Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

tag: re-add {{dead end}}, add {{sources exist}} per requests #696

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Sep 3, 2019

Conversation

siddharthvp
Copy link
Member

@siddharthvp siddharthvp commented Aug 31, 2019

Now that the interface supports search, clutter is no longer a reason for removing templates.
Adding back {{dead end}} was requested here. Also adding {{sources exist}}, requested here

Now that the interface supports search, clutter is no longer a reason for removing templates.
Adding back {{dead end}} was requested [here](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Twinkle/Archive_41#{{Dead_end}}_has_disappeared).
@siddharthvp siddharthvp changed the title tag: re-add {{dead end}} per request tag: re-add {{dead end}}, add {{sources exist}} per requests Sep 2, 2019
@MusikAnimal MusikAnimal merged commit ecb5979 into wikimedia-gadgets:master Sep 3, 2019
@Amorymeltzer
Copy link
Collaborator

We should probably put together some sort of criteria for inclusion; less important than #533 perhaps, but thinking of #178.

@MusikAnimal
Copy link
Collaborator

MusikAnimal commented Sep 5, 2019

We should probably put together some sort of criteria for inclusion; less important than #533 perhaps, but thinking of #178.

I agree. In this case {{dead end}} has sound rationale for inclusion, and {{sources exits}} had rough consensus. My concerns were alleviated with the new search feature, but if I was out of line in merging this I do apologize. Some sort of guideline would be helpful, noting that transclusion count doesn't always equate to usage, as is the case with short-lived tags like {{dead end}}.

@Amorymeltzer
Copy link
Collaborator

Amorymeltzer commented Sep 5, 2019

Not at all @MusikAnimal! Just noting that we've now moved from needing to be actively limited in our offerings to being able to be more inclusive. I do think we should be cognizant of the position Twinkle is in — if something is listed, it's likely to get used more — but this is entirely in order. We would want a way to assess items that are quickly removed, as the scripts in #178 (comment) and #178 (comment) obviously won't help.

@Amorymeltzer Amorymeltzer added this to the Next update milestone Sep 6, 2019
@siddharthvp siddharthvp deleted the deadendback branch October 22, 2020 20:26
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants