Template talk:User CSS
Latest comment: 19 days ago by Jeffrey34555 in topic Requested move 28 July 2025
 | This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
 | On 28 July 2025, it was proposed that this page be moved from Template:User css to Template:User CSS. The result of the discussion was moved. |
Requested move 28 July 2025
edit- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Jeffrey34555 (talk) 07:54, 11 August 2025 (UTC)
- Template:User css → Template:User CSS
- Template:User css-0 → Template:User CSS-0
- Template:User css-1 → Template:User CSS-1
- Template:User css-2 → Template:User CSS-2
- Template:User css-3 → Template:User CSS-3
- Template:User css-4 → Template:User CSS-4
- Template:User css-5 → Template:User CSS-5
- Template:User css-N → Template:User CSS-N
– See Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 July 27#User css. In short, "css" is an actual ISO language code and should not be used here, so it’s better to rename the templates to "User CSS". Uppercase is used to distinguish it from the real language in other interwikis. Perhaps it is also necessary to replace all template usages to avoid leaving a redirect. Solidest (talk) 00:24, 28 July 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. TarnishedPathtalk 01:35, 4 August 2025 (UTC)
- User css-N seems to be a duplicate of User css-4: Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:User css-N (2nd nomination). Solidest (talk) 00:27, 28 July 2025 (UTC)
- Question - Are these user box templates? If so, should they be discussed here at TFD, or at MFD? Robert McClenon (talk) 18:09, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- Sigh, I don't know. I already moved the css-N discussion to MfD, as TfD says userboxes go to MfD. But WP:RM doesn't mention either userboxes or MfD — the latter refers to deletion, not discussion or renaming, so it's hard to tell what's actually correct. It might even have been WP:RM/TR. Solidest (talk) 20:23, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- RM is the correct venue. * Pppery * it has begun... 15:41, 4 August 2025 (UTC)
- Sigh, I don't know. I already moved the css-N discussion to MfD, as TfD says userboxes go to MfD. But WP:RM doesn't mention either userboxes or MfD — the latter refers to deletion, not discussion or renaming, so it's hard to tell what's actually correct. It might even have been WP:RM/TR. Solidest (talk) 20:23, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- Support moving. Better to free up the space for an ISO code even if it's unlikely it'll be used. Schützenpanzer (Talk) 23:27, 1 August 2025 (UTC)
- Note: WikiProject Userboxes has been notified of this discussion. TarnishedPathtalk 01:35, 4 August 2025 (UTC)
- Rename per nom. But I would leave a redirect; until we actually have Southern Ohlone speakers then we might as well avoid the unnecessary chaos of not doing so. * Pppery * it has begun... 15:41, 4 August 2025 (UTC)
- Rename per nom; keep redirects on the understanding that they can be usurped (and "fixed") if we actually need to use Southern Ohlone. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:03, 6 August 2025 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.