Protected edit request on 20 July 2014[edit]

((!)) was made a formal magicword a build or two ago, making this template and it's documentation outdated if not obsolete.

It still shows over 2 million uses however - can an admin preform a null edit to see if that helps get all that recursive link caching refreshed to reflect the actual [magicword] state? -- George Orwell III (talk) 14:00, 20 July 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done A null edit wouldn't have done it, as now only real edits trigger a recursive link update. I've made some tweaks inside the noinclude tags to make it work. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 06:55, 21 July 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Mr. Stradivarius: -- does that mean this API....
is pointless now too? Its been a godsend over on WikiSource but it doesn't seem to do much, if anything, here on WP. I was thinking the lack of the admin bit here was making the difference in results but the more I look into it, the more I get the feeling its due to something else - like [cascading?] template protections... or just the fact its hard to "move" millions of "uses" on demand?

Anyway, thanks for the attention. -- George Orwell III (talk) 08:11, 21 July 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not sure about that. You'd have to ask someone who knew more about the API. I've known it to take up to a month for the job queue to finish processing templates with millions of transclusions, though. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 08:38, 21 July 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
&forcelinkupdate updates all links in the link table (without purging the cache of the pages). An edit updates the links and clear the cached pages too. A null edit updates the link on the current page, and can be done with &forcelinkupdate too. See WP:edit WP:Null edit and the next section too. Christian75 (talk) 22:35, 21 July 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
... which is pretty much only half of what is ultimately needed. That is why &forcerecursivelinkupdate is used in my API string above.

I can't find anything relevant to this at WP:edit btw. -- George Orwell III (talk) 22:43, 21 July 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

my mistake, it should have been WP:Null edit Christian75 (talk) 23:32, 21 July 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Since it wasn't immediately obvious, here's a link to the MediaWiki docs describing the new magic word: mw:Help:Magic_words#Other. Short story: apparently it is exactly the same as the template (replaces all instances of ((!)) with a pipe character. —Locke Cole • tc 17:32, 21 July 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Restore protection[edit]

Regardless the TFD result, this change has managed it appears to be broken when it is transcluded in Viva la Vida or Death and All His Friends, or wherever it is transcluded. Can this be fixed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tbhotch (talkcontribs) 20:58, 7 August 2014‎ (UTC)Reply[reply]

I see no reason for protection. Also I see no reason that transclusions should be broken, we should make wikimarkup as resilient as we reasonably can. All the best: Rich Farmbrough08:26, 14 August 2014 (UTC).
If you want protection, ask at WP:RPP. But like Rich said, this template most certainly doesn't need it. And if something is using this, that's what's broken, since correct uses of ((!)) won't. Jackmcbarn (talk) 12:09, 14 August 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Uses can be found here (i.e. my sandbox, currently). To deliberately break a page so that it can be fixed seems a little awkward, to say the least. All the best: Rich Farmbrough16:35, 14 August 2014 (UTC).
I don't consider that deliberately breaking it. Anything that transcludes Template:! is already broken by that fact alone, and things that are broken are better off being obviously broken rather than subtly broken, because that way it can be fixed rather than spreading unnoticed. Jackmcbarn (talk) 14:17, 27 August 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Template for discussion for this page[edit]

Was there a recent templates for discussion for this? If so, it appears the administrator forgot to put the notice on this talk page. I have no idea how I would find it. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 04:26, 10 September 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Added! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 04:36, 10 September 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks, Oiyarbepsy (talk) 04:38, 10 September 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Impact of recent edits to documentation[edit]

@Bop34: Your recent edits to Template:!/doc now cause the page to appear in Category:Pages which use a template in place of a magic word. Is there a tweak you could make so the page isn't categorized? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by GoingBatty (talkcontribs) 16:08, April 15, 2021 (UTC)

@Bop34: The above is sorted; I have toned down the formatting of the sample error as it doesn't need to dominate the lead. User:GKFXtalk 20:20, 15 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@GoingBatty:, @GKFX:: Ah thanks! I didn't realize that it caused the categorization, but sorry for the inconvenience. Also GKFX thanks for reformatting the error message. bop34talkcontribs 00:44, 16 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Is the following code


required to escape the linefeed/carriage-return?

If so could someone please add a note to the documentation page.
--:GSMC(Chief Mike) Kouklis U.S.NAVY Ret. ⛮🇺🇸 / 🇵🇭🌴⍨talk 15:09, 13 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Convert the same kind of template into ! instead of |[edit]

So I just learned that this template only converts to | when showing details of a table template instead of !, but now the problem is when I use the | colspan it still doesn't show as a scope colspan, so is there any chance to find a kind of (like) this template to convert to ! instead of |? Quochieu0211 (talk) 06:18, 6 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]