Difference between revisions of "Template talk:comic discussion"
(→"add a comment!" button: new section) |
(→"add a comment!" button) |
||
| Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
I noticed that the link appended onto the "add a comment!" button is <nowiki>{{fullurl:{{TALKPAGENAME}}|action=edit}}</nowiki>. Wouldn't it make more sense to have it as <nowiki>{{fullurl:{{TALKPAGENAME}}|action=edit§ion=new}}</nowiki>, as to create a new section by clicking that button? [[User:Schiffy|<font color="000999">Schiffy</font>]] ([[User_talk:Schiffy|<font color="FF6600">Speak to me</font>]]|[[Special:Contributions/Schiffy|<font color="FF0000">What I've done</font>]]) 15:48, 12 July 2013 (UTC) | I noticed that the link appended onto the "add a comment!" button is <nowiki>{{fullurl:{{TALKPAGENAME}}|action=edit}}</nowiki>. Wouldn't it make more sense to have it as <nowiki>{{fullurl:{{TALKPAGENAME}}|action=edit§ion=new}}</nowiki>, as to create a new section by clicking that button? [[User:Schiffy|<font color="000999">Schiffy</font>]] ([[User_talk:Schiffy|<font color="FF6600">Speak to me</font>]]|[[Special:Contributions/Schiffy|<font color="FF0000">What I've done</font>]]) 15:48, 12 July 2013 (UTC) | ||
| + | :If someone just wants to add a comment without making a new section, the current add a comment button serves them well. Plus, headers and transclusion do not mix well, and we tend to avoid them in discussion pages unless we're not transcluding; see [[Time]] and its respective talk page. '''[[User:Davidy22|<u>{{Color|#707|David}}<font color=#070 size=3>y</font></u><font color=#508 size=4>²²</font>]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 16:39, 12 July 2013 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 16:39, 12 July 2013
The template eats whitespace, compare Talk:1101: Sketchiness and 1101: Sketchiness. --Kronf (talk) 20:58, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
- Nope. In most cases it performs fine. Here's just a few examples:
- 1094: Interview vs. Talk:1094: Interview
- 1093: Forget vs. Talk:1093: Forget
- 1092: Michael Phelps vs. Talk:1092: Michael Phelps (last 2 comments)
- 1091: Curiosity vs. Talk:1091: Curiosity (at least the first 2 comments)
- 1090: Formal Languages vs. Talk:1090: Formal Languages
- etc.
- I don't know what is wrong with that talk page, but it appears to be happening only for that comic.
New topic for testing purposes
Just testing what the TOC looks like... Mark Hurd (talk) 11:01, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
FYI I've mentioned my change to "add a topic!" here for a wider audience. Mark Hurd (talk) 11:33, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
Switched to level-1 header
I was just on 1110 and I noticed that all the talk page sections were showing up as the same level as content sections... leaving a "Discussion" section with nothing actually in it. While level-1 is normally reserved for article titles, it doesn't really bother people usually, and I think it's preferable to the alternative... it's also somewhat fitting, since we are transcluding another page after all. (Another option would be configuring the "new section" button to create a level-3 header on talk pages... if that's possible.) PinkAmpersand (talk) 14:33, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks. This actually had been done before. Please see this discussion and add your thoughts :) Waldir (talk) 16:48, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
"add a comment!" button
I noticed that the link appended onto the "add a comment!" button is {{fullurl:{{TALKPAGENAME}}|action=edit}}. Wouldn't it make more sense to have it as {{fullurl:{{TALKPAGENAME}}|action=edit§ion=new}}, as to create a new section by clicking that button? Schiffy (Speak to me|What I've done) 15:48, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
- If someone just wants to add a comment without making a new section, the current add a comment button serves them well. Plus, headers and transclusion do not mix well, and we tend to avoid them in discussion pages unless we're not transcluding; see Time and its respective talk page. Davidy²²[talk] 16:39, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
