This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Happy-melon (talk | contribs) at 12:58, 23 August 2008 (→Increase flexibility: done). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 12:58, 23 August 2008 by Happy-melon (talk | contribs) (→Increase flexibility: done)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff) | Template:Userpageinfo is permanently protected from editing because it is a heavily used or highly visible template. Substantial changes should first be proposed and discussed here on this page. If the proposal is uncontroversial or has been discussed and is supported by consensus, editors may use {{edit template-protected}} to notify an administrator or template editor to make the requested edit. Usually, any contributor may edit the template's documentation to add usage notes or categories.
Any contributor may edit the template's sandbox. This template does not have a testcases subpage. You can create the testcases subpage here. |
Question
Why does this Template not work when I tested it?
edit count | edit summary usage
Nocturnal Wanderer 03:02, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
{{editprotected}}
- Request: "Edit summary usage" (Mathbot's edit summary usage tool) is no use because it's a dead link and "edit count" already shows the edit summary usage.
Not done: 'cuz I fixed the link to mathbot's tool. It's been moved to the toolserver. Cheers. --lifebaka (talk - contribs) 19:12, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
- Request: "Edit summary usage" (Mathbot's edit summary usage tool) is no use because it's a dead link and "edit count" already shows the edit summary usage.
Increase flexibility
{{editprotected}}
- Add {{{style}}} parameter to the <div>
- Remove the www. from mathbot edit summary
- Add parameter (maybe something like {{{text}}} or {{{after}}}) to allow inserting of additional text
- Use Plainlinksneverexpand class and/or add the metadata class
- Maybe a class like topicon but toptext?
- Use
- Get ride of the blue tint on the links, should need it anyway.
That's all I can think of now. — Dispenser 02:38, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
- This shouldn't even be protected anyways, so I'd like to add that whoever handles this should also unprotect it. It's not used in articles, so any potential vandalism isn't relevant.. —Locke Cole • t • c 01:16, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
- Protection should stay as it is used in over 3500 pages. It is a High-risk template as it "...is transcluded into a very large number of pages.". No comment on the proposed changes. - Rjd0060 (talk) 01:52, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
Done