Memory Alpha


Back to template

39,338pages on
this wiki

Revert Edit

Any reason this was reverted? The current code breaks line breaks, for example here. -- Cid Highwind 07:29, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, Cid, I should've written an explanation, but I had to leave. The long and the short of it is that you're right, there's an issue with the current form of the template that requires the user *in some cases* to enter a forced new line after the incite to preserve the correct formatting. I've played quite a bit with the template trying to get it to behave in an appropriate manner, but to no avail. Adding a forced break to the template fixes some situations, but breaks others (where the template was already working correctly). For example, there's an incite in the Gates McFadden article that was formatted properly until the incite template was changed, after which the line following the incite became formatted as if the line started with a space, i.e. as if <pre> </pre> was used. I'm at a loss to figure out exactly where the problem lies in the template; I'm guessing it has something to do with the use of the <div class="noicon" style="display:inline"> tag. -- Renegade54 14:44, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Reasoning Edit

Could we add another parameter to add a reason for an incite? like...

{{incite|This is a rather ambiguous reference that might be related to something else}}

...that way some people might not see the reason for the incite but if you mouse over it gives more explanation...just a thought. — Morder (talk) 01:41, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

I say make it so. Certainly can't hurt. ;-) – Cleanse 05:08, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Done and done, it's written so that it doesn't hurt... :) — Morder (talk) 05:35, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Time stamp Edit

Would it be possible to add a parameter as to when the template was added (and display over mouse over)? This would help on frequently-edited pages where searching through the history as to when a particular incite tag was added is time-consuming.– Cleanse ( talk | contribs ) 03:57, December 31, 2009 (UTC)

There is a way to automatically substitute a timestamp to the template, but that only works if the template itself is used via substitution. See User:Cid Highwind/Sandbox#Magic words test for the effect of transclusion vs. substitution. So, basically, the only way to do this seems to be creating another template (like my "/X" template) that needs to be substituted and would result in a call to this template, with the "reason" field being filled with a timestamp. Can we find a good way to enforce this substition instead of transclusion? Otherwise, we'd need to rely on timestamping the reason field manually, for example using ~~~~~. -- Cid Highwind 12:53, December 31, 2009 (UTC)
I'm going to start out saying that magic words might as well be magic as far as I know, so this may be a stupid question, hence feel free to just answer with a yes/no, but shouldn't there be a way to have the template automatically add ~~~~~ when it's used, and then use the indecipherable runes that make up {{Quote}} for the roll over function? - Archduk3:talk 23:30, January 7, 2010 (UTC)
Unfortunately, no - at least not that I'm aware of. The problem is that any "magic word" is evaluated as soon as we add it to a page, including templates. The only way to get around that is to "encrypt" it somehow, for example by actually adding ~~<includeonly>~</includeonly>~~ to the template. In that case, however, the "includeonly" tag will be the only thing being evaluated at the moment the template is substituted - and the wikitext will end up with a string of 5 tildes, which will only get replaced the next time someone changes the page. ;) -- Cid Highwind 11:16, January 8, 2010 (UTC)
Well, that was a nice thought for as long as it lasted. :) Guess it's the old fashion way for now. - Archduk3 15:42, January 9, 2010 (UTC)

Redux Edit

There was talk of adding a time stamp to this in a manner that would work, are we still OK with that? Do we want a different format than the one used with {{Featured}}? - Archduk3 13:32, January 29, 2012 (UTC)

Formatting problem Edit

I seem to remember this coming up before, though I can't remember where, so I'll state it here: There is a formatting problem with this template, in that paragraph breaks aren't respected if there are two incites.

This is a sentence. {{incite}}

This is another. {{incite}}

will display as:

This is a sentence. (citation needed • edit) This is another. (citation needed • edit)

Anyone know the reason why it behaves like this? - Archduk3 22:59, August 26, 2011 (UTC)

I changed the div to span, and it seems to behave well now - please check. Apparently, there's a rendering difference between the two, even if the div is artificially set to display:inline... -- Cid Highwind 23:59, August 26, 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, that seems to have brought it back inline. Thanks. - Archduk3 00:02, August 27, 2011 (UTC)

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki