Template talk:Barnstar

Requested move 14 August 2025

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Jeffrey34555 (talk) 15:24, 29 August 2025 (UTC)

---

Template:Barnstar2 → Template:Barnstar – There are two generic base templates for Barnstars. The first produces an image box, which is a fairly unusual/old way of displaying them. It was at Template:Barnstar until I just moved it to Template:Barnstar image box. The second, Template:Barnstar2, produces the modern wide talk page box. I suggest moving it to the freed-up Template:Barnstar spot over the redirect to help make it easier to find. The image box template had a subst-only message, but there are about 200 transclusions (mostly on old user pages) from people who didn't follow that advice, so those would have to be fixed first to clear out the spot. My second choice would be to move Template:Barnstar2 to something like Template:Barnstar talk message. Sdkb ^talk 14:16, 14 August 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. TarnishedPath^talk 09:42, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Notified: Template talk:Barnstar image box#Proposed move affecting this template. Sdkb ^talk 14:19, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Honestly, support. I've literally never seen the "old" barnstar used in my time here. — ^EF⁵ 20:39, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Regardless of the outcome of this, might want to put in a request at WP:AWBREQ to subst all those {{Barnstar}}s that didn't get subst'd. Since it's a subst-only template, that should be non-controversial regardless of what name things end up at. –Novem Linguae (talk) 20:53, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

@Novem Linguae: Could we achieve that by using |auto=yes from here? Sdkb ^talk 21:40, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

On its own, I don't think so. I think each page needs to be edited in order to trigger a subst. As you can probably tell, I think subst is a good idea here because then it gives the option to change this template name without breaking existing transclusions (subst-ing would get rid of all existing transclusions). Or if the template is not renamed, it is still good to subst templates that are subst-only. –Novem Linguae (talk) 04:26, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Hmm, the page here gives me the impression that |auto=yes may work. I'll try it, and see what happens. Sdkb ^talk 14:07, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Oh, I didn't know that that param triggered a cleanup bot. Sure, give that a try. –Novem Linguae (talk) 16:27, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Support for move. Did it work, is this ready for moving yet? CNC (talk) 10:05, 29 August 2025 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.