn't say optional). But what do we do about all the old ones that don't have a reason listed? --[[User:Loudstone\|Loudstone]] 18:15, 21 April 2009 (EDT)
			:::I put a nag message on them. If desired, I can also make it automatically put them in a category so we can work through them.--[[User:Rosicrucian\|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian\|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 18:24, 21 April 2009 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:15, 21 April 2009
Line 26:		Line 26:
	:Fixed. It's a one-character fix.--[[User:Rosicrucian\|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian\|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 18:10, 21 April 2009 (EDT)		:Fixed. It's a one-character fix.--[[User:Rosicrucian\|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian\|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 18:10, 21 April 2009 (EDT)
	:I'd actually be in favour of making it compulsory. There are quite a few articles with ancient cleanup templates on them - the original reasons the template was placed there may have been long cleaned up, but unless you go digging in the history you can't immediately tell. --[[User:Abates\|abates]] 18:10, 21 April 2009 (EDT)		:I'd actually be in favour of making it compulsory. There are quite a few articles with ancient cleanup templates on them - the original reasons the template was placed there may have been long cleaned up, but unless you go digging in the history you can't immediately tell. --[[User:Abates\|abates]] 18:10, 21 April 2009 (EDT)
			::That's probably a good idea, as long as we change the template description as well (so that it doesn't say optional). But what do we do about all the old ones that don't have a reason listed? --[[User:Loudstone\|Loudstone]] 18:15, 21 April 2009 (EDT)