Template talk:Trivia
This page has archives. Sections older than 15 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present.
Silly buggers
{{Multiple issues}} now.Here's me finding and fixing all the places where "trivia" has been stacked with other templates... And it's been made special so that it won't stack! Lost for words. Rich Farmbrough, 11:12 25 September 2007 (GMT).
- Note, one of the reasons "trivia" stacks is when an "unref" or "unrefsect" is added to a trivia section, not uncommon. Rich Farmbrough, 11:21 25 September 2007 (GMT).
- Faith No More is the only article where stacking should've occurred. Chernabog (Fantasia) had its trivia tag at the top of the page, which is the wrong placement, so I moved the tag to the trivia section, where there are no other tags. In The Purple Testament, the other tag in the trivia section was {{inappropriate tone}}, which is redundant for a section tagged as trivia, so I removed it.
Useless direction to expected Help-text
I can read this in this aricle:Editors should not use this template to tag sections they consider trivial. In accordance with Wikipedia:Trivia sections, this template should only be placed at the top of sections that contain indiscriminate and unselective lists. Thanks.
Am I an edtor?
I cannot find the template-name I intend to use. And no suggestion, no link. Let alone the guidelines.
Ãnd ALWAYS links to another semi-like subject, without an answer.
Very disappointing. Very -DePiep (talk)
Just delete irrelevant information
Why is this template locked? It desperately needs a "and delete all irrelevant information." added to the end of it. Just moving trivia to different sections doesn't solve the problem. DreamGuy (talk) 22:27, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
- There are other templates for that, e.g.
{{Reduce trivia}}, and more topically specific ones listed in the template documentation's "See also" section. This particular template is for reformatting salvageable information into coherent paragraphs that don't present factoids in a list. When the information is just plain irrelevant cruft, yes, it should be removed. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 13:01, 13 September 2015 (UTC)