Difference between revisions of "Template talk:Safe"
(My view) |
|||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
I don't think we will ever actually need [[Template:Spoilers]]. If you have reached a page with spoilers from a non-spoiler page, you will already have been given a warning (you don't want to mark every page as containing spoilers). | I don't think we will ever actually need [[Template:Spoilers]]. If you have reached a page with spoilers from a non-spoiler page, you will already have been given a warning (you don't want to mark every page as containing spoilers). | ||
[[Template:spoilerlink]] is meant for a single link that leads to a page with spoilers, which makes it different from [[Template:spoilerlinks]] and [[Template:safe]] which say that '''every''' link on a page may lead to a spoiler. But [[Template:spoilerlinks]] and [[Template:safe]] seem to have the same function. And you're not marking a page as safe, you're marking a page as leading to spoilers, which to me means that the former would be a better name. -- [[User:Svdb|SvdB]] 09:20, 19 Oct 2004 (CEST) | [[Template:spoilerlink]] is meant for a single link that leads to a page with spoilers, which makes it different from [[Template:spoilerlinks]] and [[Template:safe]] which say that '''every''' link on a page may lead to a spoiler. But [[Template:spoilerlinks]] and [[Template:safe]] seem to have the same function. And you're not marking a page as safe, you're marking a page as leading to spoilers, which to me means that the former would be a better name. -- [[User:Svdb|SvdB]] 09:20, 19 Oct 2004 (CEST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | The purpose of the Safe template (as I thought we agreed on in the editting essentials talk, but I guess that's not true) was to mark all of the (very few pages) which '''''definitely''' did not'' have spoilers (i.e. the pages that were safe). The addition of the last clause (not guaranteeing the links) is a nod to the reality that I don't think it's feasible to to give any stronger guarantee (such as that the page ''and everything linked from it'' is safe). The intended usage is that all safe pages get the Safe template and that everything else is just left alone. (again, see [[Ultronomicon talk:Editing Essentials]] for that discussion.) A new reader gets his warning on the main page and knows that any page lacking the happy green color is something he wants to avoid and hit the back button when he finds. Sorry for any confusion; as I said, I thought there was a concensus and I'm sorry if I jumped the gun. [[User:Mmrnmhrm|Mmrnmhrm]] 17:22, 19 Oct 2004 (CEST) | ||
Revision as of 15:22, 19 October 2004
Template:spoilerlinks was not enough? -- SvdB
But this one is new, and longer, and green! Don't you like the shiny template? ;) Really though, I agree. "safe" is a better template name than "spoilerlinks", so I think we should delete spoilerlinks, spoiler, and some others and make this one a bit more concise. --Jacius
I don't think we will ever actually need Template:Spoilers. If you have reached a page with spoilers from a non-spoiler page, you will already have been given a warning (you don't want to mark every page as containing spoilers). Template:spoilerlink is meant for a single link that leads to a page with spoilers, which makes it different from Template:spoilerlinks and Template:safe which say that every link on a page may lead to a spoiler. But Template:spoilerlinks and Template:safe seem to have the same function. And you're not marking a page as safe, you're marking a page as leading to spoilers, which to me means that the former would be a better name. -- SvdB 09:20, 19 Oct 2004 (CEST)
The purpose of the Safe template (as I thought we agreed on in the editting essentials talk, but I guess that's not true) was to mark all of the (very few pages) which definitely did not have spoilers (i.e. the pages that were safe). The addition of the last clause (not guaranteeing the links) is a nod to the reality that I don't think it's feasible to to give any stronger guarantee (such as that the page and everything linked from it is safe). The intended usage is that all safe pages get the Safe template and that everything else is just left alone. (again, see Ultronomicon talk:Editing Essentials for that discussion.) A new reader gets his warning on the main page and knows that any page lacking the happy green color is something he wants to avoid and hit the back button when he finds. Sorry for any confusion; as I said, I thought there was a concensus and I'm sorry if I jumped the gun. Mmrnmhrm 17:22, 19 Oct 2004 (CEST)