Template talk:Non-free album cover
 | This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
|
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 180 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present. |
 | Template:Non-free album cover 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. |
Edit request on 17 December 2012
editThis edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
As far as I can tell, the change to this template made by SchuminWeb on November 19 was never discussed, and thus there was no consensus for it established. This makes it a Bold edit. I would like to take the next step in WP:BRD and Revert it, but I cannot, since I am not an admin. Therefore I request that an admin revert SchuminWeb's edit of November 19. Thanks. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:05, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
- Done. See discussion at User talk:SchuminWeb#Changes in the wording of "Non-free" templates. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 10:39, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Template-protected edit request on 12 February 2016
editThis edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The template contains an extra space after the "Template:Non-free use rationale album cover" link that needs to be removed.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 10:42, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
Template-protected edit request on 29 January 2020
editThis edit request to Template:Non-free poster, Template:Non-free video game screenshot, Template:Non-free video game cover, Template:Non-free video cover, Template:Non-free comic, Template:Non-free symbol and Template:Non-free album cover has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
This template can be switched to use {{Uploader information}} if a change in the order of the bulleted list is acceptable; I've drafted a new version of the template at Template:Non-free album cover/sandbox. Yes, I know I can edit this template myself, but I'd like at least one other person agreeing. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 11:09, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
- @Jo-Jo Eumerus: looks good to me, but what are the advantages? I'm not too keen of the box within a box format, but this has nothing to do with your proposal — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:28, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
- Can I suggest that this is discussed somewhere centrally, rather than on a dozen separate edit requests? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:30, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
- @MSGJ:The most important one I see is that using a single standard template makes it easier to apply mass changes should they be needed, and to construct new ones if they are needed. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:32, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
- I dunno, where are such under-the-hood changes that change template code but not really their appearance normally discussed? Template talk:Uploader information has far too few watchers for a centralized discussion. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 13:30, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
- Personally I am happy for you to proceed Jo-Jo. If the box within a box can be eliminated at the same time, then so much the better — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:20, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
- MSGJ, that just requires moving everything from
|below=outside of the {{Imbox}}. --Gonnym (talk) 15:38, 29 January 2020 (UTC)- There is now a discussion here. Regarding changing the box, that's a separate question IMO. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 14:02, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
- MSGJ, that just requires moving everything from
- Personally I am happy for you to proceed Jo-Jo. If the box within a box can be eliminated at the same time, then so much the better — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:20, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
- I dunno, where are such under-the-hood changes that change template code but not really their appearance normally discussed? Template talk:Uploader information has far too few watchers for a centralized discussion. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 13:30, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
- @MSGJ:The most important one I see is that using a single standard template makes it easier to apply mass changes should they be needed, and to construct new ones if they are needed. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:32, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
@Jo-Jo Eumerus: I see no opposition to your plan. Do you plan to make these changes yourself? I have disabled the request. If for some reason you want someone else to copy the sandbox over, please reactivate — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:19, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
- I've goen ahead and implemented the changes on the other templates as well. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 14:32, 2 February 2020 (UTC)