Template talk:Db-meta

db-t5

Using db-t5 on a module page throws an error This template should be transcluded in the Template namespace(s) only. The namespace detection in the code should also include module pages. Gonnym (talk) 12:45, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

There does seem to be an error of this nature as T5 applies to both templates and modules. I don't know how to fix it myself, so I can't put it in an X to Y format for an edit request. Thryduulf (talk) 04:21, 11 December 2025 (UTC)

I too have tried to fix this and am a loss for how/where it is being produced. @Jonesey95, Primefac, and Redrose64: can any of you help here? Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 04:26, 11 December 2025 (UTC)

Wait, I think this might actually be an issue with {{db-t5}} itself... the call to {{Single namespace}} seems to be the root cause. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 04:39, 11 December 2025 (UTC)

And it appears HouseBlaster had the same idea. I think they just fixed it! Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 04:40, 11 December 2025 (UTC)

Nice job by HouseBlaster. I looked at the code and tried to figure out what combination of #if trickery would fix it, but I didn't come up with anything clever. Gonnym, let us know if it doesn't work. Module space can be a little squirrely with its handling of non-Lua text. – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:17, 11 December 2025 (UTC)

I don't know how many times this kind of "if module or template namespace" check is done around en.wiki, but if it's done quite often, then maybe a new Template:If technical namespace or something can be created so these kind of conditional checks can be created more elegantly. Gonnym (talk) 14:06, 21 December 2025 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 20 January 2026

Please implement my changes in Template:Db-gs/sandbox which completes the addition of Zak Smith to the general sanctions deletion template. Aasim (話す（はなす）) 00:54, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

 Completed. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. – welcome! – 11:43, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

Change wording for Template:db-g11

As it says in WP:SD "A page is eligible for speedy deletion only if all of its history is also eligible." The current wording in the g11 template is "This page may meet Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion because in its current form it serves only to promote or publicise an entity, person, product, or idea, and would require a fundamental rewrite in order to become encyclopedic...." This implys that if the current revision of a page is spam, the page can be deleted, regardless of any past revisions, which isn't true. Because of this, I would like the beginning of this template to be changed to: "This page may meet Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion because it serves only to promote or publicise an entity, person, product, or idea, and would require a fundamental rewrite in order to become encyclopedic...." - ExcitedA. It may be a good idea to look at this. 15:02, 24 January 2026 (UTC)

A reasonable argument, done. Primefac (talk) 15:18, 24 January 2026 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 9 March 2026

The template text contains the useless phrase "Note that", which should be removed. ~2026-82820-3 (talk) 23:14, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

 Done. I was going to argue that the "Note that" essay applies mainly to article space, but it really isn't needed here. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:33, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 11 April 2026

Add the "Contest this speedy deletion" on Template:Db-talk, Template:Db-subpage, Template:Db-redirnone, and Template:Db-timedtext to support the Template:Db-talk-notice template. and also the add

"This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here." onto the Template:Db-talk-notice page. ~ŤheŴubṂachine-840≈ 15:32, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

I can't edit these pages either, but I don't think that is necessary because these deletions appear to be non-controversial maintenance. Users can simply remove the tag to contest the deletion, after which it may go to XfD. Aasim (話す（はなす）) 16:00, 17 April 2026 (UTC)

Red on red font

Having red text on a red background is evil (e.g. Template:Db-f9) Imakesapage (talk) 06:29, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

The actual colour values for the text  Please edit this template to include details  are foreground  FF0000  background  FEE7E6 , and I would call it red on pink. Passing over that, the similarity of hues isn't itself a problem, but there is insufficient contrast: Snook's Colour Contrast Check shows a Contrast Ratio of 3.386, whilst to be WCAG 2 AA Compliant, a Contrast Ratio of 4.5 or higher is necessary; this is the minimum that we should be aiming for.

To achieve that, we can deepen the red a bit to  D90000 , for a contrast ratio of 4.502, which looks like this:  Please edit this template to include details . It's not possible to retain the original red, since if we lighten the pink as far as it will go (i.e. to white), we still have a Contrast Ratio of only 3.998:  Please edit this template to include details .

If you look at the first three letters of my signature (end of this post), which uses similar hues, you'll see that these letters use a somewhat deeper red  A80000  and a slightly paler pink  FFEEEE , giving a Contrast Ratio of 7.023, which is not just WCAG 2 AA Compliant, it is WCAG 2 AAA Compliant also. This is what it would look like:  Please edit this template to include details . --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 12:20, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

That would be great. Imakesapage (talk) 15:19, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

Template:Db/testcases showing up in CSD

what i said in the title. i'm assuming this is some evil magic in the templates going wrong somehow? i swear it isn't usually there. Morwen (talk) 02:25, 16 May 2026 (UTC)

While I'm not sure how long it's been on the list, the less-witchy answer is that someone missed a |nocat=yes in one of the calls. Primefac (talk) 09:45, 16 May 2026 (UTC)

Edit request

Please add categorising (category:candidates for speedy deletion as missing files) in {{db-imagepage}} ~2026-31705-45 (talk) 01:48, 27 May 2026 (UTC) courtesy links added, no content change. Primefac (talk) 14:52, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

 Done. Primefac (talk) 14:51, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

Db-u6 not showing a time since last edit check like G13

Before I try to implement this, is there any reason, technical or otherwise, that there isn't a was-this-edited-in-the-last-six-months check built into the U6 template in the same way there is one for G13? Rusalkii (talk) 00:31, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

Only that no one probably thought to add it in. Primefac (talk) 19:50, 12 July 2026 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request for Template:Db-g12 on 7 July 2026

The first sentence of this template contains a grammar error. There are two possible ways I can think of to fix this error - either like this:

−

This template may meet Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion as a copyright infringement.

+

This template may meet Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion as copyright infringement.

Or like this:

−

This template may meet Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion as a copyright infringement.

+

This template may meet Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion as a copyright violation.

If one is able go and fix this error in either of these ways, that would be much appreciated. JHD0919 (talk) 00:44, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

 Completed. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. – welcome! – 11:30, 7 July 2026 (UTC)