Requests for comment/Let Template:Tl be a magic word

The following request for comments is closed. No consensus at this point of time to implement the proposed change due to lack of community input/discussion. Unfortunately, Meta-wiki is not the appropriate place to host this discussion; this is likely why there is a lack of discussion. Although Meta request for comments are intended to facilitate global discussion, this proposal first and foremost requires discussion on MediaWiki-wiki where similar proposals, as highlighted by Quiddity, have been held. ~riley (talk) 05:51, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

---

Rationale

Let's see codes that how {{Tl}} on every wikis around the Internet world have (without documentation parts):

{{[[{{#if:{{{2|}}}|{{{2|}}}:}}Template:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]]}}

I really doubted for several years, that if there are reasons that {{!}} should be a magic word, then why not do so for Tl?

Probably I may guess someone who wanna oppose me: They say "Hey I need these codes on my wiki as my private code" (Are you really sure that your wiki is a private wiki, even so, such code needs privately repeat)? "Hey Template:Tl on my wiki has different role than yours" (can't you consider renaming)? "Template:Tl on my wiki has redirected to another template" (without additional parameters, there are no affects to your wiki, don't you know, or if your wiki would prefer translations of "Tl", then you may also translate the Tl in MediaWiki codes, why not)? "There are several templates derivated from Template:Tl" (I only ask to convert {{Tl}}, no derivates)?

So I just want to ask two words: Why not? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 22:24, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Discussions

Arguments in favor (support)

• As nom. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 22:26, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
• Fine with me, looks like one of the most useful templates. It's similar to what was done with {{!}} and no-one is complaining. However, there are dozens, if not hundreds of similar templates that could be useful for all wikis, and they would all be solved using true Global templates. For just a few examples, see Which templates should be global?, and there are many more. And if this is done, then the editors community will be empowered to do such things by itself, without having to go through the complicated software development and deployment process. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 10:43, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

Arguments against (oppose)

Arguments Neutral or other kinds of discussions

• I understand the desire to have consistent and reliably-available common/universal templates on all MediaWiki wikis. I believe there are many technical and social pros/cons for each of the various options for how to resolve this long-standing and widespread issue, but I'm not familiar with the details - I.e. making them available via either: (a) Core, (b) default MediaWiki extension, (c) optional MediaWiki extension, (d) propagated across Wikimedia wikis via bot but other wikis are left out, (e) other? -- Hopefully a developer can comment or point to previous discussions, about that big-picture and short/long-term perspective. Quiddity (talk) 18:23, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
• This proposal seems related (closely or tangentially) to these other pages of ideas/proposals/processes/notes. -- mw:Template repository, and mw:Requests for comment/Future of magic links, and mw:Multilingual Templates and Modules, and mw:MediaWiki Stakeholders' Group/Tasks/Feature wishlist/2015 assessment#Template Management, and mw:Suggestions for extensions to be integrated. Quiddity (talk) 18:23, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

  @Quiddity: But then, as far as I know, {{!}} is also a problem in Chinese Wikisource as they created their s:zh:Template:! as a different usage. --117.14.250.154 01:05, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

• What Quiddity said. There are proposals that better deal with this sort of thing. This certainly isn't the most pressing template in need of universalization, and would be better left to places to implement. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 14:53, 13 October 2019 (UTC)