Module talk:Formatnum: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 13:19, 1 August 2022

Latest revision as of 11:53, 28 August 2022

(6 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)

Line 1:

{{Permanently protected}}

{{oldtfdfull|date= 2018 September 21 |result=keep |disc=Module:Formatnum}}

Line 14 ⟶ 15:

== #invoke ==

{{edit template-protected|answered=noyes}}

The production code cannot be #invoke'd normally, only wrapped by templates. The sandbox code fixes this. [[User:Trigenibinion|Trigenibinion]] ([[User talk:Trigenibinion|talk]]) 11:56, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

:[[File:Red information icon with gradient background.svg|20px|link=|alt=]] '''Not done for now:''' please establish a [[Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] for this alteration '''[[Wikipedia:Edit requests|before]]''' using the {{tlx|edit template-protected}} template.<!-- Template:ETp --> It is not obvious to me that it would be beneficial to allow a module-version to be used. What is the proposed use case where it is necessary? (See also [[Template talk:Infobox]] for a related case.) [[User:Izno|Izno]] ([[User talk:Izno|talk]]) 02:11, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

::This is needed so that this module or another one can be conditionally #invoke'd. See [[Template:FXConvert/sandbox]]. [[User:Trigenibinion|Trigenibinion]] ([[User talk:Trigenibinion|talk]]) 08:43, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

::: {{not done}} Nothing has changed since {{u|Izno}}'s decline. This request is part of a proposal to produce code bloat whose existence five people have objected to at TfD, and hence is by definition not uncontroversial enough for an edit request. [[User:Pppery|* Pppery *]] [[User talk:Pppery|<sub style="color:#800000">it has begun...</sub>]] 14:34, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

::::Supporting #invoke has nothing to do with code bloat. It is only a couple lines of code. It is not required by [[Template:FXConvert]] or [[Module:Wordify]], it can be worked around, but that is not the best solution. [[User:Trigenibinion|Trigenibinion]] ([[User talk:Trigenibinion|talk]]) 16:11, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

:::::Asked and answered. Reopening without consensus is not acceptable. No TE in their right mind would make such an edit without the necessary garnered consensus. Rather than spinning your wheels, just go and get the necessary consensus. '''''[[User:Paine Ellsworth|<span style="font-size:92%;color:darkblue;font-family:Segoe Script">P.I.&nbsp;Ellsworth</span>]]'''''&thinsp;,&nbsp;[[Editor|<span style="color:black">ed.</span>]]&nbsp;[[User talk:Paine Ellsworth|^{put'r&nbsp;there}]]&nbsp;<small>20:20, 5 August 2022 (UTC)</small>

::::::Isn't this the place to garner consensus? [[User:Trigenibinion|Trigenibinion]] ([[User talk:Trigenibinion|talk]]) 21:24, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

:::::::{{to|Trigenibinion}} yes, this talk page would be the place to garner consensus. Since this talk page may not be monitored by many editors, a [[WP:CAN|neutral invitation]] on other appropriate talk pages would put more eyes on your proposal. For some edits, especially major changes, a formal [[WP:RFC|RfC]] is used to help garner [[WP:consensus|consensus]]. '''''[[User:Paine Ellsworth|<span style="font-size:92%;color:darkblue;font-family:Segoe Script">P.I.&nbsp;Ellsworth</span>]]'''''&thinsp;,&nbsp;[[Editor|<span style="color:black">ed.</span>]]&nbsp;[[User talk:Paine Ellsworth|^{put'r&nbsp;there}]]&nbsp;<small>18:49, 27 August 2022 (UTC)</small>