Template talk:Correct title

Wording II: because of vs. due to

Proposal: Change because of to due to* (*except in the generated text "It appears incorrectly here because of . . ."). I'm aware that due to has crept into all sorts of sentences in which it doesn't modify a noun. Normally, the "error" one sees is the overuse of due to in such situations, where it doesn't make a very clear link between two clauses, and usually because of or for or another conjunction or phrase is better. This is a rare case of the reverse error: Due to actually works better here, as it directly modifies a noun—the singular subject "substitution or omission." Because of is somewhat out of place here; because connects a phrase (e.g., "he did this" or "this occurred") with a reason. Here, due to is perfect: It's an adjectival phrase that modifies a noun. How do I change this (assuming there's no opposition or we achieve consensus)? Thanks. Holy (talk) 17:09, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Adding some logic

The wording produced by this template ("the substitution or omission of ...") is quite confusing for lay readers. Its best if we correctly identify if we substituted or omitted the offending character. One option would be to manually fill in the |edit= param (which if present replaces the text "substitution or omission") using AWB or somethin. Or add some parser function logic to automate it from here itself.

I surveyed a good number of pages using this template and noticed that for 99% of cases where the problem is with the # or | characters, there is a simple formula to find out if we omitted the character or substituted it: if the length of stored page name (stripped of any parenthetical disambiguation terms) is 1 less than the length of the correct title supplied to the template, its an omission, otherwise it's a substitution. This checks out correctly for the vast majority of cases. Where it doesn't, its easy enough to manually provide the |edit= param which will override the automated wording selection. SD0001 (talk) 16:46, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

I have added in some logic for case of brackets too. If correct title length is 2 more than stored title, it's an omission, if they are equal, it was a substitution. If the difference is neither 2 or 0, the default wording is retained. SD0001 (talk) 18:19, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

@SD0001: Hi, can you edit this template so that we have the option to manually choose between substituted or omitted (example substituted=yes / omitted=yes or s=y / o=y) because the automated wording selection is not working sometimes (example BABO). Thanks. --Hddty. (talk) 03:37, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

@Hddty.: The option is already there: use |edit=substitution or |edit=omission . I just added it at BABO. SD0001 (talk) 04:33, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

handling underscore

This should probably include handling of the userscores in the title. E.g., lm_sensors is a very popular GNU/Linux utility that traditionally has an underscore in its name. MureninC (talk) 23:48, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Italicization

As evidenced by some 16-year-old talkpage comments above, italics in the correct title presented in bold by this template might be undesirable and could potentially confuse readers, e.g. if italics are semantically relevant. I've thus WP:BOLDly removed italicization from the bolded text to address this (diff) – feel free to revert if things go horribly wrong or if it's a terrible idea. — RAVENPVFF · talk · 01:20, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

This appears to have gone wrong, not horribly as far as I can tell, but almost definitely wrong. Pages including &sol now have misnested italics, which can be seen using LintHint applied to the content of that page pasted into Special:ExpandTemplates. Some of the affected redirect pages are currently listed here. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:21, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Seeing no response here, I have reverted this edit to fix these errors. Please experiment in the sandbox. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:19, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Template Editor?

Template Editor has not be protected Lakasay30 (talk) 19:20, 26 May 2025 (UTC)