The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:02, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
No need for this overly specific wrapper on #ifeq
, which is only used correctly on two templates.
{{3x|p}}ery (
talk) 23:59, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
{{#ifeq:{{{param|a}}}|{{{param|b}}}|defined|undefined}}
works well when this is needed.
Frietjes (
talk) 14:29, 30 May 2018 (UTC)The result of the discussion was delete. (non-admin closure) ~ Winged Blades Godric 07:35, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
Unused, and seems unnecessary. When would a template needs the ternary undef/empty/content situation (for cases without |5=
, literally the same syntax as #ifeq
{{3x|p}}ery (
talk) 23:48, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Primefac ( talk) 02:21, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
One transclusion in userspace, no apparent encyclopedic value Nikkimaria ( talk) 18:36, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Primefac ( talk) 02:37, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
No page that is using this template would run into the expensive parser function limit if it used the regular #ifexist
instead.
{{3x|p}}ery (
talk) 14:08, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
-- Redrose64 🌹 ( talk) 19:50, 19 May 2018 (UTC)This template seems to work by comparing a link to the page under test with a transclusion of that page; if the page doesn't exist, the attempted transclusion instead returns a redlink, which tests as equal to the true link. If the page exists, and is large, that means that a lot of content is being transcluded unnecessarily. This is occurring at Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous)/Archive L#.7B.7Bexists.7D.7D where the whole of Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous) is being transcluded - invisibly, but it's still there - see What Links Here.
#ifexist
.
Richard
0612 10:57, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete after substituting in San Diego Padres retired numbers and transcluding on San Diego Padres (non-admin closure) Galobtter ( pingó mió) 03:12, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
Only used on two articles, and could very easily be placed on the " retired numbers" page and transcluded onto the main article. Primefac ( talk) 15:47, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
<section begin=retired_numbers/>
would just delete the "unnecessary" code and never know that they broke transclusion on the including page. Having a standalone page is self-contained, and avoids these inadvertent, uninformed mistakes. It also ensures that all citations are defined in the included text, and doesnt reuse a reference from outside the section, which would result in undefined references on the transcluding page(s).—
Bagumba (
talk) 01:22, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
{{#section-h:San Diego Padres retired numbers|Retired numbers}}
which does not require <section />
tags and is less fragile.
Plastikspork
―Œ(talk) 20:37, 1 June 2018 (UTC)The result of the discussion was relisted on 2018 May 28. (non-admin closure) ~ Winged Blades Godric 07:38, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was relisted on 2018 June 2. Primefac ( talk) 15:13, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:02, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
No need for this overly specific wrapper on #ifeq
, which is only used correctly on two templates.
{{3x|p}}ery (
talk) 23:59, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
{{#ifeq:{{{param|a}}}|{{{param|b}}}|defined|undefined}}
works well when this is needed.
Frietjes (
talk) 14:29, 30 May 2018 (UTC)The result of the discussion was delete. (non-admin closure) ~ Winged Blades Godric 07:35, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
Unused, and seems unnecessary. When would a template needs the ternary undef/empty/content situation (for cases without |5=
, literally the same syntax as #ifeq
{{3x|p}}ery (
talk) 23:48, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Primefac ( talk) 02:21, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
One transclusion in userspace, no apparent encyclopedic value Nikkimaria ( talk) 18:36, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Primefac ( talk) 02:37, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
No page that is using this template would run into the expensive parser function limit if it used the regular #ifexist
instead.
{{3x|p}}ery (
talk) 14:08, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
-- Redrose64 🌹 ( talk) 19:50, 19 May 2018 (UTC)This template seems to work by comparing a link to the page under test with a transclusion of that page; if the page doesn't exist, the attempted transclusion instead returns a redlink, which tests as equal to the true link. If the page exists, and is large, that means that a lot of content is being transcluded unnecessarily. This is occurring at Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous)/Archive L#.7B.7Bexists.7D.7D where the whole of Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous) is being transcluded - invisibly, but it's still there - see What Links Here.
#ifexist
.
Richard
0612 10:57, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete after substituting in San Diego Padres retired numbers and transcluding on San Diego Padres (non-admin closure) Galobtter ( pingó mió) 03:12, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
Only used on two articles, and could very easily be placed on the " retired numbers" page and transcluded onto the main article. Primefac ( talk) 15:47, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
<section begin=retired_numbers/>
would just delete the "unnecessary" code and never know that they broke transclusion on the including page. Having a standalone page is self-contained, and avoids these inadvertent, uninformed mistakes. It also ensures that all citations are defined in the included text, and doesnt reuse a reference from outside the section, which would result in undefined references on the transcluding page(s).—
Bagumba (
talk) 01:22, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
{{#section-h:San Diego Padres retired numbers|Retired numbers}}
which does not require <section />
tags and is less fragile.
Plastikspork
―Œ(talk) 20:37, 1 June 2018 (UTC)The result of the discussion was relisted on 2018 May 28. (non-admin closure) ~ Winged Blades Godric 07:38, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was relisted on 2018 June 2. Primefac ( talk) 15:13, 2 June 2018 (UTC)