Template talk:Controversial
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Controversial template. |
|
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 6 months  |
 | This template was considered for deletion on 19 June 2025. The result of the discussion was "no consensus". |
 | Template:Controversial is permanently protected from editing because it is a heavily used or highly visible template. Substantial changes should first be proposed and discussed here on this page. If the proposal is uncontroversial or has been discussed and is supported by consensus, editors may use {{edit template-protected}} to notify an administrator or template editor to make the requested edit. Usually, any contributor may edit the template's documentation to add usage notes or categories.
Any contributor may edit the template's sandbox. Functionality of the template can be checked using test cases. |
Edit request 12 June 2025
[edit] | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Description of suggested change: Please remove the link to WP:CTOP as this template is used mostly on pages that are not WP:CTOP.
Diff:
| − | '''The subject of this article is | + | '''The subject of this article is potentially controversial.''' |
Psychastes (talk) 04:54, 12 June 2025 (UTC)
- I recommend letting the TFD reach a consensus before making this or any other substantive change. – Jonesey95 (talk) 12:56, 12 June 2025 (UTC)
- Agree 100%, this request is mainly contingent on the concerns raised in the TFD discussion. Psychastes (talk) 17:59, 12 June 2025 (UTC)
- Let's mark the request as answered for now, then. —andrybak (talk) 18:24, 12 June 2025 (UTC)
- Strong Delete on the Controversial box. The significance of this just hit NYT and WaPo. This article is going to catch fire. For the public good—don't discredit the truth in a world where its increasingly hard to find. Funkadlik3 (talk) 17:09, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
- Please take your !vote to the TFD, not here, where it will not be accounted for. — Trailblazer101🔥 (discuss · contribs) 17:16, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
- Strong Delete on the Controversial box. The significance of this just hit NYT and WaPo. This article is going to catch fire. For the public good—don't discredit the truth in a world where its increasingly hard to find. Funkadlik3 (talk) 17:09, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
- Let's mark the request as answered for now, then. —andrybak (talk) 18:24, 12 June 2025 (UTC)
- Agree 100%, this request is mainly contingent on the concerns raised in the TFD discussion. Psychastes (talk) 17:59, 12 June 2025 (UTC)
Template-protected edit request on 25 July 2025
[edit] | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
| − | Wikipedia: | + | Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2025_June_19#Template:Controversial |
This is the new location of the discussion. FaviFake (talk) 17:25, 25 July 2025 (UTC)
Done HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 21:24, 25 July 2025 (UTC)
"Template:Contentious" listed at Redirects for discussion
[edit]
The redirect Template:Contentious has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 August 23 § Template:Contentious until a consensus is reached. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:59, 23 August 2025 (UTC)