Last modified: 2010-05-15 15:48:23 UTC

Wikimedia Bugzilla is closed!

Wikimedia has migrated from Bugzilla to Phabricator. Bug reports should be created and updated in Wikimedia Phabricator instead. Please create an account in Phabricator and add your Bugzilla email address to it.
Wikimedia Bugzilla is read-only. If you try to edit or create any bug report in Bugzilla you will be shown an intentional error message.
In order to access the Phabricator task corresponding to a Bugzilla report, just remove "static-" from its URL.
You could still run searches in Bugzilla or access your list of votes but bug reports will obviously not be up-to-date in Bugzilla.
Bug 9499 - New "automatically substing" template namespace
New "automatically substing" template namespace
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 2777
Product: MediaWiki
Classification: Unclassified
Templates (Other open bugs)
All All
: Normal enhancement with 2 votes (vote)
: ---
Assigned To: Nobody - You can work on this!
Depends on: 2003
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2007-04-05 00:51 UTC by emddudley
Modified: 2010-05-15 15:48 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:
Web browser: ---
Mobile Platform: ---
Assignee Huggle Beta Tester: ---


Description emddudley 2007-04-05 00:51:18 UTC
Many people get confused on Wikipedia on whether or not they should subst a
template, despite the extensive [[Wikipedia:Subst]] page describing the topic. I
am tired of people substing templates when they shouldn't, and not substing when
they should.

I propose the addition of a new namespace type which acts as a template in every
way except that it is automatically substed. Essentially it should be a shortcut
for going to the template, viewing the source, copying it (being careful not to
select any <noinclude> text) and copying it into the new page. Perhaps it could
somehow get substed prior to the "save edit" stage so if the user wanted to make
a change to the substituted text, they could do so without making two edits.

Templates could still be substed using the subst keyword, but I wouldn't mind
seeing the keyword get removed entirely.

My argument is that the *creator(s)* of the template should be the ones that
determine whether or not a template should be substed, not the users. The
creators know what the proper use is, and users just get confused or make
mistakes. It would be more clear to have a separate namespace.
Comment 1 emddudley 2007-04-05 00:54:37 UTC
I see that there is a similar bug for adding a new keyword that would be a
template unsubstable. I think this bug should remain separate, since this is a
proposal for a new namespace, not a keyword.
Comment 2 Rob Church 2007-04-08 07:37:52 UTC
Namespace clutter; similar enough to bug 2777, which is more feasible with our
current template handling, and makes more sense.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 2777 ***

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.