Template talk:question

For historical reference
This template was formed from z-, yue- and cmn-question which were restricted to one language per template. Here are the page histories for historical reference:

15:49, 1 February 2010 Mglovesfun (Talk | contribs | block) m (80 bytes) (redundant to ) 07:38, 25 October 2009 Carolina wren (Talk | contribs | block) m (235 bytes) (have error message use error CSS class) 14:11, 12 December 2007 Robert Ullmann (Talk | contribs | block) (231 bytes) (only on Talk: pages, cat key) 13:17, 12 December 2007 A-cai (Talk | contribs | block) (46 bytes) (New page: Category:Questions about Cantonese entries)

15:48, 1 February 2010 Mglovesfun (Talk | contribs | block) m (79 bytes) (redundant to ) 15:45, 1 February 2010 Mglovesfun (Talk | contribs | block) m (262 bytes) (small things) 07:38, 25 October 2009 Carolina wren (Talk | contribs | block) m (230 bytes) (have error message use error CSS class) 14:09, 12 December 2007 Robert Ullmann (Talk | contribs | block) (226 bytes) (only on Talk: pages) 13:04, 12 December 2007 A-cai (Talk | contribs | block) (44 bytes) (New page: Category:Questions about Chinese entries)

15:49, 1 February 2010 Mglovesfun (Talk | contribs | block) m (80 bytes) (redundant to ) 07:36, 25 October 2009 Carolina wren (Talk | contribs | block) m (233 bytes) (switch to use error class in error message) 14:10, 12 December 2007 Robert Ullmann (Talk | contribs | block) (229 bytes) (Talk: space, cat key) 13:05, 12 December 2007 A-cai (Talk | contribs | block) (45 bytes) (New page: Category:Questions about Mandarin entries)


 * Mglovesfun (talk) 14:56, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

attention
Is there a reason this template should not simply hard-redirect to template:attention? It seems wasteful to make editors check two categories. I don't even understand when one would choose one template over the other: they seem to serve the same purpose (though only one is usable in the entry). &#x200b;— msh210 ℠ 18:06, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * There are theoretical differences. But yes, if push came to shove I'd favor a merge for those reasons. Mglovesfun (talk) 22:40, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

RFM discussion: June 2014

 * See Template talk:attention.