Jon B wrote:
Everything else is too complex for authors anyway.
Clearly people want features in the software that the developers are too busy or unmotivated to implement. The barrier to becoming a Mediawiki developer is high, but the barrier to creating a conditional template is not. Authors/editors/endusers *don't need* to edit the complex templates; they need to edit the articles, which are becoming more and more daunting the more features are added to the syntax. If the intermediately-skilled programmers can make editing simpler and easier for the end users, isn't that a good thing?
Of course, the best solution would be to implement infoboxes and the like directly in the Mediawiki software, in a way that doesn't require end users to code anything. But until that happens, people are going to use as many shortcuts as they can to make it easy on newcomers.
Certainly the passion which some prople have for creating yet another template should be seriously controlled. Knowing which template to use under what circumstances can be intimidating to the newcomer. It can even be frustrating for long term users. People shoulkd be encouraged to replace templates with plain text whnever it works.
What the **** is that? We don't need geek-features but a simple solution.
(warning: obscene code alert).
Stop being so hostile to people trying to improve the Wikipedia.
Do they unnecessarily load down the servers? Fine. Then they should be killed, for now. (But don't call it "killing" and don't be an ass about it.) Is the code obscene? Fine, but don't call it "obscene". These people are just trying to help, in ways that you are unable or unwilling to do. Be nice.
I agree. "Obscure" would be a much nicer term than "obscene"
Ec