Add a Wikinav link?[edit]

Is it possible for the template to check if one of the pages is a dab, and if so, then add a link to Wikinav after the move log links at the bottom-right? This new tool is little know, but really indispensable for primary topic proposals that aim to dislodge a dab page from the base title. – Uanfala (talk) 23:35, 13 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

So, here's a mockup of what the template could look like with such a link:
So, the first question is: is this going to interfere with the work of RMCD bot? Pinging the bot creator and maintainer: Wbm1058. – Uanfala (talk) 17:11, 18 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Uanfala: No, adding a link to the list on the lower right of the template won't interfere with bots. Your second question? wbm1058 (talk) 22:04, 23 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Error handling for |multiple=[edit]

I suggest changing 

#ifeq:(({multiple))}|yes|((#ifeq:(({new1|))}

to 

#if:((yesno-no|(({multiple))))}|((#ifeq:(({new1|))}

so that it calls ((yesno)) to handle any malformed "yes" and reject non-yes content as it currently does -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 07:40, 4 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This concerns ((requested move/dated)) -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 00:54, 5 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Do editors have a TL;DR problem and miss the message Please use ((subst:requested move)). Do not use ((requested move/dated)) directly. ?
If there is a way that ((subst:requested move)) can be made to create a malformed "yes" then that issue should be addressed in Template:Requested move – wbm1058 (talk) 23:34, 20 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Add checks for refs in reason parameter[edit]

@Wbm1058, can you add a check somewhere in the module on the reason= parameter for the presence of <ref> tags and append ((reflist-talk)) automatically if there isn't a ((reflist-talk)) invoked already? This should help with the occasional refs being bunched up at the end of the WP:RMC page. – robertsky (talk) 03:07, 27 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Modules aren't things I'm really clever with yet. The module was originally written by Mr. Stradivarius, perhaps either he or Pppery can help. I'm kind of swamped with other projects at the moment. wbm1058 (talk) 03:19, 27 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Nix possessive in template message[edit]

This template currently produces a message that includes the text A bot will list this discussion on requested moves' current discussions subpage.... The word moves should not be possessive (i.e. should not have an apostrophe), and the word "requested" should be preceded by the: A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage...; Or, maybe better: A bot will list this discussion on the current discussions subpage for requested moves.... I don't see how to edit this myself, so I'm posting the suggestion here. Eric talk 05:05, 8 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Template-protected edit request on 7 January 2024

Hello- Please see my post from December 2022: Template_talk:Requested_move#Nix_possessive_in_template_message. Eric talk 20:54, 7 January 2024 (UTC) Eric talk 20:54, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Does the subpage not belong to RM? Is it like saying "that page's subpage"? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:08, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Not done. It appears that the possessive "requested moves'" is appropriate. The sentence informs that the RMCD bot will add the new request to the "current discussions" page, which is a "subpage" of the requested moves parent project page. If I'm reading the English possessive article correctly, this type of possessive can be shown by either an ending apostrophe (moves') or by "'s" (moves's), whichever the writer deems suitable. In this respect, a subpage "belongs" to its parent page. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 10:32, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I see it more like a talkpage: The MOS talkpage as opposed to the MOS' talkpage. Eric talk 14:45, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, that sounds like a valid viewpoint. Either phrase seems to show possession, yet the former is more subtle than the latter and "MOS" is a true adjective in the former. If t'were me, in the case of the MOS I'd probably use "MOS's talkpage". But that's just me. The editor who originally put those phrases together is most likely the same one who still takes good care of all things RM. Happy New Year to you and yours! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 20:19, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Should this template say "within half an hour"?[edit]

This template says "within half an hour", however, it took 37 minutes to post on Vamsi (name). Should we not change the time frame to "within one hour"? --Jax 0677 (talk) 20:13, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:13, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Category