Template talk:SPIpriorcases

Template-protected edit request on 17 March 2019[edit]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

‹ The template Edit template-protected is being considered for merging. ›

Please replace

<noinclude>{{documentation|content=This template will be added to all new cases on first creation, and will link to the prior cases in RFCU and SSP Once a case is archived, it remains in the archive ONLY, and isn't added to the top of new cases. In the archive page, it generates the L4 header at the top of the case that is supplied by {{tl|SPIarchive notice}} on live pages.}} </noinclude>

with

<noinclude>{{documentation}}</noinclude>

to transclude the currently unused Template:SPIpriorcases/doc. This would also cause the currently missing protection template to be shown, since the template is protected (template-protected). Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 21:27, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done T. Canens (talk) 23:08, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template-protected edit request on 4 July 2020[edit]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

‹ The template Edit template-protected is being considered for merging. ›

Please tighten up the whitespace around "For archived investigations, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Caparound/Archive." in cases such as Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Caparound and archived cases. I would do it myself, but I'm not authorized to edit protected templates here. — Jeff G. ツ 12:48, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

~~Done~~ I also fixed a widespread case in which this template was used on the same line as {{SPI archive notice}} with a br tag in between, causing this template's header not to render. Please ping me if I broke anything. I tested the changes using the template sandbox in about 15 pages, but I may have missed cases that are covered by some combination of #if statement conditions that did not occur on the pages I used. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:02, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

On second thought, I am not convinced that I have resolved this excessive whitespace. Another pair of eyes would be helpful. Be aware that sometimes, this template is used on a new line (see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Caparound), and sometimes it follows a br tag on the same line, as at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Coloryourface/Archive. Also, a previous version of this template caused the following date header to be rendered as invisible at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Bambifan101. Each of those pages should be used as sandbox test cases. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:12, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Re-closing; of the three cases listed by Jonesey95, the template is not responsible for the whitespace. Sceptre (talk) 17:51, 15 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]