![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
I am contemplating creating an article using in part chunks of text copied from other articles. To use this template seems neat and I would use explicit edit summaries also. However, I would create the new article in user space before eventually moving it. At the time of the move, would I revisit the places where I have transcluded the template, altering the arguments for the destination? What about the diff (or permanent url) arguments? Thincat ( talk) 20:51, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
I wrote {{ Copied multi}} as a way to compact multiple Copied templates. Flatscan ( talk) 05:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
When attribution is provided via an alternate method ( WP:Copying within Wikipedia#Proper attribution, List of authors), {{Copied}} isn't necessary. It is helpful, and a link (diff for Help:Dummy edit, page link for Talk page section) would be useful. I suggest adding a parameter that displays a link and suppresses the "must not be deleted" wording. Flatscan ( talk) 04:56, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
Original:
Text from Jennifer Mui was copied into Mercenaries 2: World in Flames with this edit. Jennifer Mui now serves to provide attribution for that content in Mercenaries 2: World in Flames and must not be deleted so long as Mercenaries 2: World in Flames exists. For attribution and to access older versions of the copied text, please see this history.
Proposed draft:
Text from Jennifer Mui was copied into Mercenaries 2: World in Flames with this edit. For attribution, please see this edit summary. To access older versions of the copied text, please see this history.
The attribution link can be an edit summary or a permanent link to a list on the Talk page. Flatscan ( talk) 04:30, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
to_oldid
and from_oldid
: Links can be generated from them (example: {{
talkarchivehist}}), currently specified manually in diff
.Flatscan ( talk) 04:08, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
I gave up trying to figure out how to link the diff in an article created by a split. This is the best I could do. Please make this more user friendly if you want this to be used. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 23:15, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
The talk
parameter
was added recently to match {{
merged-from}}. I disagree with this addition. Since {{Copied}} is meant for use on both source and destination, half the templates will display bolded non-links. Both the templates on
Talk:History of Poland are examples of this. I think that it adds clutter to an already lengthy template.
Flatscan (
talk)
04:25, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
I recently used the {{ Copied}} template. It took me a while to work out what the text meant. It does actually make sense (I think) but would be easier if the sentence:
[[{{{from}}}]] now serves to provide attribution for that content in [[{{{to}}}]] and must not be deleted so long as [[{{{to}}}]] exists.
was replaced with:
[[{{{from}}}]] now serves to provide attribution for that content in [[{{{to}}}]] and [[{{{from}}}]] must not be deleted so long as [[{{{to}}}]] exists.
(I have put the addition in bold; this boldening would be removed.) Does this addition make sense to people? HairyWombat 02:26, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
User:Zappernapper expanded this template to take multiple sets of arguments, similar to {{ Old AfD multi}}. It seems too similar to {{ Copied-multi}} – which is not transcluded anywhere. I prefer {{ Copied multi}} (based on {{ multidel}}), as it is a container that holds arbitrary entries: copying or merging, in either direction. Flatscan ( talk) 04:21, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
{{copied| to = Foo | to2 = Bar}}placed on the source page correctly identifies the source page in references. The same is true when the template is placed on a destination page.
#if:
s straight. A few kilobytes saved, even for each of the
roughly 3,000 transclusions, is a drop in the bucket. I agree that there is a place for an easier to use template, but I think it would work best as a separate, simplified version; see
#The template is too difficult to use above.
Flatscan (
talk)
04:41, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
We're starting to go in circles, so I have requested outside input at WP:Village pump (technical)#Expansion of Template:Copied ( diff). Flatscan ( talk) 04:25, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
These are 10 placements, 5 pairs that I made a few months ago.
Copied|from=Jonny Quest|from_oldid=430949393|to=List of Jonny Quest episodes|to_diff=prev|to_oldid=430949754
Talk:Jonny QuestCopied|from=Jonny Quest|from_oldid=430949393|to=List of Jonny Quest episodes|to_diff=prev|to_oldid=430949754
Talk:List of Jonny Quest episodesCopied|from_oldid=430949393|to=List of Jonny Quest episodes|to_diff=prev|to_oldid=430949754
Talk:Jonny QuestCopied|from=Jonny Quest|from_oldid=430949393|to_diff=prev|to_oldid=430949754
Talk:List of Jonny Quest episodesFlatscan ( talk) 04:25, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
At Talk:Barratry (admiralty law), there is a bug with this template. The oldid is not listed in the template, so when you click on this edit, it instead links to the most recent revision. This, of course, is the wrong revision, and this behavior is anti-intuitive and doesn't make any sense. If the oldid isn't listed, the text with this edit should simply be omitted.
Also, the documentation page should provide instructions on how do you link to an old revision?. This is not easy to do, and I still haven't found instructions on how to do it. If this template is gonna force me to enter it, it should at least tell you how to do it. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 13:52, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
to_oldid
is set. For example, detecting an invalid diff
requires parsing, which is more suited for a cleanup JavaScript or bot.from_oldid
. That page links to
Help:Page history#Linking to a specific version of a page.
Flatscan (
talk)
05:32, 25 December 2011 (UTC)With this edit I changed some very awkward wording, not that on Talk:Justin Bieber on Twitter, it reads:
Text from Justin Bieber on Twitter was copied into Justin Bieber with this edit on 27 April 2012. Justin Bieber on Twitter now serves to provide attribution for that content in Justin Bieber and must not be deleted so long as Justin Bieber exists. For attribution and to access older versions of the copied text, please see this history.
I changed it to read must not be deleted so long as the article XXXX exists, because Justin Bieber's existance has no bearing on Wikipedia's attribution policy. His article on the other hand is what we are worried about. -- kelapstick( bainuu) 04:09, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
Do we really need to mention two article names five times? Could we reword it along the following lines?
Antony–22 ( talk⁄ contribs) 06:26, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
An editor removed the true basic use (meaning not history links) of this template claiming it doesn't work. It does: Template:Copied/test. I'm restoring a version that's to/from/date to the documentation page. Ego White Tray ( talk) 15:55, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
{{Copied |from=Abraham Lincoln|date=1 September 2012}}
![]() | Text and/or other creative content from Abraham Lincoln was copied or moved into [[]] on 1 September 2012. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
Incnis Mrsi ( talk · contribs) modified this template so that a missing oldid would point the text "with this edit" to just the article page. My first thought was to revert, but I thought better of it (after Incnis e-mailed me instead of posting here for some reason). While it doesn't fully address the problems discussed earlier, I do consider it an improvement. Ego White Tray ( talk) 01:13, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
to_diff=prev
.
This example produces
this diff that indicates that to_oldid
is the first revision.
Flatscan (
talk)
04:09, 26 October 2012 (UTC)I noticed that User:Francophonie&Androphilie/RFPP uses this template. (I am not objecting to its placement there.)
The same situation applies to most of my own user scripts, not including cancelRedirectNo.js. (Note to self: create a proper listing at User:SoledadKabocha/scripts)
Should I add this template to the doc pages of my own user scripts? (Is there a guideline for or against doing so?) Also, does the requirement that the original script "must not be deleted so long as the latter page exists" hold in userspace? (What if one of the original authors retires and wants to delete his/her scripts? Would I need to delete my version too, or ... ?) -- SoledadKabocha ( talk) 17:21, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:Copied has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Currently the template gracefully handles when from_oldid isn't used, but doesn't gracefully handle when both to_oldid and to_diff are missing.
The following diff in the sandbox should fix this issue:
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Template%3ACopied%2Fsandbox&diff=647755100&oldid=647751775
Ahecht (
TALK
PAGE)
20:03, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
May I suggest that you consider changing the "from" and "to" portion of
Text from [[{{{from}}}]] was copied or moved into [[{{{to}}}]]
depending on which article you're currently on to "this article". It would make the message a bit clearer and shorter especially since most page moves are between similarly named articles. Not sure about any technical limitations with templates, if any, but you do seem to be linking to the former article's talk page only if you're on the latter article so detection does seem possible. Opencooper ( talk) 15:01, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:Copied has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please implement the
changes from the template's sandbox to avoid placing a page in
Category:Wikipedia pages using copied template without oldid if the |diff=
parameter is provided, as that is equivalent to the |to_diff=
and |to_oldid=
parameters combined (or just the latter if it's the first revision).
nyuszika7h ( talk) 14:13, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Would it be a good idea to apply a "No redirect" to the links [[{{{from}}}]] and [[{{{to}}}]] in this template? Iceblock ( talk) 21:16, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
The transclusion of this template on Help talk:Interwiki linking has a broken link to the former page's talk page. This appears to be caused by this page's being on Meta and not wikipedia, which means that {{TALKPAGENAME}} doesn't produce the right name. I can't think of a good solution to this except to change the code to 'The former page's talk page can be accessed at [[{{{1|{{TALKPAGENAME:{{{from}}}}}}}}]].', which would allow for a custom parameter to be added for the talk page if it otherwise would display incorrectly - but that seems icky. Any thoughts? Cathfolant ( talk) 22:09, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
I recently created a new article, and at the same time I added to a preexisting, related article the new content I had obtained for the new article. I was just wondering if the template always is required in such situations. Happy to use it, but it's just that I had assumed that this template would only be for situations in which the editor copies and pastes text from another Wikipedia article, and that's not quite what happened. Coretheapple ( talk) 13:35, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
{{edit template-protected|Template:Copied|answered=no}}
Please implement
this edit from the sandbox. I inserted
prev
as a default value for the {{{to_diff}}}
parameter when creating the URL, in order to avoid errors where to_oldid
is provided but not to_diff
. --
Paul_012 (
talk)
09:25, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
Please update this template to follow the guideline MOS:ANDOR. This seems like a clear case where "and/or" can simply be replaced with "or" as there is no question that the possible case of "not both" is notable. -- 109.79.177.186 ( talk) 21:22, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:Copied has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please add {{subst:tfm|Copied multi|heading=Template:Copied multi}} to the top of the template. -- Trialpears ( talk) 21:52, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
This edit caught my eye and caused me to encounter this template for what I think is the first time. This template appears to have a serious problem when it says in the hatnote it adds to articles that one Wikipedia article serves to provide attribution for another article and that the attribution in the article providing it must not be deleted so long as the other article which relies on that exists. WP:V requires support by reliable sources. WP:RS says that other Wikipedia articles are not reliable sources (see WP:NOTRS). It appears to me that this template ought to be deleted and that articles which use it need to be reviewed for proper attribution. Please discuss below. I see this as a very urgent matter. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill)
That's probably why I have not seen its hatnote previously. Regardless, this seems to me still to flout WP:V by relying on a non-RS source for attribution. That policy objection reflects the practical problem that even though the hatnote says that the attribution in that non-RS source "must not be deleted" so long as articles which rely on it exist, nothing prevents such deletion in that non-RS source without regard to the fact that other WP articles rely on it for attribution -- leaving those reliant articles in copyvio. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 13:41, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
This gets messier and messier, and leads away from copyright license attribution. That still looks like a problem area to me, but let's put that aside for now.
(→History: copied content from USS Maine (ACR-1); see that page's history for attribution.)
(not from the
Spanish–American War article). There seems to have been an error in template usage there. Let's put that aside for now also.the latter's high hull and guns mounted on her main deck made her the drier ship.{{sfn|Cowan & Sumrall|p=134}}
. That leads to a problem I am about to discuss.Summarizing that, copying content with clickable internal links from one article to another breaks those internal links unless their targets are also copied from the donor to the recipient article.
That's not a problem with this template, though, it's a general problem in WP:Copying within Wikipedia#Proper attribution. Right now, I'm thinking that this discussion ought to be moved over to the talk page there. What do you think? Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 22:59, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
Yes. See Wikipedia talk:Copying within Wikipedia#Proper attribution, which I've just created. I still think that there are problems with the notice inserted by this template in that a Wikipedia article, being an unreliable source, cannot properly provide attribution where attribution is required. I'm not presently ready to suggest improvements, though. I'll think about that and will probably revisit this here later. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 14:16, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
If a range of oldid
s is not specified, it should assume the copying took place in a single edit, so the parameter |to_diff=
should default to prev
. ―
cobaltcigs
01:40, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
I have made some major improvements and converted the entire template to lua in connection to the {{ Copied multi}} TfD. The code can be found at Module:Sandbox/Trialpears/Copied and the results at Template:Copied/testcases. Essentially the changes I've made are as follows:
|merge=
is set to yes.|afd=
Since this is my first large scale lua project I'm a bit hesitent to implement it without a second pair of eyes so feedback would be appreciated. Thanks! ‑‑ Trialpears ( talk) 19:06, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
argsx or ""
- since you are using Module:Arguments, nil arguments and empty arguments are treated the same. If you don't need to concatenate the text, there is no need to set as empty. So for regular if checks this is unnessaray.if not (x = "") then ... else ... end
- conventional coding practice is to check the positive as it keeps the code cleaner. Here you first check if it's not positive (in this case, empty), then you check if it's not empty and then do the positive action. Instead of that, if (x)
would work. It's much easier to read the code this way.argsx
.text = text .. text
you create a new object. In places where the string of text is broken up to multiple parts, it also makes reading the whole text harder and finding grammar bugs even harder. Instead, use string.format().I am planning on making a few changes to this template based on needs seen when converting all the instances of {{ Copied multi}} these are as follows:
|to_diff=
breaking the template. To solve this the template should recognize if the user has inputted a URL and handle it appropriately.If no one objects this will be implemented in a few days. ‑‑ Trialpears ( talk) 13:14, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
Like other template pages I've viewed, this one is functionally indecipherable (and I'm a former college educator and technical writer, with numerous technical certificates and licenses, including in computers!)
Wikipedia needs to fundamentally rethink, restructure, and re-present its protocols and input systems for references, tags, and templates.
Wikipedia, at present, demands FAR too much effort, on form and computer coding -- leaving precious little time for editors to focus on substance.
What a MESS. ~ Penlite ( talk) 14:37, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
~ Penlite ( talk) 14:39, 29 May 2020 (UTC) ~ Penlite ( talk) 14:40, 29 May 2020 (UTC) ~ Penlite ( talk) 14:41, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
I've been inserting {{ copied}} to record the complete or partial copying of articles, templates. modules and documentation from the English Wikipedia to an incubator wikipedia and to the Thai Wikipedia, and from the English and Thai Wikipedias to an incubator wikipedia. For simple copying where the pages have ASCII names, one can create the new template invocation in a file by the simple process:
This process has a fairly low error rate. -- RichardW57 ( talk) 17:09, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
The first issue arises with non-ASCII file names. The non-ASCII characters are represent by the hex code of the UTF bytes. These do seem to work when viewed the rendered template instance, but:
Is it possible to use the #subst mechanism to convert the hex codes of the UTF characters back to UTF? -- RichardW57 ( talk) 17:09, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
Where are the steps to be taken when 'moving' either source or the destination recorded? Have they indeed been documented? How are they enforced? There is an unanswered section #Maybe "No redirect" that suggests that changing names of source or definition should be prohibited. However, it seems unreasonable that copying a file from the English Wikipedia to an incubator Wikipedia should prevent its being renamed, and if a length chunk of an article is copied for translation, will not the translation be done while the article is in user space? A translation can take days or weeks. -- RichardW57 ( talk) 17:09, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
Are admins trained in how to handle notices published via {{ copied}}? — Preceding unsigned comment added by RichardW57 ( talk • contribs) 17:09, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
Please see the discussion at WT:COPY#Attribution in a case of deleted history from a cross-wiki translation for a case which may possibly affect the documentation or coding of this template. Thanks, Mathglot ( talk) 00:40, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
I am finding the instruction for basic use
{{Copied|from=|from_oldid=|to=|to_diff=}}
seems wrong. I think it should read
{{Copied|from=|from_oldid=|to=|diff=}}
which works for me. The change was made here Thincat ( talk) 11:02, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
For the case of {{ tlg}} being renamed, the notice placed in its talk page is still accessible and and almost functional at Template_talk:tlg if one allows the redirection to Template talk:Template link general: {{copied|from=Template:Tlg|from_oldid=790785155|to=:incubator:Template:Wp/nod/tlg|to_diff=4245590}} yields
![]() | Text and/or other creative content from this version of Template:Tlg was copied or moved into incubator:Template:Wp/nod/tlg with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
For the case of {{ tlx}} and {{ tlx/doc}} being renamed, the notice placed on its talk page is still accessible and almost functional at Template_talk:tlx if one allows the redirection to Template talk:Template link expanded: {{copied|from1=Template:Tlx|from_oldid1=821674175|to1=:incubator:Template:Wp/nod/tlx|to_diff1=4241206 |from2=Template:Tlx/doc|from_oldid2=780763309|to2=:incubator:Template:Wp/nod/tlx/doc|to_diff2=4241689}} yields
![]() | 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.
|
With both formats, the problem is that the three history links link to the history of the redirections, so do not provide attribution for the actual templates and documentation. What should be modified to fix this problem:
![]() | Text and/or other creative content from this version of Template:Template link general was copied or moved into incubator:Template:Wp/nod/tlg with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
![]() | 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.
|
Please advise. -- RichardW57 ( talk) 02:35, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
Please modify this template to comply with MOS:ANDOR (see also MOS:SLASH).
Specifically that means change the phrase from
X: "Text and/or other creative content from"... to
Y: "Text or other creative content from"...
(optionally, if you really believe there was every any ambiguity necessitating the use of AND/OR you could instead change it to:
Z: "Text or other creative content or both from"... ). Ignore my use of italics, they're or emphasis and to highlight the specific change.
There is no need to for this template (or any other page) to ignore the Manual of Style guidelines MOS:ANDOR when it could simply write with a bit more clarity. -- 109.79.171.255 ( talk) 15:20, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Module:Copied has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The changes at
Module:Copied/sandbox in regards to using "prev" as a default for to_diff
and "next" as a default for to_oldid
should be copied over to
Module:Copied.
Right now the default that is provided is for to_diff
, is "prev", which is wrong. Since to_oldid
represents the ID of the revision before the content was copied, to link to the diff where the content was added, to_diff
should be set to "next" as the revision with the content being added would be the next revision. When only to_diff
is provided, to produce the right diff link, to_oldid
should fallback to "prev".
See the first three testcases here
Template:Copied/testcases, when to_diff
is removed the current template links to the
diff before the diff where the content was added, but the sandbox version
links to the correct diff. When to_oldid
is removed, both templates link to the correct diff, but the sandbox specifies oldid=prev
, whereas the live template doesn't. –
BrandonXLF (
talk)
02:25, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
Faced with nine parameters for basic usage, I think that many people will be discouraged from using this template at all.
Couldn't we have an "ultra-basic" or "absolutely minimal" example with just 'from' and 'to'? or 'from' and 'to' and 'date'? Last time I tried, 'from' and 'to' were the minimum that made sense. This would encourage more usage, IMHO.
This is a proposal for the documentation page, not for the template itself. Boud ( talk) 01:19, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Module:Copied has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Hello! I'm trying to create a userscript for
WikiProject Copyright Cleanup editors and noticed that this template doesn't have a specific class to identify it (much like how {{
edit semi-protected}} is implemented). I've made the required changes in the
module sandbox (
diff) and I'd like to request that version to be copied into
Module:Copied. It introduces the "copiednotice
" class into the box so that it can be efficiently targeted on rendered talk pages and in
Parsoid documents.
Chlod (
say hi!)
06:06, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Module:Copied has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Currently, if a page uses fromX without using from (like here), it'll get put into Category:Wikipedia pages using copied template without oldid incorrectly even if it has a perfectly valid oldidX. I've made a change onto the sandbox version that fixes this. Aidan9382 ( talk) 06:37, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
I am contemplating creating an article using in part chunks of text copied from other articles. To use this template seems neat and I would use explicit edit summaries also. However, I would create the new article in user space before eventually moving it. At the time of the move, would I revisit the places where I have transcluded the template, altering the arguments for the destination? What about the diff (or permanent url) arguments? Thincat ( talk) 20:51, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
I wrote {{ Copied multi}} as a way to compact multiple Copied templates. Flatscan ( talk) 05:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
When attribution is provided via an alternate method ( WP:Copying within Wikipedia#Proper attribution, List of authors), {{Copied}} isn't necessary. It is helpful, and a link (diff for Help:Dummy edit, page link for Talk page section) would be useful. I suggest adding a parameter that displays a link and suppresses the "must not be deleted" wording. Flatscan ( talk) 04:56, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
Original:
Text from Jennifer Mui was copied into Mercenaries 2: World in Flames with this edit. Jennifer Mui now serves to provide attribution for that content in Mercenaries 2: World in Flames and must not be deleted so long as Mercenaries 2: World in Flames exists. For attribution and to access older versions of the copied text, please see this history.
Proposed draft:
Text from Jennifer Mui was copied into Mercenaries 2: World in Flames with this edit. For attribution, please see this edit summary. To access older versions of the copied text, please see this history.
The attribution link can be an edit summary or a permanent link to a list on the Talk page. Flatscan ( talk) 04:30, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
to_oldid
and from_oldid
: Links can be generated from them (example: {{
talkarchivehist}}), currently specified manually in diff
.Flatscan ( talk) 04:08, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
I gave up trying to figure out how to link the diff in an article created by a split. This is the best I could do. Please make this more user friendly if you want this to be used. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 23:15, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
The talk
parameter
was added recently to match {{
merged-from}}. I disagree with this addition. Since {{Copied}} is meant for use on both source and destination, half the templates will display bolded non-links. Both the templates on
Talk:History of Poland are examples of this. I think that it adds clutter to an already lengthy template.
Flatscan (
talk)
04:25, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
I recently used the {{ Copied}} template. It took me a while to work out what the text meant. It does actually make sense (I think) but would be easier if the sentence:
[[{{{from}}}]] now serves to provide attribution for that content in [[{{{to}}}]] and must not be deleted so long as [[{{{to}}}]] exists.
was replaced with:
[[{{{from}}}]] now serves to provide attribution for that content in [[{{{to}}}]] and [[{{{from}}}]] must not be deleted so long as [[{{{to}}}]] exists.
(I have put the addition in bold; this boldening would be removed.) Does this addition make sense to people? HairyWombat 02:26, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
User:Zappernapper expanded this template to take multiple sets of arguments, similar to {{ Old AfD multi}}. It seems too similar to {{ Copied-multi}} – which is not transcluded anywhere. I prefer {{ Copied multi}} (based on {{ multidel}}), as it is a container that holds arbitrary entries: copying or merging, in either direction. Flatscan ( talk) 04:21, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
{{copied| to = Foo | to2 = Bar}}placed on the source page correctly identifies the source page in references. The same is true when the template is placed on a destination page.
#if:
s straight. A few kilobytes saved, even for each of the
roughly 3,000 transclusions, is a drop in the bucket. I agree that there is a place for an easier to use template, but I think it would work best as a separate, simplified version; see
#The template is too difficult to use above.
Flatscan (
talk)
04:41, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
We're starting to go in circles, so I have requested outside input at WP:Village pump (technical)#Expansion of Template:Copied ( diff). Flatscan ( talk) 04:25, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
These are 10 placements, 5 pairs that I made a few months ago.
Copied|from=Jonny Quest|from_oldid=430949393|to=List of Jonny Quest episodes|to_diff=prev|to_oldid=430949754
Talk:Jonny QuestCopied|from=Jonny Quest|from_oldid=430949393|to=List of Jonny Quest episodes|to_diff=prev|to_oldid=430949754
Talk:List of Jonny Quest episodesCopied|from_oldid=430949393|to=List of Jonny Quest episodes|to_diff=prev|to_oldid=430949754
Talk:Jonny QuestCopied|from=Jonny Quest|from_oldid=430949393|to_diff=prev|to_oldid=430949754
Talk:List of Jonny Quest episodesFlatscan ( talk) 04:25, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
At Talk:Barratry (admiralty law), there is a bug with this template. The oldid is not listed in the template, so when you click on this edit, it instead links to the most recent revision. This, of course, is the wrong revision, and this behavior is anti-intuitive and doesn't make any sense. If the oldid isn't listed, the text with this edit should simply be omitted.
Also, the documentation page should provide instructions on how do you link to an old revision?. This is not easy to do, and I still haven't found instructions on how to do it. If this template is gonna force me to enter it, it should at least tell you how to do it. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 13:52, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
to_oldid
is set. For example, detecting an invalid diff
requires parsing, which is more suited for a cleanup JavaScript or bot.from_oldid
. That page links to
Help:Page history#Linking to a specific version of a page.
Flatscan (
talk)
05:32, 25 December 2011 (UTC)With this edit I changed some very awkward wording, not that on Talk:Justin Bieber on Twitter, it reads:
Text from Justin Bieber on Twitter was copied into Justin Bieber with this edit on 27 April 2012. Justin Bieber on Twitter now serves to provide attribution for that content in Justin Bieber and must not be deleted so long as Justin Bieber exists. For attribution and to access older versions of the copied text, please see this history.
I changed it to read must not be deleted so long as the article XXXX exists, because Justin Bieber's existance has no bearing on Wikipedia's attribution policy. His article on the other hand is what we are worried about. -- kelapstick( bainuu) 04:09, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
Do we really need to mention two article names five times? Could we reword it along the following lines?
Antony–22 ( talk⁄ contribs) 06:26, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
An editor removed the true basic use (meaning not history links) of this template claiming it doesn't work. It does: Template:Copied/test. I'm restoring a version that's to/from/date to the documentation page. Ego White Tray ( talk) 15:55, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
{{Copied |from=Abraham Lincoln|date=1 September 2012}}
![]() | Text and/or other creative content from Abraham Lincoln was copied or moved into [[]] on 1 September 2012. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
Incnis Mrsi ( talk · contribs) modified this template so that a missing oldid would point the text "with this edit" to just the article page. My first thought was to revert, but I thought better of it (after Incnis e-mailed me instead of posting here for some reason). While it doesn't fully address the problems discussed earlier, I do consider it an improvement. Ego White Tray ( talk) 01:13, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
to_diff=prev
.
This example produces
this diff that indicates that to_oldid
is the first revision.
Flatscan (
talk)
04:09, 26 October 2012 (UTC)I noticed that User:Francophonie&Androphilie/RFPP uses this template. (I am not objecting to its placement there.)
The same situation applies to most of my own user scripts, not including cancelRedirectNo.js. (Note to self: create a proper listing at User:SoledadKabocha/scripts)
Should I add this template to the doc pages of my own user scripts? (Is there a guideline for or against doing so?) Also, does the requirement that the original script "must not be deleted so long as the latter page exists" hold in userspace? (What if one of the original authors retires and wants to delete his/her scripts? Would I need to delete my version too, or ... ?) -- SoledadKabocha ( talk) 17:21, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:Copied has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Currently the template gracefully handles when from_oldid isn't used, but doesn't gracefully handle when both to_oldid and to_diff are missing.
The following diff in the sandbox should fix this issue:
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Template%3ACopied%2Fsandbox&diff=647755100&oldid=647751775
Ahecht (
TALK
PAGE)
20:03, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
May I suggest that you consider changing the "from" and "to" portion of
Text from [[{{{from}}}]] was copied or moved into [[{{{to}}}]]
depending on which article you're currently on to "this article". It would make the message a bit clearer and shorter especially since most page moves are between similarly named articles. Not sure about any technical limitations with templates, if any, but you do seem to be linking to the former article's talk page only if you're on the latter article so detection does seem possible. Opencooper ( talk) 15:01, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:Copied has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please implement the
changes from the template's sandbox to avoid placing a page in
Category:Wikipedia pages using copied template without oldid if the |diff=
parameter is provided, as that is equivalent to the |to_diff=
and |to_oldid=
parameters combined (or just the latter if it's the first revision).
nyuszika7h ( talk) 14:13, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Would it be a good idea to apply a "No redirect" to the links [[{{{from}}}]] and [[{{{to}}}]] in this template? Iceblock ( talk) 21:16, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
The transclusion of this template on Help talk:Interwiki linking has a broken link to the former page's talk page. This appears to be caused by this page's being on Meta and not wikipedia, which means that {{TALKPAGENAME}} doesn't produce the right name. I can't think of a good solution to this except to change the code to 'The former page's talk page can be accessed at [[{{{1|{{TALKPAGENAME:{{{from}}}}}}}}]].', which would allow for a custom parameter to be added for the talk page if it otherwise would display incorrectly - but that seems icky. Any thoughts? Cathfolant ( talk) 22:09, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
I recently created a new article, and at the same time I added to a preexisting, related article the new content I had obtained for the new article. I was just wondering if the template always is required in such situations. Happy to use it, but it's just that I had assumed that this template would only be for situations in which the editor copies and pastes text from another Wikipedia article, and that's not quite what happened. Coretheapple ( talk) 13:35, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
{{edit template-protected|Template:Copied|answered=no}}
Please implement
this edit from the sandbox. I inserted
prev
as a default value for the {{{to_diff}}}
parameter when creating the URL, in order to avoid errors where to_oldid
is provided but not to_diff
. --
Paul_012 (
talk)
09:25, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
Please update this template to follow the guideline MOS:ANDOR. This seems like a clear case where "and/or" can simply be replaced with "or" as there is no question that the possible case of "not both" is notable. -- 109.79.177.186 ( talk) 21:22, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:Copied has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please add {{subst:tfm|Copied multi|heading=Template:Copied multi}} to the top of the template. -- Trialpears ( talk) 21:52, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
This edit caught my eye and caused me to encounter this template for what I think is the first time. This template appears to have a serious problem when it says in the hatnote it adds to articles that one Wikipedia article serves to provide attribution for another article and that the attribution in the article providing it must not be deleted so long as the other article which relies on that exists. WP:V requires support by reliable sources. WP:RS says that other Wikipedia articles are not reliable sources (see WP:NOTRS). It appears to me that this template ought to be deleted and that articles which use it need to be reviewed for proper attribution. Please discuss below. I see this as a very urgent matter. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill)
That's probably why I have not seen its hatnote previously. Regardless, this seems to me still to flout WP:V by relying on a non-RS source for attribution. That policy objection reflects the practical problem that even though the hatnote says that the attribution in that non-RS source "must not be deleted" so long as articles which rely on it exist, nothing prevents such deletion in that non-RS source without regard to the fact that other WP articles rely on it for attribution -- leaving those reliant articles in copyvio. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 13:41, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
This gets messier and messier, and leads away from copyright license attribution. That still looks like a problem area to me, but let's put that aside for now.
(→History: copied content from USS Maine (ACR-1); see that page's history for attribution.)
(not from the
Spanish–American War article). There seems to have been an error in template usage there. Let's put that aside for now also.the latter's high hull and guns mounted on her main deck made her the drier ship.{{sfn|Cowan & Sumrall|p=134}}
. That leads to a problem I am about to discuss.Summarizing that, copying content with clickable internal links from one article to another breaks those internal links unless their targets are also copied from the donor to the recipient article.
That's not a problem with this template, though, it's a general problem in WP:Copying within Wikipedia#Proper attribution. Right now, I'm thinking that this discussion ought to be moved over to the talk page there. What do you think? Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 22:59, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
Yes. See Wikipedia talk:Copying within Wikipedia#Proper attribution, which I've just created. I still think that there are problems with the notice inserted by this template in that a Wikipedia article, being an unreliable source, cannot properly provide attribution where attribution is required. I'm not presently ready to suggest improvements, though. I'll think about that and will probably revisit this here later. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 14:16, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
If a range of oldid
s is not specified, it should assume the copying took place in a single edit, so the parameter |to_diff=
should default to prev
. ―
cobaltcigs
01:40, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
I have made some major improvements and converted the entire template to lua in connection to the {{ Copied multi}} TfD. The code can be found at Module:Sandbox/Trialpears/Copied and the results at Template:Copied/testcases. Essentially the changes I've made are as follows:
|merge=
is set to yes.|afd=
Since this is my first large scale lua project I'm a bit hesitent to implement it without a second pair of eyes so feedback would be appreciated. Thanks! ‑‑ Trialpears ( talk) 19:06, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
argsx or ""
- since you are using Module:Arguments, nil arguments and empty arguments are treated the same. If you don't need to concatenate the text, there is no need to set as empty. So for regular if checks this is unnessaray.if not (x = "") then ... else ... end
- conventional coding practice is to check the positive as it keeps the code cleaner. Here you first check if it's not positive (in this case, empty), then you check if it's not empty and then do the positive action. Instead of that, if (x)
would work. It's much easier to read the code this way.argsx
.text = text .. text
you create a new object. In places where the string of text is broken up to multiple parts, it also makes reading the whole text harder and finding grammar bugs even harder. Instead, use string.format().I am planning on making a few changes to this template based on needs seen when converting all the instances of {{ Copied multi}} these are as follows:
|to_diff=
breaking the template. To solve this the template should recognize if the user has inputted a URL and handle it appropriately.If no one objects this will be implemented in a few days. ‑‑ Trialpears ( talk) 13:14, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
Like other template pages I've viewed, this one is functionally indecipherable (and I'm a former college educator and technical writer, with numerous technical certificates and licenses, including in computers!)
Wikipedia needs to fundamentally rethink, restructure, and re-present its protocols and input systems for references, tags, and templates.
Wikipedia, at present, demands FAR too much effort, on form and computer coding -- leaving precious little time for editors to focus on substance.
What a MESS. ~ Penlite ( talk) 14:37, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
~ Penlite ( talk) 14:39, 29 May 2020 (UTC) ~ Penlite ( talk) 14:40, 29 May 2020 (UTC) ~ Penlite ( talk) 14:41, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
I've been inserting {{ copied}} to record the complete or partial copying of articles, templates. modules and documentation from the English Wikipedia to an incubator wikipedia and to the Thai Wikipedia, and from the English and Thai Wikipedias to an incubator wikipedia. For simple copying where the pages have ASCII names, one can create the new template invocation in a file by the simple process:
This process has a fairly low error rate. -- RichardW57 ( talk) 17:09, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
The first issue arises with non-ASCII file names. The non-ASCII characters are represent by the hex code of the UTF bytes. These do seem to work when viewed the rendered template instance, but:
Is it possible to use the #subst mechanism to convert the hex codes of the UTF characters back to UTF? -- RichardW57 ( talk) 17:09, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
Where are the steps to be taken when 'moving' either source or the destination recorded? Have they indeed been documented? How are they enforced? There is an unanswered section #Maybe "No redirect" that suggests that changing names of source or definition should be prohibited. However, it seems unreasonable that copying a file from the English Wikipedia to an incubator Wikipedia should prevent its being renamed, and if a length chunk of an article is copied for translation, will not the translation be done while the article is in user space? A translation can take days or weeks. -- RichardW57 ( talk) 17:09, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
Are admins trained in how to handle notices published via {{ copied}}? — Preceding unsigned comment added by RichardW57 ( talk • contribs) 17:09, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
Please see the discussion at WT:COPY#Attribution in a case of deleted history from a cross-wiki translation for a case which may possibly affect the documentation or coding of this template. Thanks, Mathglot ( talk) 00:40, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
I am finding the instruction for basic use
{{Copied|from=|from_oldid=|to=|to_diff=}}
seems wrong. I think it should read
{{Copied|from=|from_oldid=|to=|diff=}}
which works for me. The change was made here Thincat ( talk) 11:02, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
For the case of {{ tlg}} being renamed, the notice placed in its talk page is still accessible and and almost functional at Template_talk:tlg if one allows the redirection to Template talk:Template link general: {{copied|from=Template:Tlg|from_oldid=790785155|to=:incubator:Template:Wp/nod/tlg|to_diff=4245590}} yields
![]() | Text and/or other creative content from this version of Template:Tlg was copied or moved into incubator:Template:Wp/nod/tlg with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
For the case of {{ tlx}} and {{ tlx/doc}} being renamed, the notice placed on its talk page is still accessible and almost functional at Template_talk:tlx if one allows the redirection to Template talk:Template link expanded: {{copied|from1=Template:Tlx|from_oldid1=821674175|to1=:incubator:Template:Wp/nod/tlx|to_diff1=4241206 |from2=Template:Tlx/doc|from_oldid2=780763309|to2=:incubator:Template:Wp/nod/tlx/doc|to_diff2=4241689}} yields
![]() | 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.
|
With both formats, the problem is that the three history links link to the history of the redirections, so do not provide attribution for the actual templates and documentation. What should be modified to fix this problem:
![]() | Text and/or other creative content from this version of Template:Template link general was copied or moved into incubator:Template:Wp/nod/tlg with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
![]() | 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.
|
Please advise. -- RichardW57 ( talk) 02:35, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
Please modify this template to comply with MOS:ANDOR (see also MOS:SLASH).
Specifically that means change the phrase from
X: "Text and/or other creative content from"... to
Y: "Text or other creative content from"...
(optionally, if you really believe there was every any ambiguity necessitating the use of AND/OR you could instead change it to:
Z: "Text or other creative content or both from"... ). Ignore my use of italics, they're or emphasis and to highlight the specific change.
There is no need to for this template (or any other page) to ignore the Manual of Style guidelines MOS:ANDOR when it could simply write with a bit more clarity. -- 109.79.171.255 ( talk) 15:20, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Module:Copied has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The changes at
Module:Copied/sandbox in regards to using "prev" as a default for to_diff
and "next" as a default for to_oldid
should be copied over to
Module:Copied.
Right now the default that is provided is for to_diff
, is "prev", which is wrong. Since to_oldid
represents the ID of the revision before the content was copied, to link to the diff where the content was added, to_diff
should be set to "next" as the revision with the content being added would be the next revision. When only to_diff
is provided, to produce the right diff link, to_oldid
should fallback to "prev".
See the first three testcases here
Template:Copied/testcases, when to_diff
is removed the current template links to the
diff before the diff where the content was added, but the sandbox version
links to the correct diff. When to_oldid
is removed, both templates link to the correct diff, but the sandbox specifies oldid=prev
, whereas the live template doesn't. –
BrandonXLF (
talk)
02:25, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
Faced with nine parameters for basic usage, I think that many people will be discouraged from using this template at all.
Couldn't we have an "ultra-basic" or "absolutely minimal" example with just 'from' and 'to'? or 'from' and 'to' and 'date'? Last time I tried, 'from' and 'to' were the minimum that made sense. This would encourage more usage, IMHO.
This is a proposal for the documentation page, not for the template itself. Boud ( talk) 01:19, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Module:Copied has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Hello! I'm trying to create a userscript for
WikiProject Copyright Cleanup editors and noticed that this template doesn't have a specific class to identify it (much like how {{
edit semi-protected}} is implemented). I've made the required changes in the
module sandbox (
diff) and I'd like to request that version to be copied into
Module:Copied. It introduces the "copiednotice
" class into the box so that it can be efficiently targeted on rendered talk pages and in
Parsoid documents.
Chlod (
say hi!)
06:06, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Module:Copied has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Currently, if a page uses fromX without using from (like here), it'll get put into Category:Wikipedia pages using copied template without oldid incorrectly even if it has a perfectly valid oldidX. I've made a change onto the sandbox version that fixes this. Aidan9382 ( talk) 06:37, 17 May 2022 (UTC)