includeonly造句

• For both the vandalism was set to be visible on includeonly, so you wouldn't see the image if you'd looked at the template themselves.
• Two additional templates were affected by this, and all have been vandalized using deceptively phrased edit summaries and creative use of includeonly code, just as they were last week.
• It is really easy for a bot to fix a noinclude or includeonly that is basically empty .-- contribs ) 19 : 22, 11 December 2007 ( UTC)
• Substitution is required, but must only be used during inclusion; otherwise, the template will be substituted with includeonly tags immediately, and the desired effect will be lost.
• Is there possibly no way to find out which templates ( transclusions utilizing includeonly ) are populating a particular category ?-- sock 09 : 44, 10 December 2008 ( UTC)
• :What you probably want do in that case is put < includeonly > < / includeonly > around the subst in the sub-templates.
• :What you probably want do in that case is put < includeonly > < / includeonly > around the subst in the sub-templates.
• When this template is placed on a template's / doc page it can be nice to put it within < includeonly > tags so it only gets visible on the template page.
• Non-free images have to be wrapped in includeonly, but that isn't much of a problem . & mdash; Carl ( talk ) 13 : 24, 9 August 2009 ( UTC)
• I was attempting to show some WikiText code as an example, and I haven't figured out how to have "'includeonly "'show up as example text on a transcluded page.
• :: : If you write template documentation explaining the parameters and don't rely on the template page to be self-explanatory with automatically displayed parameter names then you can skip includeonly around the pipes.
• A CBDunkerson began transcluding a portion of a randomly selected featured list using < onlyinclude > and < includeonly > tags; this is how the list section of the portal can be seen today.
• First of all, it doesn't process < noinclude > and < includeonly >, which means some templates will behave differently if they are used as instead of.
• The recent rash of template vandalism takes major advantage of the fact that there is no way to quickly see the rendering of < includeonly > text on a template, unlike < noinclude > or ordinary text.
• Removing includeonly would take care of a more esoteric / confusing markup inclusion, but the tools are still there & ndash; of immeasurable use to constructive editors, and of immeasurable annoyance to those who actually go around and remove all the testing.
• Note : In keeping with the user categories guidelines, and to avoid category pollution, this template employs < includeonly > tags and conditional code to avoid automatically including any page other than a user page into the user category.
• I've been going through the userboxes and removing parent cats ( essentially duplicative cats ) from the programming / OS userboxes . " Many " of them did not use includeonly / noinclude, and often a userbox would add the transcluder to several cats.
• It's possible to control which parts are transcluded with Help : Template # Noinclude, includeonly, and onlyinclude but it would become messy because both pages are currently transcluded at Wikipedia : Reference desk / all, and the pages will be archived to other names at some point.
• This also applies if the template is also to be viewed directly, on its own page ( although in this case, if the first of the above methods is used, plain subst : will still work, as the includeonly tags will cause the parser to ignore the subst : on direct viewing ).
• I'm wondering if a simple unnamed parameters list would work, but have a table template ( eg, ) inside < noinclude > tags to display the page identically to how it currently looks, with < includeonly > tags around a usage template ( eg ).