Template talk:Delete

Instructions

The full syntax is:
{{Delete
|reason=<your reason goes here. e.g. Duplicate Image, or Poor Quality, etc.>
|subpage=<The subpage of "Commons:Deletion requests" where the request for the image is. See below.>
|day={{CURRENTDAY}}
|month={{CURRENTMONTHNAME}}
|year={{CURRENTYEAR}}
}}

The reason is mandatory. You only need to fill out the "subpage" parameter if you create the deletion request at a different subpage of Commons:Deletion requests than the image name. For example, if you nominate Image:Foo.jpg for deletion, and you create the subpage Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Foo.jpg, then you don't need to fill out the parameter. But if you nominate that image as part of a mass nomination, you will have to fill it out. For example you nominate all the images uploaded by a particular user for deletion. Then instead of creating 50 different subpage, you create just one, Commons:Deletion requests/Images uploaded by User XYZ, and then on all of the relevant images, you put this template with the parameter subpage=Images uploaded by User XYZ.

Check usage

Shouldn't this template include check usage as well as deletion? --Saperaud 05:30, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

It does now, but the function was broken earlier. -- Jeff G. 10:33, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Parameter

Why does this now have a parameter?? It shouldn't -- people should put the reason on COM:DEL, not on the image page. pfctdayelise (translate?) 08:11, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

The paramaters are the date parameters and pure optional (They are meant later for a second subst: template using it like subst:nsd...) The other "parameter" with the reason is an implicit informal parameter (that does not break current usage) as I think it is crucial that people give a reason (many people forget to add it to the deletion requests and giving a reason on the image page is always a good idea). The reason given at the image page can and should be copy-pasted by the tagger to deletion requests anyways. Arnomane 09:29, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Wouldn't it be better to write Category:{{{CURRENTMONTH}}} {{{CURRENTYEAR}}} directly here in this template? --MarianSigler {bla} 15:53, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

| It DOES hurt. There is nothing on the template explicitly telling them to go post their reason at COM:DEL. Having this parameter will make them think all they need to do is put the reason here. Then these images will sit around and never get processed. pfctdayelise (translate?) 10:53, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

I have reworded the information in the template a bit in order to make clear that people have to add it to deletion requests if they use that template. (I must have overlooked it that this essential information wasn't there...). Arnomane 12:08, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

New links

you are probably aware that now the still existing links do not work anymore and if someone wants to say something to a deletionrequest he is quite challenged specially when he is not to much familiar with commons ...Sicherlich ^Post 09:05, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

hmm you did something to convert to the new system; this somehow vanised. WOuld be nice if you find a way to fix it ...Sicherlich ^Post 09:13, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

They link to the subpage where the request is to be placed, so they will become blue once the request is made. --Rory096 16:33, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Confusing directions

I followed the directions at the bottom of the template for using{{delete2}} to make a sub-page.

I wrote {{delete2|image=Image:ASBcover.jpg|reason=This is a book cover. Unless it was it was freely licensed by the original copyright holder, a photo probably can't be GFDL'd by the photographer. Recommend move to English Wikipedia as a fair use image.}} --~~~~

However, my sub-page turned out to be garbage.

Are the instructions incorrect, or confusing for beginners, in some way?

I ended up writing the sub-page by hand. --82.153.128.122 11:28, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Uh, what's wrong with the original page with that template? It looks fine to me. --Rory096 23:21, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

reason

I've just tried to insert this template and the reason field seems to be broken. It doesn't work if you actually use "reason=", you have to include the parameter without a name. Night Gyr 15:56, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

It should work now. Alphax (talk) 14:44, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Preloaded debate doesn't work

The "preloaded debate" link does not work properly. After saving the preloaded deletion debate (Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Foo.jpg), the page starts with

=== [[:{{SUBPAGENAME}}]] ===

which evaluates to the correct link

=== [[:Image:Foo.jpg]]=== 

if the page is displayed standalone, but when it is displayed as a template in the deletion log ({{Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Foo.jpg}} in Commons:Deletion requests/2007/01/11 for example), {{SUBPAGENAME}} evaluates to the date of month, given the nonsensical heading

 === [[:11]]===

Also, it would be nice if the content of the "reason" field could be preloaded too.

Regards, High on a tree 02:29, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the fix, it's working well now. Regards, High on a tree 10:22, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Protected 24 hours

I have protected the template for 24 hours. It is a highly used template, and I don't find the constant tests and rewording appropriate. How about creating a test-template to try out new stuff, before implementing them here? / Fred Chess 17:32, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, that was me, and I didn't know about job queues at the time. I was just following WP:BOLD (without realising the rule doesn't apply to templates), and I saw that other people had been editing it in the same way I was, and I assumed I wasn't doing anything wrong. Does the new layout work well? That's my main concern. I was worried I'd broke the some code in its rendering, so I was very careful; hence all the minor edits. Could you (if you know what you're doing more than me) give it a look-over? Thanks, and sorry again - Jack (talk) 05:21, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

No problem; it's ok to edit templates. Just want to give you the friendly advice that it is often better to test out new stuff in test-templates. Feel free to continue improving this template though. If we didn't want people to edit it, we would protect it.

Fred Chess 14:17, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Rather than possibly cause more annoyances by additional editing, I'll just ask here - could someone restore the last part of the instructions that said "On the log, use: ...". With the current version, it took me a lot longer to find that step. --Davepape 03:01, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Actualy, I see the relevant instruction is at the top of COM:DEL. But it was still a little easier to copy & paste each step from the template on an image page. --Davepape 03:34, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Keep the Consistency (Change the layout)

Dear Administrators,

Why don't you change the layout in order to keep the consistency with Speedy Request {{Speedydelete}} and Copyvio {{Copyvio}}? They all belong to the same DELETE group.

Please refer to {{Delete/ja}}

Followings are very smal things, though...

• Deletion Guidelines : ALL languages don't have to be shown. User can click "Language Changer Bar" at the bottom.
• Be more clearly: UPPER Messages are for READERs, Middle are for Maintenance Staff, and LOWER Messages are for ADMINs without mixing up.
• Explain the usage simply: The explanation should be OUTSIDE of the main box. The main Message Box is automatically shown on all tagged pages; Whom is it for? Without making READERs confused, Admins or People helping maintenance can come to check the Usage details here.

The point is to KEEP the LOOKS CONSISTENCY. If you think PINK color is too strong for this normal Delete, light-blue or light-yellow would be fine, of course.

What do you think? If you agree, then I can help to change the layout.

--SantaClaus 09:02, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Someone seems to have done it - and I may have deleted an image which was up for a deletion request because I thought it was tagged as speedy... Samulili 20:48, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

In that case, the Warning Icon should be replaced with something else in order to distinguish between Speedy and Regular obiously. --SantaClaus 10:58, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Suggested improvement to subpage instructions in the template

The subpage instructions should be expanded from the current ambiguous:

*'''subpage''' — the subpage of [[Commons:Deletion requests]] the image nominated for deletion is listed

to

*'''subpage''' — the subpage of [[Commons:Deletion requests]] on which the image nominated for deletion is listed, for instance Image:User.gif

Of course, if you really meant "for instance User.gif", please say so. -- Jeff G. 09:13, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Suggested improvement to date instructions on the template page

For consistency's sake, please add to the last mention of "month" so it reads "the current day of the month, month as a word in English, and four-digit year, such as 1, January, and 2000", rather than the ambiguous current "the current day, month and year". -- Jeff G. 09:13, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Also, change "speed deletion" to "speedy deletion." --141.156.46.121 01:45, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Template is broken

Now each and every deletion request is 'incomplete', no matter what you do. Any way to fix it? -- Prince Kassad 13:07, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Prince Kassad was incorrect; deletion requests are completed by following the directions.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 23:36, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Why do you need to fill in subpage. Isn't it obvious? I would think you'd only need to fill it in if it was on a non-default subpage. Bawolff 02:50, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, you are absolutely right. The template no longer considers lack of a "subpage" field to be sufficient reason for a deletion request to be incomplete. In a similar vein, I have also allowed Variable 1 to represent the reason. It may take a while for the servers to recover from these changes. Sorry for any delay or inconvenience.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 12:57, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Next time you might wanna preview first or test on another page as changing the template so many times in one day is not a very good thing to say the least. Yonatanh 17:50, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

{{Delete/lang}}

{{Delete/lang}} is necessary to be placed in <includeonly>?? I mean... If possible, the Lang Bar would be better to be seen all the time. On that template, the Lang Bar is NOT visible and people CAN'T go to the other language template.--SantaClaus 15:29, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, good point. It should be there all the time. pfctdayelise (说什么?) 12:59, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, and thus changed. -- Bryan (talk to me) 13:27, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Good!! Much easier to change the language template --SantaClaus 14:04, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Edit request

{{editprotected}} May the image be changed to ? 71.233.232.243 19:53, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Why? What's wrong with the existing image?   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 22:27, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

I just think the one I want looks cooler. Nothing's wrong with the current one, IMO, I just like the one I request to use better. 71.233.232.243 00:42, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Can you please be more specific about why the one you want looks cooler? For reference, here they are in their current versions, side by side using similar areas of 3.4 kpixels:

 ?->

I prefer the status quo, with the rounded corners and the fatter exclamation point.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 05:02, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

IMO, the one with the with the thinner ! is better. (Also it's a lower resolution and would take up less space in the template.) Get what I mean? 71.233.232.243 15:26, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

To the contrary, the existing one is 5 KB, the one you want is 9 KB.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 07:50, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

 Not done "I like it better" isn't a good reason to change. MECU≈talk 21:18, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Why have the -- been added?

Why? Seems to me the user's choice to use them, or / as some other users use, or add them in the signature... -- Bryan (talk to me) 18:14, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

You appear to have been writing about the dashes. They were put back by White Cat in this edit. It would be helpful and more transparent to have the justification here. I personally don't like them because I prefer the em dash already in my sig.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 02:54, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

The default signature format is --~~~~ which should be preserved for consistency. Most people will end up with an incomplete ~~~~ otherwise. It could be made that the -- can be removed with a monobook setting perhaps but at default the --'s should be preserved. -- Cat ^chi? 04:39, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Commons appears to have nothing in concrete about dashes preceding tildes in signatures. Looking, then, to Wikipedia, w:Wikipedia:Signatures#How to "sign" your posts says "1. At the end of your comments, simply type four tildes (~), like this: ~~~~." Note the distinct lack of dashes. Now, if you want to put a reminder on the edit page for Special:Preferences for users to add dashes to their custom signatures, go right ahead, but what Flominator did and you've continued appears to break functionality for the vast majority of users (the ones that don't have custom signatures), as well as for me. These dashes have been bothering me and LX since March.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 20:47, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Cat appears to have also added dashes to Commons:Deletion requests/preload in this edit. If Cat likes them so much, I suggest that Cat put them in its own signature and stop bothering the rest of us with them.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 17:41, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

I dislike to be talked about as a third person in the same thread. the -- Cat ^ちぃ？ 17:48, 9 October 2007 (UTC) is the standard way to sign. Template can have an optional parameter to override the standard if you like. Infact I'll add this now. -- Cat ^ちぃ？ 17:48, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

There you go. Add a "|3=}}" at the end of delete and the --'s will go away. -- Cat ^ちぃ？ 17:51, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

When you click . The --'s come by default. Now you have a way to override it in this template. -- Cat ^ちぃ？ 17:56, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Icon change

Revert the icon change, other icon loks way better. Da Man2 20:28, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Edit request declined. -- Bryan (talk to me) 10:24, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

There is no need for any generic icon in this template. The icon does not carry any specific message, and it doesn't improve the template visibility neither. --Juiced lemon 09:44, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Do not remove deletion request tags

{{editprotected}} Per this suggestion, please add in bold letters "do not remove this notice from pages that you have created yourself" or something similar like "do not remove deletion request tags from images before an administrator has closed the debate. If you do not agree that the image should be deleted, you can express your opinion on the deletion request page." from {{Dont remove delete}}.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 21:21, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

 Done MECU≈talk 16:02, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Grammar

{{editprotected}}

"If you just added this template, please follow the following instructions"

I think this could be improved to avoid such an obvious source of ammusement. Perhaps:

"please follow these instructions"

— Lee Carré 10:53, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

 Done MECU≈talk 16:02, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Grammar 2

When a date is specified, the deletion template reads "This image has been requested since [date] for deletion". This should be reworded to say "This image has been requested for deletion since [date]", which IIRC is better wording. -- Prince Kassad 21:18, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

 Done Fred J 15:07, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

A recent change to remove a superfluous space removed too much, producing for example "This image has been requested for deletionsince 14 July 2007." - please see Image:MooreKucinich.jpg for an example. Thanks!   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs|Flickr review status nom) 06:33, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Alright -- back to the other one. Now there's a space right before the dot that looks awkward but it should be better. / Fred J 09:54, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Grammar 3

{{editprotected}}

For the sentence which reads:

Note that this template is for REGULAR "Deletion Requests" to be discussed. For speedy deletions, please use {{speedy}}.

"deletion requests" should be written in lowercase, and the quotation marks should also be removed (they make the sentence look weird). The word 'regular' should be bolded instead of being in all caps because no other word on Commons is in all caps (at least none that I know of). -- Prince Kassad 15:57, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

•  Support - I concur with Prince Kassad's request for these changes.

Looks like it has been done now. -- Prince Kassad 10:11, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Category:Incomplete deletion requests

Hi. This template contains two instances of "[[Category:Incomplete deletion requests|{{FULLPAGENAME}}]]". Please change them both to "[[Category:Incomplete deletion requests|{{PAGENAME}}]]" (remove "FULL") so as not to clutter up the "I" section of Category:Incomplete deletion requests. Thanks!   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 08:57, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Done. Samulili 09:10, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 01:39, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Mass deletions

{{editprotected}} Hi again. Please replace the following superfluous (and somewhat wrong) wording at the end of the For mass deletions: sentence with a single dot "." to end the sentence. Thanks!   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 01:35, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

, by manually adding {{delete|reason|group name}} to each image page and then follow the steps above. (Help on mass requests)

 Done Siebrand 23:09, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Why say that all five fields must be filled?

Must really all five fields be filled? In the automated deletion, in the toolbar, only the reason field is ever created, and as far as I know no-one has complained. / Fred J 18:43, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Punctuation

Can someone please remove the blank in “delete .” when there are no day/month/year parameters? -- Ddxc 20:49, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

 Done I never noticed that before. Thanks. Rocket000 05:41, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Link to the deletion log

Would it be possible to format the link to the deletion log (step no. 2) so that it is functional even when accessed from another WikiMedia project (e.g. en:Image:France Preseren.jpg)? Thanks a lot if you'll be able to fix that. --Eleassar ^(t/p) 12:16, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Put code for DR list in <nowiki></nowiki> Tags

{{Editprotected}} Hello, IMHO the code for notification of the uploader should be put in nowiki-Tags. Think of this: The reason for deletion is Images are from xyz site which does not have copyright notice. Now the template says: Visit the deletion requests subpage, and place the following code: {{subst:delete2|image=imagename.png|reason=Images are from xyz site which does not have copyright notice}}. Now, if you copy this with c&p, the link will get lost. It would be better if it looked like this: Visit the deletion requests subpage, and place the following code: {{subst:delete2|image=imagename.png|reason=Images are from [http://xyz.com xyz site] which does not have copyright notice}}. I hope you get my point. Regards, -- ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 19:23, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Erm, when trying to edit the template I already see the nowiki already put in there, if I'm wrong please tell me what to do, or give the code, thanks. --Kanonkas_(talk) 12:42, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I looked at the wrong line. I was talking about that code that the nominator should add to the deletion request subpage of the current day: Look e.g. at Image:Threat Cat.jpg: The line that I am supposed to copy contains a link. When I copy that line, the link will be gone. I hope you get my point now, sorry I cannot provide you with some code atm. Regards, -- ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 20:50, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

 Done There were several <nowiki> tags in that part of the template code, but not around the {{{reason}}} parameter. yes, it is a mess, indeed. Anyway, I just added it. --Waldir ^talk 15:44, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

I did a mistake, and found myself going deeper and deeper in a series of ugly hacks (a deeply reprehensible behavior considering that this template is used in so many pages), until I finally figured out: it is impossible to <nowiki> the {{{reason}}}, otherwise it simply isnt transcluded into the page. Sorry for the mess. --Waldir ^talk 16:35, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Maybe it would work something like this: <includeonly><no</includeonly><includeonly>wiki></includeonly> -- ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 20:22, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Regardless of what we do, we need the {{{reason}}} to be outside any <nowiki> tags, otherwise it simply won't be transcluded into the page... If the parameter markup worked like the internal links markup, maybe we could have something like [[Link|Some'''thing''']] (which produces Something), but we simply cannot do {{{reason|<nowiki>$1</nowiki>}}} or whatever, because that just is not in the mechanics of the template parameter markup... I hope I could get my point across, but it's a tricky issue. --Waldir ^talk 20:46, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I get your point. This is a problem in the MediaWiki software, we probably cannot solve. Sorry for taking up your time. Regards, -- ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 23:22, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

No problem :) I am the one to be sorry, for not behaving properly and making experiments in a massively used template :P --Waldir ^talk 11:04, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

 Done some time ago, via {{#tag:nowiki}}. --The Evil IP address (talk) 17:10, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

simple spelling suggestion

{{editprotected}} For mass deletions: If you want to nominate several related images, please make a mass request, by manually adding {{delete|reason|group_name}} to each image page and then follow the steps above. (Help on mass requests).

This sentence should be changed to:

For mass deletions: If you want to nominate several related images, please make a mass request by manually adding {{delete|reason|group_name}} to each image page and then following the steps above. (Help on mass requests)

Specifically, it removes a comma and a dot which are incorrect and corrects the tense of a word. -- Prince Kassad (talk) 18:21, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

 Done — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 23:19, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

image to file prefix

please change the Image:{{PAGENAME}}}}}}}}}}|here]] to file:{{PAGENAME}}}}}}}}}}|here]] {{editprotected}}. Hidro (talk) 16:08, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

I am not quite sure what you want me to do. I already did a fix that points the here-part to the correct DR subpage, as most of them are still using Image as prefix. Are you talking about the destination of the redlink, in case the request is not completed? I could implement yet another check to see whether the Image: DR page exists and, if not, point the redlink to (also non-existing, due to previous check) File: DR page. Is that your request? Regards, -- ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 16:23, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

I'd also appreciate it, if you could link an example page on which the functionality is broken. Thanks and regards, -- ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 16:24, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

set the template to go first to the file prefix and if it's dos not exist go to image. File:Mozilla Firefox 2.0.0.11 in Kubuntu 7.10.png is referring to Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Mozilla Firefox 2.0.0.11 in Kubuntu 7.10.png instead of Commons:Deletion requests/File:Mozilla Firefox 2.0.0.11 in Kubuntu 7.10.png. Hidro (talk) 17:01, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Well, the behaviour you are requesting is actually implemented right now. It works fine for me, so I cannot reproduce you problem. Have you tried purging the page? Regards, -- ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 23:03, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

strange... never mind. Hidro (talk) 01:51, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

{{Editprotected}}

This edit fixed the here link to reflect the new File: namespace. The deletion requests subpage link further down still needs to be corrected, though. See, for example, File:Bundesarchiv Bild 183-2008-0129-500, Ruhrtal, Überschwemmungen nach Luftangriff.jpg -- Prince Kassad (talk) 16:23, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

 Done, thanks for pointing this out. Regards, -- ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 23:31, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

There is still one instance of Image: where it should be File: on this line:

• # Visit the [[Commons:Deletion requests/{{{subpage|{{{2|{{#ifexist: Commons:Deletion requests/{{FULLPAGENAME}} | {{FULLPAGENAME}} | Image:{{PAGENAME}}}}}}}}}}|deletion requests subpage]], and place the following code:

It creates a deletion request starting with Image:, and if you copy-paste the delete3 template on the deletion log, it looks for a deletion request starting with File:. --Tryphon (talk) 17:23, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Reading what I just wrote, I realize that it's not very clear; besides, maybe it's not this particular line that should be changed. So I'll give an example, the deletion request for File:FFFFOUNDsnapshot.jpg.

If you do it manually, the first step involves creating the request by following deletion request subpage link; it would create a request named Commons:Deletion_requests/Image:FFFFOUNDsnapshot.jpg.

Then on step two, if you copy-paste {{subst:delete3|pg=File:FFFFOUNDsnapshot.jpg}} on the deletion log, it tries to transclude Commons:Deletion_requests/File:FFFFOUNDsnapshot.jpg, which does not exist.

That's why I think something is wrong in this template, but I might not have spotted the right place. I hope it's a bit clearer with this example. --Tryphon (talk) 17:35, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

I know what you mean and I have already thought about this. Right now, it checks for a page with File. If it does not exist, it links to the page with Image. I could add, that if that does not exist either, it points to File, if you wish. Regards, -- ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 20:46, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Well, if it can be fixed in a simple way, without risking to break anything else, I think it would be a good idea. However, keep in mind that he vast majority of people use the link in the toolbox to nominate images for deletion (which is not affected by this issue), so it might not be worth it. It's your call, but I wanted to make sure the issue was known and could be dealt with if necessary. Best wishes. --Tryphon (talk) 21:21, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

 Done, I guess. Regards, -- ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 21:49, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

I finally had a chance to test it, and it works perfectly now. Thank you. --Tryphon (talk) 11:22, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

hide=yes?

How about adding another param, hide=yes, for after the instructions are carried out? After all, once a user has completed the four steps, there is no need for the massively large template any more: we only need the red part at the top, and possibly a section about speedy? Microchip08 (talk) 19:47, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

How about removing the information completly and pointing users to COM:DR? IMHO it would be better if we had the instructions over there instead of on the template. Regards, -- ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 20:54, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

How about making it collapsed by default? Like in {{Hidden}}. Rocket000(talk) 04:28, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Collapsing needs JavaScript, which needs CPU power. There's no frequently accessed information on there, as most users use the link in the sidebar anyway. Thus we don't need to load all the information on every image page load and can just store it somewhere else. Regards, -- ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 22:16, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

broken

{{editprotected}}As of the latest revision, the link to the deletion discussion is broken. -- Prince Kassad (talk) 19:44, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Should work now, I have reverted the autotranslation. If the issue persists, please report again. Thanks and regards, -- ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 23:35, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Sorting in category

{{editprotected}} This template use the deletion request subpage name as sortkey in the month category:

[[Category:Deletion requests {{{month|}}} {{{year|}}}|{{{subpage|{{{2|{{FULLPAGENAME}}}}}}}}]]

This causes problems when more than 200 files are in one deletion request. To fix this the pagename can be added to the sortkey to make them unique:

[[Category:Deletion requests {{{month|}}} {{{year|}}}|{{{subpage|{{{2|}}}}}}{{FULLPAGENAME}}]]

(Another possibility is to just remove the sortkey:

[[Category:Deletion requests {{{month|}}} {{{year|}}}]]

But that is a bigger change, and I assume there is a reason for using a sortkey) /Ö 10:57, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

 Done - let's hope I didn't break anything.  — Mike.lifeguard 01:02, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Requested edit

{{Editprotected}}

I am requesting that a couple of corrections be made:

• The link is not external, so the external link icon does not belong there.

• The word "their" is plural. It is not possible for multiple people to create a page or upload a file. I propose that be changed to "his or her", which is singular.

To see a diff of the requested changes, please click here. For convenience, you can simply copy and paste the contents from the sandbox into the template. -- IRP ☎ 21:34, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

 Done I try not to use "his or her". It's kinda awkward. Thanks for pointing out these things. Rocket000 (talk) 23:06, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Subpage parameter

{{Editprotected}} According to the documentation, the subpage parameter is optional. If it is left blank, the page name of the nominated file is supposed to default in. This is not happening. Either the documentation should be changed to state the parameter is mandatory, or the template needs to be fixed. —Werewombat (talk) 22:21, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

I can not confirm this problem. Going to a random image and puting {{Delete}} on it description page gives the red box with the (red) link to the subpage Commons:Deletion requests/File:....jpg in it. --Martin H. (talk) 22:37, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

I see the problem: {{delete|subpage=}} leads to problems, the subpage then goes to Commons:Deletion requests/. --Martin H. (talk) 22:44, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Yup. Sorry if I was too brief. —Werewombat (talk) 04:40, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

AFAIK the MediaWiki software interprets this as a given parameter, so anything like {{{param|default}}} will always be empty in case the param is given without a value. I don't see how we should fix this; people should rather use the template in a correct way. So yes, the parameter is optional, but if you don't fill it in, then remove it completely. Regards, -- ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 08:58, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

It is fixable, but the code will get even uglier. I don't think there's a need for this as ChrisiPK pointed out. If you all agree, please {{Tl}} the editprotected template. Cheers, Waldir ^talk 09:46, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

tl'ed the template. I am already working on an autotranslated version of this template, which will get a totally new interface, so code changes will (hopefully) be language-independant and easier to implement. I think we can live with this minor flaw for now. Thanks for reporting, though. Best regards, -- ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 16:55, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

If you're doing the autotranslation, I hope you're not planning on using something like {{Autotranslate}} to do it. It's already complicated enough, passing around parameters will not help matters. Translators shouldn't have to worry about all the complicated syntax. I would simply switch out the text only. Not the whole template (and that way you don't need a /layout page either). Rocket000 (talk) 17:43, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, it's not quite as easy, because there are links with complicated syntax in the text. I am planning on doing the link computations in the main template, which then calls a translated template (subpage /en etc. of main template), which contains the text and gets the already computed strings from the main template by param. This translated template then calls the layout template, passing the text as params and some other stuff (like a computed parameter whether the subpage is missing etc.). The layout template then computes which parts of the text to display (e.g. do we need "this is incomplete, because no subpage exists"?). Regards, -- ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 18:42, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

It seems to me that my explanation is unneccesarily complicated. The basic essence is: Translators will not need to worry about computing links to subpages, error messages and the like. They will be given a param {{{subpage}}} or similar, which they can then use in the translated text. The complicated syntax will be in the other templates (main and layout), so translators won't have to worry about that. Regards, -- ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 18:46, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for all the attention to this. I understand the essence of the problem now and the workaround (though all this stuff about autotranslation is way over my head). This won't be a problem for me any more, but I would recommend rewriting the final paragraph of "How to use this template" thusly:

You only need to include the "subpage" parameter if you create the deletion request at a different subpage of Commons:Deletion requests than the image name. For example, if you nominate Image:Foo.jpg for deletion, and you will create the subpage Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Foo.jpg, then just skip the parameter. Do not, however, list the "subpage" parameter but leave it blank (i.e. nothing after the = ); doing so will cause the links within the template to function improperly.

If you nominate an image as part of a mass nomination, you will have to list and complete the "subpage" parameter. For example you nominate all the images uploaded by a particular user for deletion. Then instead of creating 50 different subpages, you create just one, Commons:Deletion requests/Images uploaded by User XYZ, and then on all of the relevant images, you put this template with the parameter subpage=Images uploaded by User XYZ.

Once again, thanks for the helpful response. —Werewombat (talk) 17:33, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

As I stated above (#hide=yes?), I think the detailed description should not be on the template itself, because this is way too much text, which way too few users actually need. As there have been no objections to this proposal so far, I will probably move the description part to some section of COM:DR or similar. I'll do this together with the autotranslation. Regards, -- ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 21:06, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Wrong date --> Wrong category:Deletion requests 05 2009

When the date is entered as a numerical, the "category:Deletion requests x 2009" is generated as can be seen here. --Foroa (talk) 16:32, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

I added a switch and surprisingly it works :)) Maybe someone can cleanup the code a bit, my switch is not very elaborated, I read about the #time switch in mediawiki, maybe this can used to switch from 1 or 01 to the monthname January. --Martin H. (talk) 17:13, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Don't work yourself up on this, I am already preparing a new version of this template with cleaned up code and autotranslation on User:ChrisiPK/Template:Delete. Regards, -- ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 18:35, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Category discussions and Category:Non-media deletion requests

{{editprotected}}

About Category:Non-media deletion requests

I am specifically interested in category deletion discussions. "Non-media deletion requests" is not very helpful to me in figuring out what is in that category. I only discovered that it contained category deletion requests after reading a comment here: Category talk:Category deletion discussions. Unfinished

I suggest changing Category:Non-media deletion requests in the {{Delete}} template to Category:Category deletion requests --Timeshifter (talk) 12:38, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

 Oppose cat contains pages, galleries and templates as well. The template would need to be changed as well. --Cwbm (commons) (talk) 12:58, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

OK. Maybe the template can be changed. --Timeshifter (talk) 23:37, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

If you never saw the non-media category befory, maybe you do not have hidden categories turned on in your preferences. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 00:12, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

I have hidden categories on. I just don't think Category:Non-media deletion requests is very descriptive. I did not even notice it, because it didn't sound like categories. --Timeshifter (talk) 00:19, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

It contains everything but media deletion requests. I can't think of a better name than "non-media". (I'm disabling the editprotected for now). Rocket000 (talk) 06:05, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Is it possible for the template to put non-media deletion requests in 3 separate categories:

• Category:Category deletion requests
• Category:Gallery deletion requests
• Category:Template deletion requests

--Timeshifter (talk) 08:06, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

It is not necessary to split it up into three categories. The category contains only 60 items and a lot of the categories are allready empty and can thus be redirected or speedyded. --Cwbm (commons) (talk) 09:32, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

No offense, but I think you missed my point. This has happened before. --Timeshifter (talk) 16:29, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

thoughts about design

Haven't been around much in the last years. Now seeing the template again made me a usability test candidate. There really should be more usability tests made on Wikipedia and Commons. I was thinking:

1. Is it possible desired language without having to go to another page? As in http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archivo:Royan_church.jpg where the copyright tags are in Spanish, the deletion tag could be in Spanish too.
2. The reason could be enhanced more. Perhaps "Reason for the deletion request:" could be shortened to "Reason:". If not #1 is possible, then it could be added in other languages (e.g. "Reason/motivo/causa/Ursach")
3. Possibly "Do not remove this tag until the deletion request is closed." could be shorted to "Do not remove this tag". Possibly in other languages, as suggestion in #2
4. The "instruction" part ("If this template was added...") could possibly be hidden with a button called "Show instructions" displaying it. Instruction is not important for most users.

Possibly other design changes could be made, but I'm not an expert so I can't really say how.

Fred J (talk) 15:58, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

#1 is probably possible, though not easy (probably easiest to do it similar to the localization of {{MWheader}}). And I fully agree that #4 would be good, also for similar templates like {{Copyvio}}, {{Speedydelete}}… --The Evil IP address (talk) 16:20, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

1. 4 is done. Needs a cache refresh/30 days though; till then the instructions will appear as before.--DieBuche (talk) 14:52, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Headline doesn't show up

I followed the step-by-step instruction described in the template, but my deletion requests are not listed properly on the current deletion request list. The other listings have automatically generated section headers with a link to the file page, but my entries have none. Is something wrong with the template? --Casper (talk) 13:12, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Sorting in category 2

{{editprotected}} It would be very helpful for scripts if the category sortkey can be changed, so that you can identify the deletion discuss page from database entry or with the api. Then you do not have to read the full page content and recreate the same logic in your the script as used by the template with checking page existence. I use this procedure already on dewiki for all these templates. This wouldn't change much of the sort order as already used.

The two different possible categories are defined within the template ParmAnd3 (there is only one in the source code) where the sort key is

• {{{subpage|{{{2|}}}}}}{{FULLPAGENAME}}

This should be changed (two times) to

• {{{subpage|{{{2|{{#ifexist: Commons:Deletion requests/{{FULLPAGENAME}} | {{FULLPAGENAME}} | {{#ifexist: Commons:Deletion requests/Image:{{PAGENAME}} | Image:{{PAGENAME}} | {{FULLPAGENAME}}}}}}}}}}}}#{{FULLPAGENAME}}

This is the same code as used by the here-Link. Then the disuccion page would be simply Commons:Deletion requests/sortkey. The #{{FULLPAGENAME}} part fixes the problem as described at #Sorting in category. Merlissimo (talk) 05:38, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Hello Merlissimo, it's included now. greetings -- Ra'ike T C 05:51, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Licensing conflict with local wiki

{{Edit protected}} Add note in instructions as follows : ' If you are tagging this image because the license on Commons is in conflict with a license for an identical image on a local project (such as Wikipedia), Then please include a link to the 'local' image concerned in your nomination. ' Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:01, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

I think this line is not necessary in this template. When nominating something for deletion it is required to include a valid reason. It can be considered logic to include why something would be a copyright violation (ie." duplicate on en.wikipedia.org as 'Foobar.jpg' is tagged non-free"). See also User:MGA73/Possibly unfree as with for example File:Kineo CAM Logo.PNG. –Krinkle^talk 11:15, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Boilerplate disclaimers on local wikipedias are not sufficient reason to nominate a file for deletion. One should argue why the license on commons would not be valid. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 11:21, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Krinkle, That's still a need to link the enwiki duplicate.

Amended wording " If you are tagging this because the license on Commons is in conflict with a license for an identical image on a local project (such as Wikipedia), please indicate why the license on Commons is invalid as well as providing a link to the duplicate image. It is not normally sufficient to claim an image is merely 'non-free'. " Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:27, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

This template is already pretty long. If this case happens, couldn't we just easily ask for the en source image in the DR talk?--DieBuche (talk) 13:42, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

 Not done looks like a very special case and doesnt belong to the front-end of one of our most important processes much used by unexpirienced users. Keep it as simple as possible. --Martin H. (talk) 22:49, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Just a note: local commons.css/js aren't available global

You have justs added the collapse feature. I only want to mention that this will not work on other wikis (e.g. de:Datei:JM_Fire.jpg). In this case its not so important because the template is always shown expanded but you should take care not to use local classes for styling or something else. Merlissimo (talk) 18:53, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Didn't think of that, yes. I've got a rough idea how to hide the header in these cases, will do the changes tomorrow--DieBuche (talk) 19:07, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

The header is now hidden on default & the respective JS shows the header if it's loaded. Doesn't seem to work right now, but I'm supecting that's a cache isssue--DieBuche (talk) 20:13, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

I've fixed it so it should work now. The only remaining issue is that now users with CSS enabled but JS disabled will see no instructions at all (after the nomination page has been created, that is). In principle, this could be fixed with appropriate changes to MediaWiki:Common.css and MediaWiki:CollapsibleTemplates.js, but it's a bit tricky to get just right and I'm too tired to start figuring it out right now. (Basically, we'd need to override the inline "display:none" with a suitable declaration in Common.css, but then have MediaWiki:CollapsibleTemplates.js override that. And do it without interfering with other uses of the script. It probably needs a new class name.) —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 21:39, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

I think your last edit was a bad idea; Now it's always expanded, even when the subpage exists. Your previous edit (setting {{#ifexist:Commons:Deletion requests/{{FULLPAGENAME}}|collapsed}}), seems to be the cleaner solution (because the class="collapsed" has only any effect if the javascript was loaded)--DieBuche (talk) 11:34, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

...did you try it? I'm pretty sure that it's not "always expanded, even when the subpage exists". (I did, however, have a bug in the existence check, namely that it didn't respect the "subpage=" parameter. It should be fixed now.) —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 16:06, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

yeah, tried it on some pages; but the subpage= thing might have been just the cause--DieBuche (talk) 21:12, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Now that it's working, I tweaked it a little more so that the mass deletion instructions are also collapsed. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 21:55, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

I created a feature request to solve this css style problem bugzilla:24212 Merlissimo (talk) 18:12, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Bug

I am using a browser without javascript. The request page has already been created, and now I miss both the "subst:idw" link to copy paste on the uploader's talk page and the log link to add the page on today's link. The File is File:G-Ball Court.jpg. Teofilo (talk) 20:16, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

See previous section. I think I've  fixed it now with a rather crude but effective kluge involving a class="show-on-commons". You may need to clear your cache to get everything up to date. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 20:52, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Thats one solution. The other would be {{#ifeq:{{SITENAME}}|Wikimedia Commons|....}} Merlissimo (talk) 22:10, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I don't know if I will have an occasion to try it again soon, but thank you for your efforts. File:G-Ball Court.jpg seems to be OK now, both with and without javascript. Teofilo (talk) 14:15, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Listing open deletion requests

There is a bot request. If there is no more response i'll archive that due to inactivity of the requester. Merlissimo (talk) 00:49, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

bug in automated javascript deletion request + bug in this template

Hi there, using the automated javascript deletion request in the left hand tool bar it added the line

{{delete|reason=unknown child, no permission by parents, no hint why we should keep this|subpage=File:DIEGO07.JPG|day=19|month=June|year=2010}}

to the File:DIEGO07.JPG making it popping up in Category:Incomplete deletion requests - missing subpage!

I just took a look at the code and I think I found the problem. The "#ifexists" explicitly checks for parameter "2", which is missing in the line mentioned above! The line should read:

{{delete|reason=unknown child, no permission by parents, no hint why we should keep this|File:DIEGO07.JPG|subpage=File:DIEGO07.JPG|day=19|month=June|year=2010}}

Where can I add the additional parameter to stop Category:Incomplete deletion requests - missing subpage being "flooded" by correct deletion requests?

Btw.: I just realized there is another bug in this template: The date of the deletion request is given correctly (see above) but the help line No. 2 links to Commons:Deletion requests/2010/06/20 – which is obviously the page of today! axp_de^Hello! 08:21, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

The first one is not a bug, but a cache problem: If you stick a delete on an image & save, it will appear in Category:Incomplete deletion requests - missing subpage even hours after you created the subpage. I think the second one is intentional: Otherwise someone cleaning the incomplete RfDs might put them in the logs which have closed weeks ago. This way a RfD always gets to be on the page of the current day once.--DieBuche (talk) 12:28, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, I purged all pages/categories but the file in question continues to show up ... btw. now Template:Delete/en shows up in Category:Incomplete deletion requests - missing subpage!

The link to the actual date bears some problems: the DR is already filed on original date but the next day someone might add another link on actual date because he can't see the original link!

There's still some work left to do ... axp_de^Hello! 16:01, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure what's going on with Template:Delete/en; DieBuche seems to have been editing that lately, maybe they can clarify. (BTW, has anyone considered making {{Delete}} autotranslated? That would seem like a good idea to me.) As for the log link, unfortunately {{Delete}} can't tell if the request subpage has already been transcluded, so it has to keep offering that link. Given that limitation, it's IMO safer to link to today's log page even if the template was added earlier: a request transcluded on two different days is a minor annoyance and easily fixed, while a request transcluded late on an old daily list could easily end up closed without getting enough attention. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 16:22, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

"BTW, has anyone considered making {{Delete}} autotranslated?" That's what I'm trying at Delete/en; but i have yet to find a workaround to pass named parameters using {{Autotranslate}}; otherwise the autotranslate would immediately break all translated versions.

You can either convert them to numbered parameters (as in {{Attribution}}) or do it by hand (as in {{PD-self}}). Either way works, although I personally prefer the latter. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 17:20, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

BTW, while you're at it, I'd recommend also making it use {{Layouttemplateargs}} (see the template page for documentation). —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 17:24, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

cursor: pointer

{{editprotected}}

Add a cursor: pointer; style rule to the line "Click here to show further instructions", so that mouse cursor will turn to be a hand when that text is pointed.

This should also apply to all other similar text, and finally a rule in MediaWiki:Common.css? Liangent (talk) 15:07, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

 Done I have modified MediaWiki:Common.css to apply the cursor to all collapsible templates. --Mormegil (talk) 16:17, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

What happened to the instructions ?!

The instructions have disappeared. Please restore. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 09:38, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

There's a button called "Click here to show further instructions", when you click it, the magic instructions shall appear. –Krinkle^talk 15:06, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Language switch does not work?

I set language setting as Japanese at my preference page. But this template does not switch to Template:Delete/ja. --Was a bee (talk) 09:42, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

The template is not yet autotranslated afaik. --Martin H. (talk) 10:34, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank you Martin. Could somebody add switch?--Was a bee (talk) 11:31, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

The template is a bit more complex than the average message templates, but I'll give it a shot. –Krinkle^talk 06:06, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

 Done - I've fixed a few others thing at the same time, however in doing so the syntax has slightly changed (only the texts need to be translated, not the whole template). Copy and paste the contents of Template:Delete/en to yours and fill in the texts. –Krinkle^talk 09:38, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank you Krinkle. --Was a bee (talk) 13:43, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

"since ... date" is not localizable

Hello, I have converted {{Delete/pl}} to use {{Delete/layout}}, but unfortunately parameters 4, 5 and 6 are not localizable, i.e. month name is given in English and "since ..." text is added in a way that is suitable for English. I would propose to extract the date information to a separate parameter, use #formatdate parser function and maybe separate sentence (instead of just adding since...). For now, I am not passing parameters 4, 5 and 6 to the layout template.  « Saper // @talk »  19:48, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Layout is not suitable for translation

I tried to convert Template:Delete/ko using Template:Delete/layout, but I found it is not applicable for Korean template, and is designed for English. For the "To discuss it please go here", "여기에서 삭제 여부에 대한 토론이 진행중입니다." is Korean translation. And Category:Incomplete deletion requests should be in middle of sentence. Layout should be changed. – Kwj2772 (msg) 13:37, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Agree. I'm struggling even to make a Norwegian translation, although the language is not that different from English. In Norwegian you would write {{{intro1}}} in present tense if a date is omitted (no {{{since}}}), but in past tense otherwise. The same problem applies to Danish (the current translation is wrong if a date is omitted) – Danmichaelo (δ) 19:56, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Clicked by error

I pologize, was trying to insert del template request on a page...Ciaurlec (talk) 21:09, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Wiki code not getting displayed properly in a delete template

Hello. When I made this edit, I used wiki code to link to the Russia section on the FoP page. Unfortunately, in the instructions on the resulting template, in step 1, the wiki code didn't make it properly in the code to be copied. Note the result on the deletion sub page. Is there any way to change the template to make sure the wiki code is properly copyable?--Rockfang (talk) 19:05, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

mass deletion paragraph

{{editprotected}} The mass deletion paragraph should provide the full template code : {{Delete |reason=reason |subpage=group-name |day=11 |month=December |year=2010 }} instead of {{delete|reason|group-name}}

Teofilo (talk) 15:53, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

 Done (You could have done it yourself, the edit went to semi-protected Template:Delete/en.) --Mormegil (talk) 14:15, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Sorting according to day

{{editprotected|technical=yes}}

I propose sorting the files in “Category:Deletion requests month year 2011” according to the day (parameter day in template). Maybe “day {{PAGENAME}}” would be the best sort key. Doing so would allow admins to find find files for assessment according to the date of the DR (i.e. 7+ days afterwards) and therein to the kind they are knowledgeable in (history images, diagrams, photographs of bands, logos, …) on a visual basis. --Leyo 07:29, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Implementing in Template:Delete/layout seems to be a bit tricky. --Leyo 12:10, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Please make a specific request that an admin can implement with a minimum of technical knowledge. If you need help with the technical details, please post a request at the Help desk. Powers (talk) 17:15, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

 Done. Let me know if there is something wrong. -- RE rillke questions? 11:24, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. What would be useful now is to have a TOC with links to the individual days (e.g. like this). --Leyo 17:17, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

 Done as well. If you don't like 31 days on >31d months, I suggest you make a bright invention to achieve it without a lot of coding. -- RE rillke questions? 11:47, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks you. I don't think it's a real problem to always have 31 days. --Leyo 09:53, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

I have a big problem now. My bot creates Commons:Deletion requests/incomplete and reports. For this database report and also for reporting commons deletion requests on dewiki portals my bot uses the sort key for extracting the talk page used for discussion. read #Sorting_in_category_2.

So this info must be changed again so that i can still get the linked talk page from database. Until now i used:

INSERT IGNORE INTO Com_DR (file_page_id, file_page_title, talk_page_title, talk_page_id)
 SELECT cp.page_id, cp.page_title, CONCAT('Deletion_requests/', REPLACE(SUBSTRING_INDEX(cl_sortkey,'#',1),' ','_')), cdp.page_id
  FROM commonswiki_p.templatelinks
   INNER JOIN commonswiki_p.page cp ON tl_from = cp.page_id
   INNER JOIN commonswiki_p.categorylinks ON cp.page_id=cl_from AND cl_to LIKE 'Deletion_requests_%'
   LEFT JOIN commonswiki_p.page cdp ON cdp.page_namespace=4 AND cdp.page_title = CONCAT('Deletion_requests/', REPLACE(SUBSTRING_INDEX(cl_sortkey,'#',1),' ','_'))
  WHERE tl_namespace=10 AND tl_title='Delete' AND cp.page_namespace=6 AND cl_sortkey LIKE '%#%'

Merlissimo (talk) 01:37, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

I agree that this is unfortunate. But is there really no other way than to do a full revert? For example, the previous sortkey might be restored for the incomplete deletion requests only.

I would not like to miss this new sorting feature, because it helps me (and surely also others) to find (on a visual basis) deletion requests, which run for 7+ days and where I am competent for taking a decision. --Leyo 09:01, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

I didn't change the sortkey for incomlete requests, Leyo. -- RE rillke questions? 09:11, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

I am not the SQL-master and implentation of helper-function (e.g. SUBSTRING_INDEX) differs significantly. Und wir können auch auf Deutsch weiterreden.

The sort-key is now: two-digit-day#subpage#Fullpagename. The subpage is what you want, I think. I hope this helps. I am sorry for the inconvenience. There are so many dependencies...

BTW, can your bot automatically create cats like Category:Deletion requests October 2011 e.g. a month before? -- RE rillke questions? 09:09, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

My bot is already creating mountly pages already on dewiki. But DRBot creates Commons:Deletion requests/2011/10. I think both pages should be created by the same bot. So you should ask Bryan first.

This sortkey would be ok for me now. But i'll remove the tailing fullpagename part. This was added because of #Sorting in category. But since march 2011 mediawiki always adds "\nfullpagename" as suffix to the sortkey. So adding this manually isn't needed anymore.

So sortkey now contains only two-digit-day#subpage. Merlissimo (talk) 11:42, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. --Leyo 12:18, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. -- RE rillke questions? 14:50, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. RE rillke questions? 14:50, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Incomplete1c and Incomplete2c

I want to translate this template into Persian but I can't understand the function of Incomplete1c and Inxomplete2c parameters. Can anybody help me?
incomplete1c=Here (where?) is the full syntax again, in case you misplaced it (misplaced what?). Don't use it (use what?) as the subpage code (eh? what is a subpage code?). Thanks. AMERICOPHILE 05:21, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Just place a {{Delete}} here and hit preview.

Here = below; misplaced it - maybe forgot it; Don't use it - the syntax below; subpage code - text to be inserted into the request-subpage (e.g. Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Rillke) that is transcluded into the daily list (e.g. Commons:Deletion requests/2011/12/28).

It produces (context):

This page is a member of Category:Incomplete deletion requests - missing reason because it is incomplete (you failed to fill in the reason). PLEASE fill in all five variables and create the subpage! (Note: This error may appear due to a caching issue; purge this page cache to fix it.)

On the subpage, please use the following code: {{subst:delete2|image=File:FILE-NAME.JPG|reason=WRITE REASON - ~~~~}}

Here is the full syntax again, in case you misplaced it. Don't use it as the subpage code:

{{Delete
|reason=
|subpage=Template talk:Delete
|day=28
|month=December
|year=2011
}}

-- RE rillke questions? 14:12, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I translated it and asked some Persian colleagues who follow the page to improve my translation.[1] AMERICOPHILE 06:39, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

internationalisation of date

{{Editprotected}} Hello,

looking for example at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Lauraciufo2.jpg?uselang=fr

one can see that the date is not translated. Maybe this could be done using the Date template ?

Cheers, Frédéric (talk) 19:04, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

 Support, it would be very useful! Why don't we use a "date" field with ISO value? Example: {{Delete|reason=lorem ipsum|date=2013-06-23}} - much more compact, it can be easily translated using {{Date}} and MediaWiki messages for months. --Ricordisamoa 09:04, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm placing the {{Editprotected}} template to call to any admin. --Ricordisamoa 09:06, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

This idea seems fine, but we can't leave the edit request tag live forever. If you would like, you can post on COM:VP about this to get someone to code it. When making edit requests, please post specific changes (code) you would like. Killiondude (talk) 20:53, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Update: We finally got this working! Now, an ISO-formatted date can be specified with the fourth/"day" argument. It would be nice to have a "date" parameter as fallback: {{{day|{{{date|{{{4|}}}}}}}}}. Thanks, --Ricordisamoa 12:51, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

The request now has been moved to Template talk:Delete/layout. — TintoMeches, 18:42, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

@Ricordisamoa: Something seems to be still wrong with the categorization. Can you fix that? Thanks in advance. -- Rillke^(q?) 21:51, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

@Rillke: actually, I don't understand much of the categorization algorithm used in the template. I'd rather try with a Scribunto module. --Ricordisamoa 06:00, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Strong support, Template:Delete is unusable, all those subst foo here, subst bar there, eventually subst Template:Delete itself resulting in 17th century month names instead of simple YYYY-MM-DD time stamps are just wrong. Somebody went to the trouble to create a nice #time parser function, it works. –Be..anyone (talk) 10:57, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

See also

The template documentation needs a "See also" including links such as to {{Speedydelete}}. Hyacinth (talk) 03:50, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

It tells me to do what has already been done automatically

Having just used this for maybe the second or third time ever (via the "Nominate for deletion" link) I picked "further instructions", and it told me to put a load of templates on different pages. I started doing this, and then found it had already done so (in one case I added what it told me, and only then noticed that it was already there).

This does not seem optimal. --ColinFine (talk) 12:00, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Hmmm... no, it tells you that those steps are only necessary if the automatic processes failed or if you added the template manually: "If this template was added because you clicked "Nominate for deletion" in the left menu, please make sure that all necessary pages have been created: If they haven't been created after a few minutes, or if you added this template manually, you should complete these steps" (emphasis mine). —LX (talk, contribs) 14:26, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

The date is displayed wrongly at Chinese Wikipedia

I found that the date displayed in Chinese version will show up as「(date)+(Chinese month)+(year)」。

eg. June 3, 2017 → 3 六月 2017. It should be fixed as "2017年6月3日". ---Koala0090 (talk) 08:37, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

Edit request (parameter 2)

{{Editrequest}} Change

2={{{subpage|{{{2|}}}}}}

to

2={{{subpage|{{{2|{{FULLPAGENAME}}}}}}}}

so that {subpage/2} won't be needed for most files.Jonteemil (talk) 18:16, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

 Not done Not necessary. You seem to misunderstand the purpose of this parameter. — Speravir – 00:10, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

@Speravir: One year late reply, but my request seemed like a sensible request. What did I misunderstand regarding the purpose of the parameter?Jonteemil (talk) 21:17, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

@Jonteemil: Parameter 2 is simply not necessary in most cases.   — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 22:25, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Okay, now I have discovered something. What I wanted is already implemented and Parameter 2 is simply not necessary in most cases was my point exactly :).Jonteemil (talk) 22:30, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Recent layout changes

This one…

or this?

Please check the recent changes to Template:Delete/layout. Why doesn’t this subpage has the same level of protection, b.t.w.? -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 21:56, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

• Glad to see the new colors reverted, but the icon change was an improvement, I think. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 00:03, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Suggestion to add a warning/disclaimer

To prevent people to reuse the material with this template outside Commons, I suggest to add a warning like: Do not reuse this media outside the Wikimedia projects. Be reusing it you risk infringement of copyright of the copyright owner. (Please improve my English). This template is used on an estimated 50.000 27.000 files, and it can stay there for 9 months or even more, considering the current backlog. Ellywa (talk) 09:12, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Not all images are nominated for deletion because of copyright issues. For example, File:Venus symbol (blue).gif is totally OK from the copyright point of view, it’s just useless. If someone wants to reuse this low-resolution image instead of a higher-resolution one, they can do it without infringing any copyright. (By the way, I don’t know how you got this 50,000 figure; according to this Toolforge tool, it’s used on only some 27,000 files.) —Tacsipacsi (talk) 14:02, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Agree, but most of them are copyright infringements, or suspected to be so. Sometimes the reason is indeed out-of-scope, educational not usefull. I am very worried about the problems people can get into if they re-use such an image and trust on the "free" content we are provide. (I just estimated the number from a category, thanks for the link). Ellywa (talk) 14:16, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Maybe a notice stating that it may not be freely reusable is okay. (The best would be if the template could decide whether the provided reason is copyright infringement, but since the reason is free text, it’s not realistically possible.) We should also keep in mind while phrasing the notice that even if the file is not freely reusable, someone reusing it may not infringe copyright, e.g. because of fair use or similar copyright exceptions. —Tacsipacsi (talk) 16:18, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, based on that remark I propose to change the intro1 of Template:Delete/en with: This (automatic namespace) has been nominated for deletion. Please note that the content may not be reusable because the licensing on this page might not be valid. First sentence is not changed. Ellywa (talk) 11:19, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Language links are broken

The language links the bottom of the template appear to be broken. To reproduce the problem see any page currently nominated for deletion. (I was using File:Turkish Policy Quarterly.jpg as a test case, just because it is a recent nomination.) If you click on a non-English language link (I tried a bunch), you see a template talking about removing Template:Delete/xx, where xx is the language code. For example, if you click on Neederlands, you a page titled Template:Delete/nl. The text you see says "Dit of deze template is genomineerd voor verwijdering." If you the click on "'hier"' in "Voor overleg hierover, zie hier, " which should have taken you to the deletion discussion for File:Turkish Policy Quarterly, instead you are taken to "Commons:Deletion requests/Template:Delete/nl" which was closed "keep" about a year ago. From what I can see, some vandal was nominating many of these Delete/xx templates for deletion. Perhaps in the process of restoring order, something was broken.--agr (talk) 17:21, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Agree, I am seeing the same. I do not know how it should be solved. @Krinkle: would you have an opportunity to look at this problem? Ellywa (talk) 11:25, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

@Ellywa and ArnoldReinhold: this isn't fixable without changing the functionality of the links, the language links go to an entirely different page (the language subpage of the template), so the context is entirely different with a different page and different namespace, so the wording is different and the deletion discussion link is different. The template would somehow have to know what page referred you to know what to display, currently the template only knows the details of the page that is on (Template:Delete/nl), it doesn't know that you came from File:Turkish Policy Quarterly.jpg. A potential fix to this problem would require changing the link target of the language links to instead go to the current page URL with the parameter uselang=langcode added to it, this would reload the current page with the interface language temporarily changed to the specified language, instead of the link going to the template subpage. Dylsss (talk) 15:21, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

@Ellywa: It looks like the MediaWiki:AjaxTranslation.js gadget has stopped working in some cases. The canundrum described by @Dylsss is correct, but was solved ten years ago. The way it is meant to work is that when these language links are clicked, the JS code from AjaxTranslation.js takes over by performing an HTTP request in the background to the MediaWiki API, to produce a preview of this template rendered in context of this page with the given language (thus exactly as it should be, including template params). It then dynamically replaces the template on the current page with the translated one (without reloading the whole page). The links that we see today are merely a default for when the script is not working. I agree it would be a slightly better default if these links instead pointed to the current page with a uselang query parameter. Although, doing so would further break the AjaxTranslation.js gadget. It appears the gadget still works on some templates, but it stopped working for the "Delete" template due to this edit by @Jdx. This edit introduced use of BDI tags in the wikitext, which means that the effective click target is now technically the "BDI" element, instead of the anchor link element. This confuses the AjaxTranslation.js gadget. I will try to extend the gadget to support both ways of linking so that these will work as well. Although, looking at the broader situation, I think we may also want to consider removing these language links altogether. I will explain why, in a new thread on MediaWiki talk:AjaxTranslation.js. --Krinkle (talk) 22:49, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

@Ellywa and Dylsss: This template is very widely used. If the language links can't include the information intended, it seems to me they should be removed or replaced with a working alternative. One possibility might be to mark the links in the original text with special symbols or circled numbers. Perhaps:

This media file has been nominated for deletion since: >> 9 January 2022 <<

To discuss it, please visit: >>> nomination page <<<

Do not remove this tag until the deletion nomination is closed.

Reason for the nomination: >>>> Copyrighted logo. <<<<

Each language link would then go to a page in that language that says:

This media file has been nominated for deletion.

On the page you came from,

the date of the nomination is marked >> xxx <<

a link to the page to discuss the nomination is marked: >>> yyy <<<

the reason for the nomination is marked: >>>> zzz <<<<

The nomination tag should not be removed until the deletion nomination is closed.

The language link targets might also include additional information as desired, perhaps on how to translate the nomination page. If ISO 8601 date format were used, there would be no need for the date of the nomination item. This proposal may seem awkward, but it is far better than displaying language links that give bad information and are unfixable.--agr (talk) 17:56, 9 January 2022 (UTC)