Template talk:Ns has subpages

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ns has subpages template.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

"Don't use a mw.title object"

[...] as this would increment the expensive function count for each new page tested.

This might have been true in 2014 when the module was written, but it hasn't been true for several years: most mw.title methods and objects are not expensive.

For that matter, is there any point to any of the work the module is doing to avoid simply using {{NAMESPACE}} or its mw.title equivalent? 「ディノ奴千？！」^{☎ Dinoguy1000} 22:04, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Protection level

I saw the RFPP request for Module:Ns has subpages and thought I may voice my opinion and why I protected the template. This template is one of our most transcluded templates and is used on about a quarter of our articles which makes it a natural attack vector if/when we get a compromised editor. This is a minor concern but still a real one. I also considered if there would be any extra inconvenience if this template couldn't be edited by template editors and came to the conclusion that there wouldn't since it's a wrapper that I doubt will get a single edit in the next decade.

For the module there's the same justification for protection, but given that it's likely to be edited at least a non-zero amount I didn't but consider it well within admin discretion whether or not to protect.

There you have waaay to many words on something inconsequential.

Pings to @Pppery and Ad Orientem:. --Trialpears (talk) 08:58, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Trialpears: I saw that the module was Template Protected. That's a very high level of protection requiring advanced permissions to edit. I am pretty sure it's safe. But if any admin thinks it should be fully locked, I'm fine with it. I just didn't see the necessity. - Ad Orientem (talk) 14:17, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth I don;t actually have an opinion on whether full protection is justified. All I care about is that the module is at least as high-risk as the template so it having a lower protection level is illogical. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 14:44, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Trialpears and Ad Orientem: Do one of you intend to do something here? * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 02:30, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have already declined to increase its current level of protection and explained my reasoning. I have no objection if another admin disagrees and chooses to go there. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:57, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]