Beautiful banners are coming to every article and you can help!
Check out our guidelines and learn how to create your own!

Template talk:Merge

From Wikitravel
Jump to: navigation, search

TOC[edit]

Can someone fix this template so that it isn't conflicting with the new TOC? See Qaila Jangi for an example – cacahuate talk 01:24, 24 May 2007 (EDT)

There's nothing obvious in the template that controls its placement, so it's probably something in the site's master stylesheet. But the only problem I'm seeing is that the red box goes behind the TOC, and for a temporary tag like this, I wouldn't worry about it. -Todd VerBeek 08:11, 24 May 2007 (EDT)

Slimming it down[edit]

Per Globe-trotter's suggestion at Template talk:Vfd#Friendliness, here's a proposal to slim down this template. Current version:


Weaving.PNG
This topic may not meet the Wikitravel criteria for a separate article and should be merged into [[{{{1}}}]]. If you have an opinion, please discuss on this article's talk page. Please do not add new content to this article, but instead add it to [[{{{1}}}]]. You can help by copying any relevant information from this page to [[{{{1}}}|the new page]]. Once all content has been copied, this article should be made into a redirect. Please do not remove this merge notice without first gaining consensus for the removal on the article's talk page.



Proposed update:


Weaving.PNG
This topic may not meet the Wikitravel criteria for a separate article and should be merged into [[{{{1}}}]]. If you have an opinion, please discuss on this article's talk page. Please do not add new content to this article, but instead add it to [[{{{1}}}]]. You can help by copying any relevant information from this page to [[{{{1}}}|the new page]]. Once all content has been copied, this article should be made into a redirect. Please do not remove this merge notice without first gaining consensus for the removal on the article's talk page.


Comments/Suggestions? -- Ryan • (talk) • 19:31, 23 September 2011 (EDT)

I like it, but as I was wondering just yesterday, why do we say that it may not meet the criteria? Why not doesn't meet the criteria? texugo 23:50, 23 September 2011 (EDT)
I would't be opposed to changing it from "may not" to "does not", but since this template can be put on a page by anyone and the resulting discussions sometimes lead to the article not being merged the "may not" verbiage doesn't seem altogether incorrect. -- Ryan • (talk) • 12:18, 24 September 2011 (EDT)
Yeah, I suppose you are right... texugo 12:28, 24 September 2011 (EDT)
Any other comments? Going once... -- Ryan • (talk) • 22:27, 26 September 2011 (EDT)
I like the new look, but I think I have a nitpicky comment about the wording. Since it is "...may not meet...", shouldn't it be "...may have to be merged into..." instead of "...should be merged into..."? I can't still totally comprehend these auxiliary (is that the right word?) verbs in English, though, so if should is okay for everyone else, it's okay for me, too. – Vidimian 08:34, 27 September 2011 (EDT)
I understand your confusion there, but I think it should be kept as it. If we put "may have to be", it really sounds like we are sitting around waiting for a decision on it, instead of encouraging people to go ahead and start merging. texugo 09:51, 27 September 2011 (EDT)
Template updated. -- Ryan • (talk) • 00:01, 29 September 2011 (EDT)
Good work! --globe-trotter 07:29, 29 September 2011 (EDT)

Variants

Actions

Destination Docents

In other languages