Template talk:Cfdc

Needed?

I personally don't like this template as it's just decoration which is not necessary for closing cfds. I won't discuss about that but ignore it. Regards, Achim55 (talk) 20:55, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

The commenter above for some reason felt the need to come to an optional style template they don't use or need to use, take a dump on it, and leave. That is not very constructive and I don't really know what the point of the effort really was. At any rate, for anyone else, maybe it is helpful to keep the following in mind when deciding if you want to use this template:

1. This template is optional to use and only intended as a helper for those who find it helpful.
2. Graphical formatting (decoration) can be helpful in conveying information to readers.
3. This template does not only do graphical formatting (decoration), but pings participants.
4. This template can provide a handy reminder of some of the key good citizenship elements of closing a CfD (summary, actions, ping participants, and sign)
5. If there is something that would make this template better or more helpful, let me know and I'll work on it.
6. Oh, and best of all, this template is 100% optional to use, so if it doesn't fit your editing style, don't use it.

I actually created this template based on closing hundreds of CfDs, and it was kind of just to help me out, but I'm happy to see that others use it as well, so I'm glad it is useful to some users. Josh (talk) 06:12, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

One template used in this template does not exist anymore

@Joshbaumgartner: Template {{partially resolved}} does not exist anymore. Please adjust this template. JopkeB (talk) 06:20, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

@JopkeB I believe that line was commented out over 6 months ago, so this template no longer calls 'partially resolved'. Is there something I'm missing? Josh (talk) 05:52, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

When I use this template for closing a discussion, and I fill in "p" or "rp" after "consensus=", then I do not get something like "partially resolved" when the template is published, but just "p" or "rp". I think that is beacause the template {{partially resolved}} does not exist anymore. The line in this template is:

|p|rp={{partially resolved}}--><!-- .

So I think this needs to be fixed. JopkeB (talk) 06:17, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Forgot to @Joshbaumgartner: . --JopkeB (talk) 06:19, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

@JopkeB Interesting. Testing:

• {{cfdc|p|~~~~|Testing|JopkeB}}:

---

This category discussion has been closed.
Consensus	p
Actions	Testing
Participants	JopkeB (talk · contribs)
Closed by	Josh (talk) 06:48, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

• {{cfdc|rp|~~~~|Testing|JopkeB}}:

---

This category discussion has been closed.
Consensus	rp
Actions	Testing
Participants	JopkeB (talk · contribs)
Closed by	Josh (talk) 06:48, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

• {{cfdc|partially resolved|~~~~|Testing|JopkeB}}:

---

This category discussion has been closed.
Consensus	partially resolved
Actions	Testing
Participants	JopkeB (talk · contribs)
Closed by	Josh (talk) 06:48, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

I am just seeing the text "p" or "rp" directly passed and displayed (if 1 is not a recognized option, it just displays as plain text (third test above). Do you have a use case where you are seeing something different as described above?

Note regarding that line in the template, the line should start with "-->" to close the comment from the previous line. Without that at the start, the line remains commented and will not run. This way, should that template/option become valid in the future, we can simply move the "-->" to the start of the line to reactivate it. Probably not likely here but in any case, that is why in its current form, the switch function doesn't recognize 'p' or 'rp' and is just passing them as plain text to be displayed (tests 1 and 2 above).Josh (talk) 06:48, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

@Joshbaumgartner: In Commons:Categories for discussion/2023/02/Category:Border Control Posts I wrote the words myself because it went wrong. JopkeB (talk) 07:49, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

That's the intent. I wanted to make some existing voting templates available by shorthand, but also allow the freedom to put your own words if the available ones don't apply or you need some more flexibility. If you have a template you would like a shorthand made available, let me know which one. Also, if you would like, I can make 'p' and 'rp' put the text "Partially resolved" up in lieu of a voting template. Josh (talk) 02:29, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. Good to know that I can add a text myself. I do not have yet a template I would like to add. "Partially resolved" is rare in solving a discussion. The advantage of a template here is, that the text can be shown in more languages than just English. Thanks for the offer. JopkeB (talk) 07:42, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Where is the template itself now?

@Joshbaumgartner: Do you know where I can find the string I used to copy for using in a discussion to be closed? It seems it has disappeared. I cannot find it in older versions either. I mean {{Cfdc |consensus= |by= |actions= |ping1= |ping2= |ping3= |ping4= |ping5= |ping6= |ping7= |ping8= |ping9= |ping10= |pingmore= |notes= }}. JopkeB (talk) 09:21, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

@JopkeB Nothing has changed here, I think there is a bigger problem with {{TemplateBox}} which is concerning considering how much use that template has. It is no longer recognizing the parameters listed in the documentation. Josh (talk) 19:19, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

@Joshbaumgartner: Can I still use it? JopkeB (talk) 03:30, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

@JopkeB Yes. As far as I can tell all templates themselves work the same as always, just the documentation doesn't correctly show the parameters and usage line. You can view the doc page code to see the parameters if you need to know them, but that is a hassle. I hope the issue is fixed soon, as I'm hearing from others as well having issues. Josh (talk) 23:42, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

OK, thanks for the information. JopkeB (talk) 03:05, 11 August 2024 (UTC)