This template was considered for deletion on 8 September 2011. The result of the discussion was "no consensus to delete". |
This page has archives. Sections older than 120 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
This template is used on templates which are then transcluded onto articles. This results in situations such as
this on 2010 United Kingdom general election where pages find themselves in multiple maintance cats (in this case the article has {{Use dmy dates|date=January 2020}}
and the template (
Template:2010 United Kingdom parliamentary election) has {{Use dmy dates|date=July 2013}}
). This is a problem because templates don't appear in the tracking categories, making it very difficult to see why 2010 United Kingdom general election is in
Category:Use dmy dates from July 2013 (because it is transcluded from the template), effectively meaning that the tracking category for certain months aren't likely to be cleared, as it is very hard to work out why certain articles are still in them.
So would it be possible to allow pages in the template name space to appear in the tracking cats? Then we can put the templare in a <noinclude>
tag.(I am not
watching this page, so please
ping me if you want my attention.)
SSSB (
talk) 13:33, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
{{Use dmy dates|date=January 2020}}
so that it puts all of its articles in the 2020 category, regardless of if they truly should be there, seems a bit odd. What massive advantage am I missing? -
X201 (
talk) 13:54, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
{{
use DMY dates}}
(or similar) in a template; but when that is done, it must be inside <noinclude>...</noinclude>
. --
Redrose64 🌹 (
talk) 20:41, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
Input is welcome at Wikipedia talk:Date formattings#Should all articles have a dmy/mdy template?. – Uanfala ( talk) 01:14, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
I was just looking at the script documentation page and was mildly shocked to read that "This template is used on approximately 1,530,000 pages, or roughly 3% of all pages.
" It made me wonder if the number if articles on English Wikipedia have exploded astronomically since I last checked.
--
Ohc
revolution of our times 20:10, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
{{high use |no-percent=yes}}
which will suppress the 'percent of all pages' annotation.Might a recent change be causing whitespace at the top of (some) articles? Maybe ones that weren’t affected by having a blank line between the infobox and lede previously. See this page, which I've since fixed. The other template at the top of that article is Use British English, which hasn't been modified recently. I've seen this issue in many articles recently, which is a concern. Seasider53 ( talk) 22:36, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
{{
infobox church}}
? If so,
this was the fix. The problem arose in
this edit where
Terasail (
talk ·
contribs) added two newlines, instead of one (normal) or none (best). --
Redrose64 🌹 (
talk) 15:19, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
Is this the system that we should be using to monitor the consistent use of dates in the articles? Does it need to be done at all? Is there a better way to go about it? Please drop your ideas and/or suggestions here. Dawnseeker2000 04:45, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
{{
Use mdy dates}}
.|date=December 2023
makes it very quick and convenient to nail down that point in the history to then check the changes since then.|date=
on a monthly, or even yearly basis (i.e. from last month/year to this month), without any significant changes to the article since the last check, and with no needed fixes to the article's date formats, and with no other page cleanup/etc. Articles whose date formats have not been confirmed in 10+ years, though, I think should be checked & confirmed regardless of any other changes to the page (i.e. that |date=
is the only necessary change after a thorough examination), and there is a grey area there somewhere between those 2 extremes. I run a large amount of other cleanup code, regex, and
WP:GenFixes alongside each of these 10+ year updates, but maybe 25% have no changes (though it can vary quite a bit from one month to the next). Last-checked dates of any age should be updated whenever there's a change to a non-conforming date, of course. ~
Tom.Reding (
talk ⋅
dgaf) 12:19, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
|date=January 2012
.This template was considered for deletion on 8 September 2011. The result of the discussion was "no consensus to delete". |
This page has archives. Sections older than 120 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
This template is used on templates which are then transcluded onto articles. This results in situations such as
this on 2010 United Kingdom general election where pages find themselves in multiple maintance cats (in this case the article has {{Use dmy dates|date=January 2020}}
and the template (
Template:2010 United Kingdom parliamentary election) has {{Use dmy dates|date=July 2013}}
). This is a problem because templates don't appear in the tracking categories, making it very difficult to see why 2010 United Kingdom general election is in
Category:Use dmy dates from July 2013 (because it is transcluded from the template), effectively meaning that the tracking category for certain months aren't likely to be cleared, as it is very hard to work out why certain articles are still in them.
So would it be possible to allow pages in the template name space to appear in the tracking cats? Then we can put the templare in a <noinclude>
tag.(I am not
watching this page, so please
ping me if you want my attention.)
SSSB (
talk) 13:33, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
{{Use dmy dates|date=January 2020}}
so that it puts all of its articles in the 2020 category, regardless of if they truly should be there, seems a bit odd. What massive advantage am I missing? -
X201 (
talk) 13:54, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
{{
use DMY dates}}
(or similar) in a template; but when that is done, it must be inside <noinclude>...</noinclude>
. --
Redrose64 🌹 (
talk) 20:41, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
Input is welcome at Wikipedia talk:Date formattings#Should all articles have a dmy/mdy template?. – Uanfala ( talk) 01:14, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
I was just looking at the script documentation page and was mildly shocked to read that "This template is used on approximately 1,530,000 pages, or roughly 3% of all pages.
" It made me wonder if the number if articles on English Wikipedia have exploded astronomically since I last checked.
--
Ohc
revolution of our times 20:10, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
{{high use |no-percent=yes}}
which will suppress the 'percent of all pages' annotation.Might a recent change be causing whitespace at the top of (some) articles? Maybe ones that weren’t affected by having a blank line between the infobox and lede previously. See this page, which I've since fixed. The other template at the top of that article is Use British English, which hasn't been modified recently. I've seen this issue in many articles recently, which is a concern. Seasider53 ( talk) 22:36, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
{{
infobox church}}
? If so,
this was the fix. The problem arose in
this edit where
Terasail (
talk ·
contribs) added two newlines, instead of one (normal) or none (best). --
Redrose64 🌹 (
talk) 15:19, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
Is this the system that we should be using to monitor the consistent use of dates in the articles? Does it need to be done at all? Is there a better way to go about it? Please drop your ideas and/or suggestions here. Dawnseeker2000 04:45, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
{{
Use mdy dates}}
.|date=December 2023
makes it very quick and convenient to nail down that point in the history to then check the changes since then.|date=
on a monthly, or even yearly basis (i.e. from last month/year to this month), without any significant changes to the article since the last check, and with no needed fixes to the article's date formats, and with no other page cleanup/etc. Articles whose date formats have not been confirmed in 10+ years, though, I think should be checked & confirmed regardless of any other changes to the page (i.e. that |date=
is the only necessary change after a thorough examination), and there is a grey area there somewhere between those 2 extremes. I run a large amount of other cleanup code, regex, and
WP:GenFixes alongside each of these 10+ year updates, but maybe 25% have no changes (though it can vary quite a bit from one month to the next). Last-checked dates of any age should be updated whenever there's a change to a non-conforming date, of course. ~
Tom.Reding (
talk ⋅
dgaf) 12:19, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
|date=January 2012
.