Template talk:Cfr
This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "Template_talk:Cfr".

Template:Cfr is permanently protected from editing, as it is a heavily used or visible template. Substantial changes should be proposed here, and made by administrators if the proposal is uncontroversial, or has been discussed and is supported by consensus. Use {{editprotected}} to attract the attention of an administrator in such cases. Any contributor may edit the template's documentation to add usage notes, categories or interwiki links.

This template is a self-reference.

Discussion

Text change

I think that the text should be changed to make it clearer that the proposal is for renaming not deletion. At the moment, the template says

The problem is the big bold text at the start with the word deletion. I propose a change to

This is based on {{cfru}} and {{cfm}}. Any objections? SeventyThree^(Talk) 16:22, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

The reason it was changed to the current wording was because sometimes debates end with a consensus to delete the category all together, and this should be reflected in the template. Tim! 16:30, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

• I agree strongly that the current "This category is being considered for deletion" is extremely misleading. I understand that the process is technically deleting plus creation of a new category plus moving all contents into the new category. But couldn't the message say something like that? Such as, "This category is being considered for renaming… . However, there may be a consensus to delete…."—Markles 17:55, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

"Renaming" is equally (if not more) misleading, as it is not possible to use the "move page" feature on a category. You have to delete it, and re-create it at a different title. Also there are cases where the contents of one category are "merged", i.e. the links to the deleted category are replaced with a different category that already exists. The new wording accurately reflects the procedure in those cases as well. — May. 19, '06 [19:27] <freak|talk>

I don't think the lack of a 'move' feature should affect the wording of the template. That's a technical issue, and we have a fudge to get around it. To the people who use the category, all the articles move into a different category which is the same as the old category except for the name. In effect, the category has been renamed.

The wording at the moment ("considered for renaming or deletion") is fairly good. Some categories up for deletion end up getting renamed or merged, so maybe we should change the text on the other templates as well?

Another option, to keep the templates different, could be "There is a proposal to rename this category to [[Category:{{{1}}}]] in accordance with Wikipedia's Categories for Deletion policies." This is more accurate, And it doesn't restrict the outcome at all (merging/moving to an article/userfying etc.). On the other hand, it doesn't mention any other outcomes, so people might assume that the category is safe. Can somebody improve on this? If not, I'm fairly happy with the current text. SeventyThree^(Talk) 18:36, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Would anybody complain if I just merged the words of this and similar templates into the main Template:Cfd? Since, in practice, anything can happen, why not just have one template reflecting that. — May. 24, '06 [07:18] <freak|talk>

Yes, too hard to document. I did merge cfru, as the new parserfunctions made it easier.

--William Allen Simpson 10:49, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

"Subst:" error message

The error message for not "subst:"ing the template is incorrect. It currently refers to "Cfd" rather than "Cfr". Please edit "{{error:not substituted|cfd}}" to read "{{error:not substituted|cfr}}". This is a simple fix, but the template is locked. Thanks.—Chidom ^talk  22:24, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Done. AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 20:03, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

2007 January 1

See: Wikipedia_talk:Categories_for_discussion#Time_to_complete_the_grand_renaming.3F. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 15:25, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Request sub-category change

Could someone please change the category on this template from Category:Wikipedia maintenance templates to the subcategory Category:Category maintenance templates where other category-related templates are grouped? e.g. {{Cfm}}, {{Cfr-speedy}}. Thx. Dl2000 16:40, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Done. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:59, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Policy link

{{editprotected}}

The link to the policy can be updated to Wikipedia:Categories for Discussion policies for simplicity and to avoid unnecessary redirects, as well as to avoid disconcerting people who may notice that "discussion" links to "deletion". - Fayenatic london (talk) 17:48, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Y Done --ais523 17:58, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Improve code formatting

{{editprotected}} Reformat the code as follows:

{{subst:cfr2|Cfr|UNKNOWN|text='''Rename'''. Your reason(s) for the proposed rename. ~~~~}}

--Yecril (talk) 11:05, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Not done: 1) Please be more specific about what you want changed, and provide the exact code you want added. 2), how is this any different to what's there already? Happy‑melon 17:10, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

The instructions appear in reverse order

The instruction to add a comment comes before the instruction to add the entry. This is somewhat misleading for the poster. It should be noted that the first part is for others and the second part is for the poster. --Yecril (talk) 11:04, 7 July 2008 (UTC)