Difference between revisions of "Template talk:Accuracy"

From ArchWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(New page: This template should not itself be a member of the "Accuracy disputes" category. Solution? Wrap the Category:Accuracy disputes in 'includeonly' tags. -- ~~~~)
 
(I think it has been addressed)
(5 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
This template should not itself be a member of the "Accuracy disputes" category. Solution? Wrap the [[:Category:Accuracy disputes]] in 'includeonly' tags. -- [[User:Pointone|pointone]] 11:46, 13 February 2009 (EST)
+
==<s>Note about missing template categories</s>==
 +
There are some protected templates, such as ''outofdate'', that ''don't'' have a category. This in part defeats the point of the templates, since looking for ''outofdate'' articles and fixing them is a lot harder without a category listing. While this isn't directly related to what's been discussed, I mention this because it merits attention. [[User:Time|Time]] 20:20, 11 December 2009 (EST)
 +
:Agreed; I plan on updating all "article status" templates and will address this concern. -- [[User:Pointone|pointone]] 13:08, 12 December 2009 (EST)

Revision as of 01:21, 26 August 2011

Note about missing template categories

There are some protected templates, such as outofdate, that don't have a category. This in part defeats the point of the templates, since looking for outofdate articles and fixing them is a lot harder without a category listing. While this isn't directly related to what's been discussed, I mention this because it merits attention. Time 20:20, 11 December 2009 (EST)

Agreed; I plan on updating all "article status" templates and will address this concern. -- pointone 13:08, 12 December 2009 (EST)