Wikipedia:Requested templates

WP:RT

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19

This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by .

Add new requests for a new template or updates to existing templates to the bottom of this page. Please be clear about what the template is used for, roughly what it should look like, and which articles it should link to, if any.

For requests regarding stub templates, go to Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals.

A general description and guideline for userboxes can be found at Wikipedia:Userboxes. A detailed instruction to use the userbox template can be found at Template:Userbox. For requests regarding userboxes, go to Wikipedia talk:Userboxes/Ideas.

For help with fixing existing templates, you may want to visit Wikipedia:Village pump (technical).

Template for excessive details

Moved to Wikipedia talk:Template index/User talk namespace § Template for excessive details

Template:R from Cyrillic

There is no rcat template that categorises redirects from alternative scripts. Since languages that use the Cyrillic alphabet have a ton of redirect pages or their own articles in their romanised forms, I think this should be a step forward to categorising redirects from alternative scripts. My plan is to start with Cyrillic, then Greek, then Devangari, and so on until we get all scripts. 143.178.14.75 (talk) 16:08, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done. History6042😊 (Contact me) 23:45, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@History6042 please don't create templates like this for editors with zero edit counts and instead send them to WP:WikiProject Redirect to see if this is even wanted or helpful. 2 months later and this template is unsurprisingly unused. Gonnym (talk) 10:54, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay I am sorry about that, Is there a way to delete the page? @Gonnym History6042😊 (Contact me) 10:56, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just leave it for now, if it continues to stay unused for a few more months, I'll eventually send it to TfD. Gonnym (talk) 11:01, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, thanks. History6042😊 (Contact me) 11:07, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Further (if exists)

While clearing out the nonexistent hatnote link backlog, I decided to look for templates that wouldn’t allow a red link to be put into a hatnote. Then I stumbled across the “if exists” hatnote templates! I found ones for see also and main article, but I was wondering if one could be made for further. This would really help and probably clear up some space in the backlog.

The template would look the same as the Further template, except that it would work with “if exists” parameters.

Noelle!!! (summon a demon or read smth) 21:18, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

new banner for Wikiproject History task force

i would like to change this banner, to say "Modern and Contemporary History Task Force".

could you please add a new standalone option for "modern history", and also keep the option for "contemporary history", and both would point to the same new banner? thanks.

{{WikiProject History|importance=Mid|attention=|auto=|needs-infobox=|Contemporary History=yes|Contemporary history-importance=Top}}

History: Contemporary Unassessed Mid‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Contemporary History Task Force (assessed as Top-importance).

Sm8900 (talk) 16:12, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've made some changes to Template:WikiProject History/sandbox, is this what you were looking for? This would be two separate Task forces. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 15:03, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

yes that looks pretty good. thanks!! Sm8900 (talk) 01:03, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Afghanistan civil wars of the 1990s

There are no templates for 1989-92, 1992-96, and 1996-2001. Revery (talk) 11:45, 29 December 2024 (UTC) Templates are also needed for Tajikistani Civil War, First Ivorian Civil War, Ethiopian Civil War.[reply]

Template:Strunz-inline

Template for Strunz classification of minerals. I copied from fr:Modèle:Strunz, but it does not work , see Vrbaite and fr:Vrbaite in the top infoboxen. In Fr-wiki you can expand/collapse with [+]/[-] buttons. --Altenmann >talk 03:52, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Template:Strunz is something different. --Altenmann >talk 03:52, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

End matter template

Some kind of end matter template that automatically places notes, references, see also, external links, etc. in the right order. (And only displays them if they're not empty.) – Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 17:16, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Closed Limelike Curves, if you mean, in an existing article that actually has some notes, refs, see alsos, that would be problematic, because there are some technical issues around generating references out of a template. Also, even if you ignore that, such a template would be very difficult to use, for all but the smallest stub articles. However, if you mean a template that would just spit out the headings for those four sections for a new article you are creating, so you don't have to figure out the order, that could be done. Otoh, isn't it easy enough just to go to MOS:LAYOUT and look it up? Mathglot (talk) 10:56, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's not that hard, but placing materials in the wrong order is still a pretty common mistake.

The second part of the issue (and probably the bigger one) is people just forgetting to insert one or more of these sections entirely—e.g. adding a note but forgetting you need the {{notelist}}. – Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 23:31, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:HCMMLS

The said template will just be a redirect to the now functional Template:Ho Chi Minh City Metro Line Symbol as a shortcut.

Huy1984 (talk) 17:18, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Galaxy a16

a new phone needs to be added. Please see to it. 124.253.203.155 (talk) 17:23, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Amorphea, Template:Diaphoretickes

Reason for proposal: "Seeming to be wanted" in an HTML comment at Template:Biology high taxon classification navs.
Proposed template type: navbox.
What it should do: navigate between articles related to Amorphea or Diaphoretickes, respectively.
Similar templates: Template:Amoebozoa, Template:Opisthokont protists (for Amoebozoa and Opisthokonta, respectively; both in Amorphea), Template:Rhizaria, Template:Stramenopile (for Rhizaria and stramenopiles, respectively; both in Sar, part of Diaphoretickes) Template:Eukaryota (for the whole clade Eukaryota).

Alfa-ketosav (talk) 22:06, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Short formatting

I am requesting the creation of template that is analogous to {{sfn}}, but for shortened citations that use work titles instead of publication dates. So "Smith, The Mango Daily, p. 45" instead of "Smith 1996, p. 45". For an example of an article that uses this type of short citation format (albeit poorly and inconsistently), see Slavery in ancient Rome. For the Wikipedia policy regarding this type of short citation, see WP:CITESHORT.

Alternatively, we could modify {{sfn}} to pull the second field from the date or the work title. That might be the better option.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 15:17, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Esprit15d, see the use of the |ref= parameter in CS1 templates, like {{cite book}}, etc. Once you have set the parameter once in the full citation, for example, {{cite book |author=John Smith |...|ref={{harvid|Smith|The Mango Daily}}}}, that would allow you to link to that reference using the short footnote {{sfn|Smith|The Mango Daily|p=45}}. Does that fulfill your request? Mathglot (talk) 10:47, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MathglotI have used that in the past, but it didn't occur to me to use it in this case. I will use that and see how it goes. Thank you!--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 18:36, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Esprit15d, when considering what cases to use it for, be aware that |ref= is generally there for cases where there is either a missing author or date, or some other reason that requires use of |ref=. If you are looking at a completely standard citation containing both an author and date, then you probably shouldn't use it merely because you like it better that way. Adding |ref= does make the citation code harder to read and understand for some editors, and you might get pushback from other editors in cases where a standard {{sfn}} would have worked; that might be a good reason not to use it. If unsure, or if you think there are good grounds to use it it some particular case but it's kind of a gray area, then consider discussing on the Talk page of the article first (or at a relevant WP:WikiProject) first. Good luck! Mathglot (talk) 18:46, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I prefer the date method by a mile, but I am new editor to this article, the other method is well established, and this article has 100s of citations. So I am conforming to what is already there. While I would never initiate this method in an article, it doesn't violate policy.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 18:55, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Esprit15d, understood; you are complying with WP:CITEVAR, and that is a good thing. The citation style at that article has other issues, but that is getting a bit for this page. I'll probably add something to the Talk page to discuss it there. Cheers, Mathglot (talk) 20:29, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mathglot Sounds good! I'll keep an eye out for those comments. As a side note, {{sfn}} is not rendering great either, because the "title" field is text, so there is an ampersand (&) between the last name and title, which is not ideal. I feel like we either need to have a policy that eliminates this option (which I don't have that fight in me) or modify {{sfn}} to recognize titles vs additional author names. That is out of my skill set, however, especially since that template is locked anyway.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 21:01, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Esprit15d, the business with the ampersand is because {{sfn}} is expecting a series of authors (up to four, max) followed by a year; when there is more than one author, the last one gets an ampersand in front of it. There is a way to stop that ampersand, by shoehorning both author and title into a single sfn param, but that is really a perversion of proper use of the template. Besides the linkage between sfn and citation being broken, so is consolidation of identical sfn references; see for example, 335, 336, 337, 339, and 506; those should all be one citation, with ^{^ a b c d e} links preceding it to the footnote markers in the body. So the whole usage (or rather, misuse) of {{sfn}} is endemic in that article.

The solution is a lot worse than just editing a template, even if that were an option, which it isn't in this case. I can edit templates (and have created ones like {{sfnlink}} and {{remoteref}}), but this is of a higher order of complexity. Number one, the sfn template is just a wrapper for the module, and even modifying the module is more complex than a plain ol', module, because this one is integrated with the footnotes system implemented by Mediawiki code, way under the hood, as it were. So, I would not hold out too much hope that that is going to happen soon, or tbh, ever. (Doesn't mean you can't try.) I looked at the article, and besides the 921 footnotes and dozens of no-target errors, there are hundreds of unlinked short citations which almost obviate the whole point of having them in the first place. And they are not just {{sfn}}: there is an alphabet soup of sfn, harv, harvtxt, and harvp (and maybe more) so that article's citation handling is a mess. If you don't already have it, you might like to include Trappist's user script User:Trappist the monk/HarvErrors in your common.js file which will visualize all the hidden sfn problems for you on the article page. I alter the style of these messages to make them more visible to me; see my common.css lines 63–64 for how to do this, but probably just start with the default style (i.e., modifying your common.js only) and see how it goes. Mathglot (talk) 02:30, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mathglot, thanks for the useful reply. I am not sure what happened, but I thought I had edited my comment yesterday to tell you I had figured out how to make it work. And, yes, I just included the last name and title in to the first field. The harvtxts are in there because the editors have included many notations in the reference sections, and in those cases, I have to used harvtxt instead of sfn because sfn doesn't render correctly inside of ref tags. Otherwise, yes, all the issues you have mentioned are what flagged this article in my mind. Not to mention the lack of convenience link makes confirming the assertions in the article more difficult. It really is a mess on such an important article. But I'm a glutton for punishment; 90% of what I do on Wikipedia is reference section compliance, so I think I already have Trapper's script enabled, but regardless, I can see all the errors. I will take a look at your script as well to see if it will be of use to me. Thanks again!--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 18:14, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Esprit15d, feel the same as you about WP:V, and I've browsed the citation code at the article enough to feel motivated to fix it, too, so maybe we can work on that together. My current feeling is that there is enough of a mess there that there is no original citation style to adhere to per WP:CITEVAR, and even if there were, verifiability policy far outweighs that guideline. My sense is that some well-tuned regular expressions could recast hundreds of rogue sfn's into proper sfn's with author and year, with the result that they would all have live links to the full citation in the appendix, and would also immediately automate the consolidation of identical citations with the abcde links previously noted. Note that that would immediately reduce the number of unique citations from 921 to some lower number, still in the hundreds, but a lot fewer than presently. I think at this point, we should move the discussion to the article Talk page, and I'll make an effort to lay out what needs to be done there. Mathglot (talk) 19:50, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Michelin Star Template

I am requesting that someone makes the template {{Michelin stars}} automatically include the colors as well. History6042😊 (Contact me) 14:59, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @History6042 could you tell me a little more about what you are requesting? Do you just want a template that will give you the number of Michelin Stars or like a restaurant infobox? Dr vulpes (Talk) 03:42, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Opss hey @History6042 I went digging and found this, hope it's helpful Template:Michelin stars. Dr vulpes (Talk) 03:48, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I need it to show the background color like in List of Michelin-starred restaurants in Toronto. History6042😊 (Contact me) 11:36, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr vulpes, forgot to ping. History6042😊 (Contact me) 12:33, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A new template for tables should created instead. Currently, Template:Michelin stars is used for other use cases. See: Pages that link to "Template:Michelin stars" - Wikipedia Labratscientist (talk) 08:53, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@History6042 Template:Michelin stars table cell is created, you can tag me if you have better suggestions for the colors used. Labratscientist (talk) 09:51, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done Labratscientist (talk) 10:24, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I changed the colors myself ti what is used in legends on Michelin lists. I am working on adding it to pages now, thank you @Labratscientist. History6042😊 (Contact me) 13:22, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Uw-hidden set

Sometimes, such as here, sometimes someone might change or remove hidden comments in a way that constitutes disruptive editing. They might not know that changing comments inappropriately is disruptive editing.

My ideas for some of the templates:

Template:Uw-hidden3:

Please stop. If you continue to change or delete hidden comments disruptively, you may be blocked from editing.

Template:Uw-hidden4:

Redirect to Template:Uw-generic4

Faster than Thunder (talk | contributions) 01:20, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Faster than Thunder, see {{tpv1}}, and its aliases. Mathglot (talk) 10:36, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In the diff I provided, the user was changing comments in wiki markup that are guidance and do not show on the page. I provided example templates for these scenarios. I am talking about a warning series for changing or removing wiki markup comments that do not show on the page. Faster than Thunder (talk | contributions) 17:45, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Couldn't one just adapt {{tpv1}} using the 'additional text' param, something like this:

{{Uw-tpv1|Category:Thomas & Friends merchandise|...additional text as shown below}} ⟶

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, discussion pages are meant to be a record of a discussion; deleting or editing legitimate comments, as you did at Category:Thomas & Friends merchandise, is considered bad practice, even if you meant well. Even making spelling and grammatical corrections in others' comments is generally frowned upon, as it tends to irritate the users whose comments you are correcting. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. In particular, removal of hidden comments directed at editors in the wikicode might be seen as disruptive. / sig. /

Ditto with tpv2, and so on. Mathglot (talk) 03:12, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My idea isn't specifically for talk pages, and this concerns hidden comments for editors, not discussion comments. Faster than Thunder (talk | contributions) 05:05, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see what you are saying. Does this come up often? Do you have some more diffs of recent occurrences? What have you been dong up to now when you encounter these? Mathglot (talk) 19:37, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]