Wikipedia

Template talk:VTE

(Redirected from Template talk:View)
Latest comment: 2 days ago by Joy in topic Template-protected edit request on 20 August 2025
Learn more about this page

Edit linked as external

edit
Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Any way we could incorporate the features of Template:Ed2 so that the "e" link is a simple blue link like the "v" and "d" links? Similar to the style of Template:Navbox really. Having the edit link appear as an external one is pretty confusing. Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits)Join WikiProject Athletics! 18:37, 1 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I think the purge link will be fairly useful because many templates require purging either the template page or the article transcludes to make the revision effective. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 01:13, 15 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

Removal of the whitespaces outside of this template

edit
Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I notice that this template add 1 whitespaces before and after the links. I want them to be removed so we have more flexibility to alternate the display style. For example I wanna include the v.d.e links inside a brackets but the whitespaces will make it looks inconsistent with the collapsible button in most infobox templates which does not have whitespaces inbetween. (By comparing [show] / [hide] to [

]). Thanks for your attention. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 01:33, 15 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

Protected edit request on 12 May 2014

edit
Latest comment: 11 years ago20 comments3 people in discussion
  • Please copy all code from /sandbox into live template.
  • Change: shows letter "t" for talk link, not "d" any more. And accepts "t" too (next to maintained "d") as parameter input to show & link "t".
  • See testcases. -DePiep (talk) 11:55, 12 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
I support the adding of the 't' option because it may be easier for some people to remember, I oppose changing the letter of the link from discuss this template to t because d = discuss and is more clear than t = discuss. So, you'll need a consensus for that part of the request, DePiep. If there is no administrator interested in making this partial change to this template, I would be happy to fix up the sandbox and make the change if the protection level can be lowered to   Template editor and it is not cascaded. Thanks. — {{U|Technical 13}} (t • e • c) 15:46, 12 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
  Partly done: Okay, so since the protection level on this template was lowered to   Template editor, I've tested the modifications in the sandbox and testcases page. The template will now accept "t" too, but will still display "d" for discuss this template as I mentioned above. Changing that will require some discussion and a consensus as I oppose changing it so 't' means discussion. — {{U|Technical 13}} (t • e • c) 16:57, 12 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
Technical 13 I oppose a partial change, so no consensus for that.
As for "t": see {{navbar}} (7.5M). -DePiep (talk) 17:00, 12 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
  Undone: This request (or the completed portion of it) has been undone. Okay then, since I oppose the full change, then this can sit as undone. Oh well. — {{U|Technical 13}} (t • e • c) 19:51, 12 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
I don't get this. First you declare it without consenst, and then you make other changes without consent? Anyway, back to my original point: make the template follow {navbar}. Even including title text. -DePiep (talk) 20:57, 12 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
Technical 13  Twice here, and of course in my sandbox code, I have proposed to make this one parallel with {{navbar}}. Why did you not respond to that? -DePiep (talk) 22:19, 17 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
  • DP, I was unaware that there was further discussion as you did not ping me. The easiest way to ping me is to copy the template appearing section of my signature into the message and make sure to sign. {{@}} is not a pinging template (it is designed to be able to post an email address on the page with a lesser chance of a bot scrapping that information and spamming the email address like Example{{@}}foo.bar which gives you Example foo.bar. As for your other question, I've not looked at navbar and have no idea what is in it right now. I'm getting ready to go to school, but I do promise to have a peak and give you my thoughts on the matter before we move forward. I'm also currently testing a performance enhancement in the sandbox for this template, just to give you a heads up. :) — {{U|Technical 13}} (t • e • c) 11:39, 21 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
I'm sorry I/it did not ping you; it clearly was my intention to do. Did not know this difference with {U} and {ping}. Will not repeat it, thanks for pointing (I also learned recently that one must ping-and-sign in one same edit save!).
Below I've added more explanation on {navbar}. If you still disagree, I suggest you reply that (while keeping the change in place).
More changes (like your middot experiment in /sandbox) I have no time to dive in to. Except maybe to note that you could take ideas & guidance from {{navbar}}. -DePiep (talk) 05:17, 22 May 2014 (UTC)Reply

Use "t" for talk, not "d"

edit

Discussion above did not have follow up.

Changed the code to show "t" for talk, instead of "d" (from 'discuss'). This is in line with {{navbar}} (which has 7.5M treansclusions). Still kept the title text (mousehover text) to be "discuss this template", as {navbar} has. [1] -DePiep (talk) 08:42, 21 May 2014 (UTC)Reply

Adding: {{navbar}} shows these links as:
view - talk - edit or V - T - E
{{v}} and {{view}} show these links as:
view - talk - edit or v - ? - e
As for the "title", compare the mousehoover text.
-DePiep (talk) 05:05, 22 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
I just saw this, I and have to oppose using a small "t" for display, as it is too small to click on. Navbar solves this by using small-capital display, which is not the case here and is harder to build in, because the word-form should not display in small-caps.
Also, the entities are not impacting performance; that would be the truckload of parser function. Perhaps a better solution is to LUAfy this template? — Edokter (talk) — 11:16, 22 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
What would be the guideline that concludes "too small"? -DePiep (talk) 16:03, 22 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
I saw the elaborate code, but that should not prevent these changes. -DePiep (talk) 16:05, 22 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
And, what is the "not universal" thing about using thinspace entities?
There is none, but anything wider then 2 pixels would suffice. The "not universal" applies to the   entity, which has always been plagued with poor support, so don't use those. I already have an alternate solution in the sandbox, have a look. — Edokter (talk) — 16:13, 22 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
I saw the sandbox, and of course that is a route to follow. I already said we'd best follow {navbar}. I'll leave it to you to move it to live. -DePiep (talk) 17:10, 22 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
Edokter, any blocking reasons found? -DePiep (talk) 21:01, 31 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
No, just forgot. — Edokter (talk) — 21:42, 31 May 2014 (UTC)Reply

What is this "thinspace"about?

edit

Edokter. Above you pointed to   being a bad thing. That must be U+2009   THIN SPACE ( ,  ) then.

Could you link or point to some talks about these issues? It reads like a browser-dependent problem, but it could be outdated. Just some hints will do, this is not the place to rewrite an existing knowledge essay (I can also put this question at VPT, but asking you first in kindness).

In editing, I would like to use it. Like for I. -DePiep (talk) 20:48, 10 July 2014 (UTC)Reply

Older browsers/OSs may shown tofu for these characters, because   is relatively new. I generally like to avoid exotic Unicode where standard characters (or CSS) will suffice. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 20:56, 10 July 2014 (UTC)Reply

Template-protected edit request on 14 July 2014

edit
Latest comment: 11 years ago10 comments3 people in discussion

8K bytes for something this simple is kinda crazy and produces way more template inclusion than necessary. I've gone ahead and modulized this template to Module:Template view. The code to replace the current with is on Template:V/sandbox. The code has been tested to work at Template:V/testcases. If an admin fulfills this, can they also permanently template-protect the module? moluɐɯ 07:48, 14 July 2014 (UTC)Reply

You might like to handle {{view}} too, The Mol Man. -DePiep (talk) 08:38, 14 July 2014 (UTC)Reply
I looked at it, and it just calls {{v}}. The testcases page actually includes tests for both templates as well. moluɐɯ 10:04, 14 July 2014 (UTC)Reply
Invoking the module directly saves on level of transclusion. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 10:12, 14 July 2014 (UTC)Reply
Sorry, that makes sense, and I understand. I didn't get any sleep though, so I can't work on the module properly right now. I've decided to deactivate my request for today. I'll look into the module more tomorrow and get the requested change working before asking again. moluɐɯ 11:55, 14 July 2014 (UTC)Reply
I also need to find out how to pass parameters (and why its not needed in {{v}}). Links are malformed as well, so that needs work too. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 12:56, 14 July 2014 (UTC)Reply
@Edokter: The arguments are passed from the template transclusion, this is facilitated with Module:Arguments. (Bear with this tired kid) Can you tell me what exactly you mean by malformed links and where? moluɐɯ 13:00, 14 July 2014 (UTC)Reply
All the links (excepts view and talk) are in the form of .../wiki/[title]?action=edit, that doesn't work. They should be in the form of .../w/index.php?title=[title]&action=edit. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 13:04, 14 July 2014 (UTC)Reply
Weird. I don't understand why it's doing that, both are being created with {{fullurl:[title]}}. Interesting, I'll assume that's just a Lua thing (unless someone can tell me otherwise), and I'll rewrite it to use index.php. Maybe it's because I have the url arguments outside of that parser... I actually noticed another fault with my code not directly related to that (I left out Template: prefix. oops!). As I said before, I'm too tired to work on it now, but thanks for noticing these problems. Obviously don't hesitate to point out any other issues, and I'll do my best to have this fixed and working sometime tomorrow. moluɐɯ 13:11, 14 July 2014 (UTC)Reply
No rush. I think leaving the action outside the parser function is indeed the problem. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 14:07, 14 July 2014 (UTC)Reply

Request to Edit

edit
Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

The repetitive code can be moved to a sub template say Template:V/item with content 

{{#switch: {{{1}}}
|d|t= <b>·</b> [[Template talk:{{{template}}}|<span style="font-variant:small-caps;" title="Discuss this template">t</span>]]
|e= <b>·</b> [{{fullurl:Template:{{{template}}}|action=edit}} <span style="font-variant:small-caps;color:#002bb8;" title="Edit this template">e</span>]
|h= <b>·</b> [{{fullurl:Template:{{{template}}}|action=history}} <span style="font-variant:small-caps;color:#002bb8;" title="Template history">h</span>]
|m= <b>·</b> [{{fullurl:Special:Movepage|target=Template:{{{template}}}}} <span style="font-variant:small-caps;color:#002bb8;" title="Move this template">m</span>]
|w= <b>·</b> [{{fullurl:Template:{{{template}}}|action=watch}} <span style="font-variant:small-caps;color:#002bb8;" title="Watch this template">w</span>]
|talk= <b>·</b> [[Template talk:{{{template}}}|<span title="Discuss this template">talk</span>]]
|edit= <b>·</b> [{{fullurl:Template:{{{template}}}|action=edit}} <span style="color:#002bb8;" title="Edit this template">edit</span>]
|hist= <b>·</b> [{{fullurl:Template:{{{template}}}|action=history}} <span style="color:#002bb8;" title="Template history">hist</span>]
|move= <b>·</b> [{{fullurl:Special:Movepage|target=Template:{{{template}}}}} <span style="color:#002bb8;" title="Move this template">move</span>]
|watch= <b>·</b> [{{fullurl:Template:{{{template}}}|action=watch}} <span style="color:#002bb8;" title="Watch this template">watch</span>]
}}

Now the main Template can be simplified as 

-->{{V/item|{{{1}}}|template={{{template}}}}}<!--
-->{{V/item|{{{2}}}|template={{{template}}}}}<!--
-->{{V/item|{{{3}}}|template={{{template}}}}}<!--
-->{{V/item|{{{4}}}|template={{{template}}}}}<!--
-->{{V/item|{{{5}}}|template={{{template}}}}}<!--
-->{{V/item|{{{6}}}|template={{{template}}}}}<!--

Tested and Implemented in ml:Template:V. --Manuspanicker (talk) 15:01, 31 December 2014 (UTC)Reply

Every use of a subtemplate adds to the transclusion depth of a page, which has a maximum. A better solution is to make a LUA module. We already have Module:Navbar, which should be easy enough to modify for this template. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 18:20, 31 December 2014 (UTC)Reply

Template-protected edit request on 13 April 2017

edit
Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Please remove the TFD template, there appears to be no consensus on what to do relative to this important template. Thank you. 81.253.17.128 (talk) 17:46, 13 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

If you really feel that the template should be delete, it is suggested that you nominate it here. Boomer VialHolla! We gonna ball! 17:48, 13 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

Template-protected edit request on 13 April 2017

edit
Latest comment: 8 years ago4 comments4 people in discussion

As the last person to respond to my edit request failed to understand it I am reposting it. Can the TFD currently sitting here be removed? There has been no consensus on deleting this template. Thank you. 

81.253.17.128 (talk) 19:07, 13 April 2017 (UTC)Reply
  Not done: Discussion is still ongoing and consensus or lack of such has not been assessed yet. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 20:09, 13 April 2017 (UTC)Reply
There is not further discussion on this matter for over a month. 82.98.7.198 (talk) 15:55, 15 April 2017 (UTC)Reply
  Not done: The discussion has not been closed. Rest assured the tag will be removed at the resolution of the discussion. Izno (talk) 16:29, 15 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

Template:Vte listed at Redirects for discussion

edit
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Template:Vte and the outcome may involve moving Template:V. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Deryck C. 13:48, 26 June 2019 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

  You are invited to join the discussion at Template talk:Navbox § For navboxes with custom styling, VTE link underlines don't color properly. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 19:14, 4 August 2020 (UTC)Reply

buggy usage

edit
Latest comment: 4 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

I tried to use this at {{Zagreb Assembly (structure)}} and it didn't work, it rendered this:

(Only a "v" is shown".) Is it because of the parentheses or something? --Joy [shallot] (talk) 14:51, 23 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

I don't think so; I just tried to update {{AR6 SSP table}}, and the results were
; I had to switch directly to {{navbar}} use. Primefac (talk) 11:05, 22 August 2021 (UTC)Reply
Actually, on second read, I think this template is working as intended; if |mini=yes (according to the /doc) it will only show the [v] unless |t and |e are added, i.e. {{vte|AR6 SSP table|t|e}} giving
. Primefac (talk) 11:10, 22 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

Template-protected edit request on 20 August 2025

edit
Latest comment: 2 days ago16 comments3 people in discussion

Could just use {{doc}} so the actual editable doc page is transcluded? Rn it's not. FaviFake (talk) 15:32, 20 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

@FaviFake:   Done. It looks like there is existing documentation at Template:VTE/doc which differs from the documentation that was on the template page itself. Could you compare them and ensure that the most up-to-date/best version is being used? (Note that, for wrappers, we want to transclude rather than rewrite documentation to avoid redundancy.) Also courtesy pinging SWinxy, Primefac, and Joy, all of whom have edited the doc previously. Cheers, Sdkb talk 15:41, 20 August 2025 (UTC)Reply
Thanks, it does seem to be up-to-date. I added back the OG sentence from the non-doc page. FaviFake (talk) 16:04, 20 August 2025 (UTC)Reply
@Sdkb Oh, nevermind. They should probably both be scrapped because a MUCH better doc is at Template:Navbar. I'll work again on merging the two with the intent of ignoring VTE's /doc altogether in favour of Template:Navbar/doc. I'm not sure how the process works, but remember not to leave the sandbox and testcases with the old one, if it isn't done automatically. FaviFake (talk) 16:07, 20 August 2025 (UTC)Reply
Done, merged into Template:Navbar/doc#Shortcut_templates. FaviFake (talk) 16:21, 20 August 2025 (UTC)Reply
The reason I did this edit was to exactly to stop transcluding the entire navbar documentation here, because most of it is off-topic here. If someone looks up what the VTE template does, they need to see exactly that, not have to follow a meandering story to get to that. If there's a way to transclude just that relevant section, and provide a link to the rest, feel free to add that, but don't go back to the previous confusing state. --Joy (talk) 21:04, 20 August 2025 (UTC)Reply
Honestly, I think that edit made things more confusing, at least for me. I don't know what the navbar does or what the parameter "mini" is. This gives me 0 useful info. In comparison, the navbar doc already gives readers much more information, although i agree it is too cluttered.
I think the solution is not to write a sentece or two and linking to the navbar doc without transcluding it; i think the navbar doc just needs to be polished. The same thing can be said about the navbar template: "If someone looks up what the [NAVBAR] template does, they need to see exactly that, not have to follow a meandering story to get to that."
It also contains important info about the template and other configurations. I do not think the two docs should diverge. FaviFake (talk) 22:10, 20 August 2025 (UTC)Reply
If you don't know what navbar does, there is a clear link to read further and learn that. I know that some duplication in documentation can be a good practice, but I don't see how this is one such case. If the reader doesn't understand that a {{navbar}} link in template documentation invites them to click it to know more about what {{navbar}} means, it's hard to say that they are in the right place anyway. How are they going to understand template documentation if they are intimidated by the concept of following blue links? --Joy (talk) 19:25, 21 August 2025 (UTC)Reply
@Joy They are not intimidated, they're annoyed. There are two possible options:
  1. I open the doc, and find a blurb about a template that's not the one I was looking for, with a parameter that just says "mini". I try to read the rest but it all references that one weird parameter, so I have to click it and I'm presented with the full doc, and I start to read it, what it does, what it is primarily used for, its advantages, etc; or
  2. I open the doc and I read what it does, what it is primarily used for, its advantages, etc.
I'd say the second one is more streamlined.

If you don't know what navbar does, there is a clear link to read further and learn that.

Well, I think we should expect people coming to the doc to not know what it does. Otherwise, why'd they be coming to the doc in the first place? FaviFake (talk) 15:38, 24 August 2025 (UTC)Reply
I don't understand. This sounds like looking up apple, and then that lead section says it's a red round fruit, and then you have to click through in order to find out what are all the properties of fruits and what redness and roundness truly means in the context of fruits. What is there to get annoyed about? --Joy (talk) 15:41, 24 August 2025 (UTC)Reply
If you're looking up apple, you'll find all the info about apple in the article. But if look up this template, you won't find all the info. It's as if you were looking up apple juice, but it's just a super-short summary of another page, and to understand anything about the summary, you're required to read the page for apple first, which also explains apple juice in more detail and in simpler terms.
Have eyou read the new doc for navbar? I've added the easy examples from this page and I could do a redesign if you want, but I really don't understand what's the benefit of hidng every info a user comes to this templates' doc to read. FaviFake (talk) 15:51, 24 August 2025 (UTC)Reply
Okay, I see that it can be too concise. I still wouldn't squash it totally, rather explain this context better here. --Joy (talk) 20:55, 24 August 2025 (UTC)Reply
If you want to try and copy over info I don't mind, but I really think this effort is not necessary given that all the info is already on the other doc.
I suspect this will remain incomplete for many years unless the /doc target is changed to {{navbar}}'s. FaviFake (talk) 10:55, 25 August 2025 (UTC)Reply
There's no need to copy if we can simply transclude the relevant section, see below. --Joy (talk) 16:23, 25 August 2025 (UTC)Reply
Without commenting on the desirability one way or the other, @Joy, it is very possible to transclude just one section. See WP:Transclusion#Standard section transclusion. Cheers, Sdkb talk 16:42, 24 August 2025 (UTC)Reply
Right, I remember seeing that exists (though not a lot of examples). Maybe this would be a nice use case. --Joy (talk) 20:56, 24 August 2025 (UTC)Reply
Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template_talk:VTE&oldid=1307772926"