v50 Steam/Premium information for editors
- v50 information can now be added to pages in the main namespace. v0.47 information can still be found in the DF2014 namespace. See here for more details on the new versioning policy.
- Use this page to report any issues related to the migration.
This notice may be cached—the current version can be found here.
Difference between revisions of "Template talk:ArticleVersion"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(This template needs fixing (or something does)) |
|||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
::If you need me to explain more, I'd be happy to. I'm also lurking around on IRC (newnet as Emi). [[User:Emi|Emi]] 00:17, 18 March 2010 (UTC) | ::If you need me to explain more, I'd be happy to. I'm also lurking around on IRC (newnet as Emi). [[User:Emi|Emi]] 00:17, 18 March 2010 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Why is this template not working? I never see links to the old 40d articles that still actually have content. It is very annoying. --[[User:Altaree|Altaree]] 13:14, 2 April 2010 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 13:14, 2 April 2010
Having one template that covers both old and new articles is, I think, a mistake. (I didn't know it was the same at first.) When it comes time to change the latest to "old", it will require that every one be checked - and there is no way to keep track of that.
Instead, having one "old info" template, and one "current info" template would allow users/Admin to go out and change all the "current info" articles to "old", and then proceed from there. The serve diff functions, they should not be the same.--Albedo 20:23, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
- You're absolutely right, of course. I'm not quite certain why I didn't think of splitting this into separate templates, but it clearly should be. There's also the matter of Emi's recent changes assuming the presence of a "DF2010" pseudonamespace which, at this moment, does not exist. --Quietust 23:19, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
- Albedo, I'm getting the feeling that you don't understand how this template works. When it comes time to change the latest to "old" one line will have to be changed in this template's code, and then every single one will have changed to read "out of date". The entire premise of having one template that uses parser functions to determine what appears, is so that no one will ever have to go through every article to check the templates. You'll notice that 40d:Milk shows up as out of date, but that DF2010:Milk shows up as current. This is because the template is looking for what namespace the page it appears on is in, and it appears differently depending on what namespace it is.
- Also, to Quietust, the 'fixes' you made to the template were actually to intentional errors. I wanted to avoid doing things that would have to be reversed later as much as possible, but still wanted to test. So to avoid having to ask Briess to temporarily add DF2010 as a namespace, I left the namespace check for current blank. As for the non-existent DF2010: I just wanted something to test with, I never meant to imply that the DF2010 namespace was the one people had agreed upon.
- If you need me to explain more, I'd be happy to. I'm also lurking around on IRC (newnet as Emi). Emi 00:17, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
Why is this template not working? I never see links to the old 40d articles that still actually have content. It is very annoying. --Altaree 13:14, 2 April 2010 (UTC)