Forums > Senate Hall archive > SH:To those using Template:L
This page is an archive of a community-wide discussion. This page is no longer live. Further comments or questions on this topic should be made in a new Senate Hall page rather than here so that this page is preserved as a historic record. Advanced Jedi Training Droid 6 (Talk to my master) 01:05, November 17, 2014 (UTC)
Apparently for those using this, we should now be using "subst" with this-- see the info at Template:L. Seems this change was made a few days ago, but I only just now spotted it. ProfessorTofty (talk) 23:16, October 9, 2014 (UTC)
- What's the reasoning for the addition? --Clonehunter(Report your W.M.D.) 03:43, October 12, 2014 (UTC)
- It can actually be better for page load time. Just using the L template means that the page has to load every instance of the template. By using SUBST, it automatically renders it with the /Canon link and therefore doesn't require the page to load every use of Template:L. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 05:07, October 12, 2014 (UTC)
- But is that only applied to the very first canon link in the article? Or every single /Canon link? --Clonehunter(Report your W.M.D.) 14:54, October 12, 2014 (UTC)
- All of them. Anytime you use it, it changes it to to [[Article name/Canon|Article name]] upon saving the page. ProfessorTofty (talk) 16:10, October 12, 2014 (UTC)
- But is that only applied to the very first canon link in the article? Or every single /Canon link? --Clonehunter(Report your W.M.D.) 14:54, October 12, 2014 (UTC)
- It can actually be better for page load time. Just using the L template means that the page has to load every instance of the template. By using SUBST, it automatically renders it with the /Canon link and therefore doesn't require the page to load every use of Template:L. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 05:07, October 12, 2014 (UTC)
- That's annoying. In this case it would be easier to use "/Canon" link instead of the template. The beauty of the {{L}} template was that it was very easy to type out.--Richterbelmont10
(come in R2!) 19:39, October 16, 2014 (UTC)
- Well, you're still typing less. {{subst:L|Article}} is still using less characters than [[Article/Canon|Article]]. Jorrel
Fraajic 19:43, October 16, 2014 (UTC)
- It's also more elegant if you're using copy and paste-- just copy "{{subst:L|" repeatedly instead of having to go in and copy the subject's name each time, in addition to typing "/Canon|" first. ProfessorTofty (talk) 20:01, October 16, 2014 (UTC)
- I've deleted the template, as it's proven impractical for use and promotes a lack of consistency; additionally, use of it without the subst: only complicates bot work and other edits. Cade
Calrayn 20:06, October 16, 2014 (UTC)
- Was it really a problem? Were a lot of people still using it without putting the "subst" first? Because it seemed to me like the new way was working. ProfessorTofty (talk) 20:07, October 16, 2014 (UTC)
- Personally, I stopped using it with the new way. Once it was decided that we needed to add SUBST to it, Template:L lost all value to me. I don't disagree with the deletion. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 20:16, October 16, 2014 (UTC)
- I never stopped using it. With cut-and-paste, the template was still a lot faster than having to type all that out. If it's really gone for good, I'm going to miss it. ProfessorTofty (talk) 20:24, October 16, 2014 (UTC)
- Bleh. L or subst:L was a lot faster than copying and pasting or typing it long hand. So maybe the page load time increases. Not a worthwhile sacrifice? --Clonehunter(Report your W.M.D.) 02:18, October 17, 2014 (UTC)
- I never stopped using it. With cut-and-paste, the template was still a lot faster than having to type all that out. If it's really gone for good, I'm going to miss it. ProfessorTofty (talk) 20:24, October 16, 2014 (UTC)
- Personally, I stopped using it with the new way. Once it was decided that we needed to add SUBST to it, Template:L lost all value to me. I don't disagree with the deletion. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 20:16, October 16, 2014 (UTC)
- Was it really a problem? Were a lot of people still using it without putting the "subst" first? Because it seemed to me like the new way was working. ProfessorTofty (talk) 20:07, October 16, 2014 (UTC)
- I've deleted the template, as it's proven impractical for use and promotes a lack of consistency; additionally, use of it without the subst: only complicates bot work and other edits. Cade
- It's also more elegant if you're using copy and paste-- just copy "{{subst:L|" repeatedly instead of having to go in and copy the subject's name each time, in addition to typing "/Canon|" first. ProfessorTofty (talk) 20:01, October 16, 2014 (UTC)
- Well, you're still typing less. {{subst:L|Article}} is still using less characters than [[Article/Canon|Article]]. Jorrel
(resent indent) I would say it is not a worthwhile sacrifice. We're editors because we want to provide content to readers, and the reader experience is incredibly important given that it's over 99% of the traffic of this site. If a few people have to spend a few extra seconds typing in order to improve the page load time for everyone, then that's the worthwhile sacrifice. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 02:33, October 17, 2014 (UTC)
- I thought adding the "subst" solved the problem with the page load time, though. I didn't mind doing that if it fixed the issue with the page load time, but I am disappointed that even that is no longer an option. ProfessorTofty (talk) 10:50, October 17, 2014 (UTC)