This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Update template.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 150 days

Template merged from Template:Out of date; see old talk-page here.

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Currently, the reason parameter makes the template say "This [article/ section] needs to be updated. In particular: X. Please update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information." (emphasis mine) with X being whatever is put in for |reason=. It should say something like "This [article/ section] needs to be updated. In particular, X should be updated. Please update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information." (emphasis mine again) This is grammatically correct and makes a complete sentence. — Gestrid (talk) 01:37, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done. Please establish consensus before using ((edit template-protected)). I'm worried that editors might already be working around this by using ((update|reason=X should be updated)), in which case the template would now output X should be updated should be updated. However, if there's consensus to make this change, I'd be happy to do it. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 22:51, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, I forgot to ping @Gestrid:. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 22:51, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Ahecht: Ok. I didn't think it would need consensus since I didn't believe it would break any implementation currently used. The |reason= parameter isn't used very often, as far as I know. I'll go ahead and request consensus, though. Really, though, based on a previous discussion on this page, this template should probably be rewritten, anyway. — Gestrid (talk) 23:19, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have to oppose that on redundancy grounds. — AReaderOutThataway ^t/_c 07:29, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You can't use both, when part is used, the resulting box talks about "article" even if section is (also) specified. How do I log this bug so it gets the attention of the relevant powers? CapnZapp (talk) 11:48, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@CapnZapp: Please note that |section is not a parameter, it is the value of the first unnamed parameter. The documentation states

To specify what parts of the page need updating, use the first unnamed parameter (or name it |part= or number it |1=):

This means that they're not different parameters, they're different aspects of the same parameter. So writing |section is exactly the same as writing |part=section. If you use both forms, the template needs to choose one over the other; and it is coded so that |part= has precedence. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 08:04, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I trust you realize this explanation should go on the documentation page :) CapnZapp (talk) 08:55, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Let me be specific. The current documentation seems to not anticipate the following use case: Let's say I want to draw attention that a Reception section of a television show needs updating, specifically that there aren't any example of how later seasons were received. I thus place the template in the section rather than at the top, I use ((update section)) instead of ((update)), and I specify a |part= explaining it isn't the whole Reception that needs updating, it just lacks reactions from later seasons. Now, please have the documentation advise a regular non-technical user how to best proceed. Or better, tweak the code to allow this intuitive approach! :-) (Use case from Fake or Fortune, if that helps). Thank you in advance. CapnZapp (talk) 09:04, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Use |reason= instead of |part=; leave |section alone. Like this. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:45, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Note: your main assistance is needed in updating the template documentation rather than helping a single user (even if it is me :-) CapnZapp (talk) 15:28, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This badly needs a parameter like |obs-date=, for date of obsolescence:

• Change text to read something like "This article needs to be updated (since circa (({obs-date))})"
• Maybe limit this effect to mainspace use of the template only.
• At least in mainspace, have it categorize articles by that date not by the date the tag was applied (or separately by both). In the vast majority of cases, it much more important for editors to work on updating articles that are 5 years out-of-date and tagged as such only yesterday, than to work on updating articles that are 3 months out of date and flagged as such 3 months ago, but the present categorization system would have us work on the latter first.

I meant to raise this idea a long time ago but forgot about it until just now, when I noticed there was no parameter with which I can indicate how badly obsolete the Rhythm (music magazine) article is (about 8 years). — AReaderOutThataway ^t/_c 06:38, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I tried inserting the following in the WP:SANDBOX wikipage:

((Update|date=May 2019|type=section|part=.docx icon))

The result was this:

Parts of this section (those related to .docx icon) need to be updated. Please update this section to reflect recent events or newly available information. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. (May 2019)

The boldface formattings are mine.

Now, I tried inserting the same thing into the Microsoft Word article. This happened:

Parts of this article (those related to .docx icon) need to be updated. Please update this section to reflect recent events or newly available information. (May 2019)

Anyway, what I see in the article space seems like a bug.

This message has been edited 2 time(s).

5.75.18.4 (talk) 07:18, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What precisely do you mean by "I tried inserting into Microsoft Word"? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 13:14, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I mean I did this: [1]. 5.75.18.4 (talk) 04:53, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The template behaves differently in articles compared to other pages, the behavioural split began with this edit. MSGJ, do you recall when you did this why only one of the two |text= was replaced with |issue=/|fix= instead of doing both of them? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 10:30, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Only ambox accepts the issue/fix parameters as far as I am aware, so that is why only one of the text parameters was replaced. But this issue is more to do with the part and type parameters. The type feature is virtually undocumented, except at the TemplateData, so its purpose is not quite clear. I guess that originally type was used for file/template/article/category etc. so on an article the word "article" is used. Looking at the template code it seems that |part=section will achieve what is required. I agree that consistency would be good, but we first need to be clear about what each parameter should do. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:24, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

So, when is this going to be fixed? 5.219.77.186 (talk) 04:12, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Redrose64 and MSGJ: I just ran into a similar issue myself, when I tried to use type=section, and it didn't display properly because it needed to have only section. Can we get this fixed? Sdkb (talk) 19:48, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As I said last year, we can only think about fixing this once we have decided how we want it to behave, e.g. do we want to use |type=section or |part=section? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:14, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@MSGJ: I'm not knowledgeable enough to understand what the pros and cons of each option would be; I just came here to recommend doing whatever fix is needed to solve the issue. From above, it sounds like you'd prefer "part", so go ahead with that. If it'd be possible for the template to still be able to handle editors who accidentally use "type" rather than "part", that would be good. Sdkb (talk) 08:00, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The text displayed at the top of this template's page says (boldface added):

This template needs to be updated. Please update this template to reflect recent events or newly available information. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page.

Is this template supposed to be used only to update templates??? Or if it really is a comment/warning about ((Update)), where's the sample text (template output) that's usually at the top of a template page? --Thnidu (talk) 17:31, 9 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's not only intended for templates. It adapts to the page it's inserted on so, if placed within an article, it will refer to "this article". Dave.Dunford (talk) 10:27, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please apply Special:Diff/953667189/960166206 to use ((Ambox globe current red)) per discussion at Portal talk:Current events/News Browser § Rotate the image. —⁠andrybak (talk) 14:16, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Done --Bsherr (talk) 17:03, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]