Template talk:Construction

Simplified Use

Instead of making a seperate template, the current construction template could be editted to accomidate what you are doing with this. --Jacob 17:52, 2 Sep 2006 (CDT)

I didn't want to experiment on the existing template in case I got it wrong. --Macbeth 17:59, 2 Sep 2006 (CDT)

Proposal: Replace Template

Proposal to replace current construction template with this version, as this allows greater scope to inform both what is needed for the page and how this is meant to be accomplished, if applicable. --Macbeth 17:59, 2 Sep 2006 (CDT)

Go right ahead, but if you do plan on doing so please be sure to add the text to each document with it's reason, as it would just be a plank spot on the text area if you didn't. --Jacob 19:26, 2 Sep 2006 (CDT)

Will do :). --Macbeth 06:02, 3 Sep 2006 (CDT)

"Construction" Template to be absolute?

I was thinking it would be proper for this template to replace the "To Do List" and maybe even the "stubs" seen on many articles, as it gives editors a clear why for them to say what they think an article needs to be more complete. What do you think? Should this action be undertaken, one by one all articles with connections said items will be editted accordingly (editted as in added to, and not just switching all things around, which doesn't help that much). Again, wondering what others think. --Jacob 18:35, 26 Sep 2006 (CDT)

Hmm... Yes, I agree with you in regards to the To Do List... The construction template would be much more useful that just that category... However, stubs are so common, and used across Wikis, that replacing them would be, perhaps, a little far... Although we could use the Construction template in conjunction with the stub template. Perhaps create variations on the stub template, in regards to common stub needs (fleshing out being the most obvious)... --Macbeth 13:18, 27 Sep 2006 (CDT)