Template talk:ca-adj-mf

Template:ca-adj-mf
Has been merged into, no longer included anywhere. —CodeCat 20:31, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure, I modeled this on (which debatably could/should go the same way). No objection from me. Mglovesfun (talk) 17:02, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
 * But only because it's an orphan. I often think that there's little or no value in merging these sort of templates. Advantages: fewer templates; disadvantages: the templates become more complicated to accommodate all the different type of adjective. So I think you lose as much as you gain. In this case, since it's an orphan, I see no reason to keep and reinstate it when is doing it perfectly well. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I think it's more important to keep complexity in usage down than to keep complexity in coding the templates down, especially if it brings down the number of templates with near-identical contents. After all, people want templates to just work for them, rather than having to go hunting for the correct template first. And the reason for merging in this case is that the two existing templates didn't cover all situations; to do that would have required another two. —CodeCat 13:57, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Deleted. —CodeCat 08:52, 2 October 2010 (UTC)