Content deleted Content added
Line 241:
:::<p>Please don't revert another editor's {{para|answered|yes}}.<p>The technical "fix" may be trivial, but it is not sensible at this time without ''other people agreeing to implement it at this time''. (And just because someone made the supposed fix in the sandbox does not mean they necessarily agree with it.) --[[User:Izno|Izno]] ([[User talk:Izno|talk]]) 18:00, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
::::There is nothing stopping an edit request being reactivated. In fact there are specific instructions in the template that say {{tq|Set the {{para|answered}} or {{para|ans}} parameter to no to reactivate your request.}} Only admins can satisfy the request since this template is fully protected and, since you are not an admin, nor do you even hold the Templateeditor permission, you can't adequately satisfy the request. This problem was not a problem before recent edits. Nor were many other problems that have cropped up since the changes. This indicates that the changes were not adequately tested before implementation. I've been writing code, both personally and professionally, for 40 years and would never have made such changes without adequate testing. Granted, much of my professional work was mission critical, dealing with issues of national security, but I can accept that there is not an urgent need to revert the changes fully because these errors are not affecting "the mission" too much. However, implementing a simple change that merely reverts the addition of an error is to be expected. --[[User:AussieLegend|'''<span style="color:#008751;">Aussie</span><span style="color:#fcd116;">Legend</span>''']] ([[User talk:AussieLegend#top|<big>✉</big>]]) 08:23, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
:::::<p>{{tq| consensus should be obtained before formally making the request.}} (from [[WP:Edit requests]]). The ''standing consensus'' in the context of these modules, as I have already pointed out, is that the main template is synced from the sandbox only once in every while. If you are willing to challenge that standing consensus, please do so. Reactivating an edit request is not how you are going to get a change made either to the template ''or'' the standing consensus.<p>{{tq|Please do not add the {{tl|edit protected}} template merely to attract attention to the change, as it clutters up the relevant edit request category with unactionable requests.}} also from [[WP:Edit requests]]. (Re)activating this edit request has the exact effect proscribed by this sentence.<p>Administrators/templateeditors may be the only editors able to respond to a fully-protected edit request in the affirmative (that is, may implement the changes). However, I see little reason why any editor
| |||