Editing Template talk:Documentation (section)

== Show improve documentation if doc doesn't exists? ==

Should this template be modified to show {{tl|improve documentation}} by default to templates/modules that doesn't have a documentation? This will auto list the template/modules to [[:Category:Templates with missing or incorrect documentation]], which is useful for tracking and fixing. [[User:Nvdtn19|Nvdtn19]] ([[User talk:Nvdtn19|talk]]) 05:39, 2 December 2025 (UTC)

:I support this. All templates should have documentation, even if it's something basic like "see the parent template for detailed information". What seems obvious to the creator of the template, might not be to others who encounter it and might not be 10 years down the road to no one. [[User:Gonnym|Gonnym]] ([[User talk:Gonnym|talk]]) 13:56, 2 December 2025 (UTC)
::That said, there are cases where the documentation is in the body of template and not a /doc page, such as navboxes that use {{tl|Navbox documentation}} or WikiProject banners that use the auto generated documentation. Those cases should be tested to make sure they don't fill up the category. [[User:Gonnym|Gonnym]] ([[User talk:Gonnym|talk]]) 13:59, 2 December 2025 (UTC)
:::Of course, {{tl|improve documentation}} will only shows if the namespace is template/module, and if the template which is transcluding {{tl|documentation}}, does not have any documentation. The viwiki version of this template have already implemented this feature, you can see some demo:
:::* [[w:vi:Bản mẫu:!w]] (with no /doc, no <code>|content=</code>, and no auto-generated doc. Thus it's showing {{tl|improve documentation}})
:::* [[w:vi:Bản mẫu:Brackets]] (with inline <code>|content=</code>)
:::* [[w:vi:Bản mẫu:Valve]] (with {{tl|Navbox documentation}} transcluded)
:::* [[w:vi:Bản mẫu:Sơ khai]] (with auto-generated doc from module).
:::If this change are also considered useful here then I'll suggest some changes, but I'll have to test first. [[User:Nvdtn19|Nvdtn19]] ([[User talk:Nvdtn19|talk]]) 14:45, 2 December 2025 (UTC)
*I'm wondering if it wouldn't be better setting this up as a bot task to allow for a gap between the template creation process and building documentation. I know I've created a number of templates by starting off with a basic functioning and the standard <code>&lt;noinclude&gt; {{((}}documentation{{))}} &lt;/noinclude&gt;</code> ending knowing that I won't be able to build documentation until I'm done working out all the kinks and details in the code, but having that blank documentation section reminds me to come back to instructions once I've finished programming. I would hate to have overzealous gnomes coming in to try to figure out my template while I'm still fixing bugs because it ended up in a tracking category prematurely. At least if a bot were coming in, I'd be able to remove {{tlx|improve documentation}} once it got added if things weren't ready for that step yet. [[User:Vanisaac|Van]][[User talk:Vanisaac|Isaac]], GHTV<sup> [[Special:Contributions/Vanisaac|contr]]</sup><sub style="margin-left:-4.2ex"><small>[[User:Vanisaac/about|about]]</small></sub> 17:32, 2 December 2025 (UTC)
*:Ideally, if your template still has kinks in it, start it in your userspace or draft space (or /sandbox if it is one). We shouldn't be placing a non-functioning template in the "live" template space. [[User:Gonnym|Gonnym]] ([[User talk:Gonnym|talk]]) 17:57, 2 December 2025 (UTC)
*::I agree with Gonnym. Don't expect unfinished things that is outside the sandbox can't be touched by others. I don't understand why it would be disruptive when {{tl|improve documentation}} is present on templates that lacks documentation, while it clearly reflects the actual situation? So if the project currently has 10,000 templates without documentation, we have to deploy a bot just to add {{tl|improve documentation}} to those 10,000 pages, while a better one-time methods exists? If you don't want your template be flagged, better start it in your sandbox, or not adding {{tl|documentation}} until there is one. [[User:Nvdtn19|Nvdtn19]] ([[User talk:Nvdtn19|talk]]) 05:35, 3 December 2025 (UTC)
*:::So, who's gonna implement this in the sandbox? [[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 15:54, 17 December 2025 (UTC)
*:: Yes, well that's just the thing, isn't it? Almost nothing operates on a platonic ideal. While I am more than willing, and have frequently built templates in userspace, that's not something that everyone would even think to do, let alone a well-known operating procedure that people follow to any extent. While we do have the draft namespace for articles, there's really no policy for anything but new accounts to even build any content in their private userspace as a matter of course. The point is that when dealing with seemingly simple templates, drafting in userspace and moving into the template namespace is usually more hassle than is warranted, but that doesn't prevent the intricacies of template logic from biting us from time to time. So I reiterate that I would think a parameter for empty documentation that is supported by a maintenance bot would be a more robust option for accomplishing the task. [[User:Vanisaac|Van]][[User talk:Vanisaac|Isaac]], GHTV<sup> [[Special:Contributions/Vanisaac|contr]]</sup><sub style="margin-left:-4.2ex"><small>[[User:Vanisaac/about|about]]</small></sub> 18:23, 17 December 2025 (UTC)
*I support this. Checking if a page or template parameter is empty is a perfect task for a template/bot. [[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 17:41, 2 December 2025 (UTC)