Template talk:Commons-gallery
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Test 1
- {{Commons-gallery|Saxony}} -- getting nothing, so Subst it:
 |
Wikimedia Commons has an image gallery on this topic at: 'Saxony |
- {{Commons-gallery|Saxony|R=1}} -- getting nothing, so Subst it:
|
|
Wikimedia Commons has an image gallery on this topic at: 'Saxony |
[edit] Test 2-- current versions
|
|
See our image gallery on this topic at:'Saxony' |
Also, could you let me know what behavior your found to be confrontational? I will agree that if you read in isolation the section that you posted to, that I could be considered to be a potential jerk. But if you were to read the rest of the talk page, I don't see any examples of personal attacks, tendentious editing, trolling, and so on. As for wikilayering, you should realize that there is a merge proposal being considered, and the supermajority believe that this topic is in violation of wikipedia policy; the minority is wikilayering the meaning of "consensus", and I know of no other way to deal with this than by citing wikipedia policy. Thanks again for the heads up. Just to let you know, I am in charge of the WikiMoon project and have been editing over 200 diffferent articles. It is somewhat unsettling to have to deal with single purpose accounts, such as XXX
|
|
See our image gallery on this topic at:'Saxony' |
-
- I don't care to go into particulars, as I should be outside taking advantage of the warm spell for a carpentry project... I've got 50 2X4's awaiting me in my van, and am trying to finish a couple of VPP posts of my own. Suffice it to say that the comments were as much directed at the others there as yourself, and I know you to be pretty meticulous over content and references from that VPP discussion on ...
Test completes satisfactorily: FrankB 21:42, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Application
I saw the addition of this to Middle Ages, and I'm still not sure what to think. I can sympathize with the attempt to draw more attention to the historical atlas, but I don't think placing it right on top of an article is the right way to do so. Considering the thousands of space-hogging infoboxes templates already in use, this could just add to the clutter. I think this could be done a bit more discreetly.
