Template talk:Rfc subpage

Abuse cases

I think [1] is not a good idea. First, it should say "alleged abuse", unless it's meant to be used where there is consensus that there was abuse. Second, most cases of abuse which reach a Meta-Wiki RfC tend to discuss a range of issue which brought to the (perceived or real) abuse. --Nemo 08:54, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Template broken on "status", anyone got time to check?

The template is not displaying the chosen parameter from the #switch, it is only showing the #default. I gave it a quick glance and couldn't see anything wrong. Don't have time to post-mortem at the comment, so poking it out there in case someone does.  — billinghurst sDrewth 06:00, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: Where did this issue manifest? I also don’t see anything suspicious, and without knowing an actual failure case, it’s hard to debug. —Tacsipacsi (talk) 13:35, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Requests for comment/Blocking on Russian Wikipedia use of invalid was the case, though others didn't work either. I am guessing that it is the translations that are throwing things out.  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:37, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

No, it works as intended and as it has always worked: |comment= overrides the switch (the #default branch’s output would be invalid, not RfC cannot impact local blocking). —Tacsipacsi (talk) 14:01, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Bolding

@Vermont: Bolding every single word in a long, or even multiple, paragraph(s) is not intuitive in term of design. Similar to en:WP:OVERLINK, bolded words will make things much more difficult to have a quick overview of the RfC.

Now, here's an example of what I call a very lengthy comment, which contain a lot of lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

Duis autem vel eum iriure dolor in hendrerit in vulputate velit esse molestie consequat, vel illum dolore eu feugiat nulla facilisis at vero eros et accumsan et iusto odio dignissim qui blandit praesent luptatum zzril delenit augue duis dolore te feugait nulla facilisi. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit, sed diam nonummy nibh euismod tincidunt ut laoreet dolore magna aliquam erat volutpat.

Ut wisi enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exerci tation ullamcorper suscipit lobortis nisl ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis autem vel eum iriure dolor in hendrerit in vulputate velit esse molestie consequat, vel illum dolore eu feugiat nulla facilisis at vero eros et accumsan et iusto odio dignissim qui blandit praesent luptatum zzril delenit augue duis dolore te feugait nulla facilisi.

Nam liber tempor cum soluta nobis eleifend option congue nihil imperdiet doming id quod mazim placerat facer possim assum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit, sed diam nonummy nibh euismod tincidunt ut laoreet dolore magna aliquam erat volutpat. Ut wisi enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exerci tation ullamcorper suscipit lobortis nisl ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis autem vel eum iriure dolor in hendrerit in vulputate velit esse molestie consequat, vel illum dolore eu feugiat nulla facilisis.

I'm pretty sure that you did not read every word in the paragraphs above. Generally, readers are lazy; they will try to look for a short, intuitive, version when reading something long, which in this instance is one or two last sentences of the whole closing comment; that is why modern design always try to decrease the number of words as well as increasing the number of images or videos. For instance, see Brand: big text, multiple images, various colors, large spacing between sections, and only the last sentence is emphasized. The page as a whole looks readable, unlike this paragraph – sunk in a sea of bolded text. This signature of mine is also unnecessarily bolded: NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 19:13, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

If you need something to split the closing comment with the rest of the page, we have <hr>s for that. Give it a margin property, like the one right below, if you feel some spacing is needed. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 19:13, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

---

Bolded text, semantically, represent things that are emphasized. However, emphasizing everything will do the exact opposite: making them the same. Even in an important notice, there are things that don't need to be bolded. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 19:13, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

I generally see the bold of RfC closes as emphasizing the formal close message from the rest of the RfC. You’re not emphasizing everything, you’re emphasizing the close message. Which is often short and concise in terms of specific actions being taken. If there’s specific parts of the close that the closer wants to emphasize, they can italicize it or separate paragraphs. It’s a RfC close, not a news article or brand. We don’t need to provide a TL;DR through selective emphasizing of parts of the close message, and this would make the close blend in with the rest of the RfC. I only noticed this change because I closed a RfC and it looked off. Vermont 🐿️ (talk) 20:04, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Again, indiscriminately bolding a whole paragraph, including the closer's signature, is counter-intuitive and may confuse screen readers. We are talking about HTML and its semantic meaning, as well as design principals. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 18:03, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Request to add a new status option for open global ban requests

Would it be possible to tweak the template to allow a non-close status for open global ban requests? That way, we could categorise open global ban discussions at Category:Open global ban requests, in addition to the default set of categories. Taking a look at the template code, all {{{status}} mark the page as closed; and the template's code is kinda complex at this stage so I'm not sure how to implement this. Any ideas? Thanks, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:52, 14 August 2023 (UTC)