Template talk:C

RFDO discussion: May–July 2017
Too short a name, not as clear as. —CodeCat 21:53, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. I use it all the time. DonnanZ (talk) 22:07, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
 * You can use something else, that's more clearly named. —CodeCat 22:09, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
 * It's clear enough for me. So why is there a forced redirect? It means thousands of entries have to be amended. DonnanZ (talk) 22:14, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
 * You're not just writing code for yourself, but for all editors. is much clearer for everyone than . I find it selfish when people want to use overly-obscure names and don't think of who else is going to have to read it. If you used one-letter names everywhere in a true programming language, you'd be hanged! —CodeCat 22:20, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Hang on a minute, I didn't create, but I like it. So why am I being forced to use before  has been approved for deletion? Have I missed a discussion somewhere? See  and . DonnanZ (talk) 22:50, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
 * That's just a double redirect, you could have easily fixed that yourself. —CodeCat 22:54, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
 * How? The redirects have disappeared now, very strange. DonnanZ (talk) 23:07, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I fixed it. A double redirect is when a redirect points to another redirect. The second one gets ignored. I fixed it by pointing to a non-redirecting page. —CodeCat 23:08, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
 * But with all the connected MewBot activity, aren't you jumping the gun? DonnanZ (talk) 23:28, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
 * It's uncontroversial that is a clearer name to have in entries than, so I did a replacement. This discussion is about whether it's desirable for users to keep inserting new instances of  into entries. Since deleting  affects users that are currently using the template, it needs discussion. Orphaning the template only affects people reading the code of an entry, and is a clear improvement to the clarity of the code, so discussion isn't needed. —CodeCat 23:36, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I disagree, the title is misleading, and a "disimprovement". DonnanZ (talk) 09:05, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Why is it misleading? Giorgi Eufshi (talk) 05:46, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
 * It's meant to be used for categories, they're not called topics. DonnanZ (talk) 07:53, 31 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 02:45, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. Wyang (talk) 03:01, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * It's a terrible name but no better than or ... —suzukaze (t・c) 03:05, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep, I prefer it to topics. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:37, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. --WikiTiki89 18:05, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
 * RFD kept. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 04:38, 18 July 2017 (UTC)