Template talk:Cleanup

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Cleanup template.

Add new text under old text.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Start a new topic

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7: 30 days

Template:Cleanup is indefinitely protected from editing as 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.

This template was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:

Keep, 2015 January 8, see discussion.
No consensus, 2012 February 1, see discussion.
Endorse decision, 2011 June 21, see discussion.
No consensus, 2011 June 10, see discussion.
Keep, 2011 January 4, see discussion.
Keep, 2010 May 25, see discussion.

Template-protected edit request on 26 September 2019

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

With regard to transclusions of this template, I would recommend adding a period at the end of the reason= parameter, so as to make sure a period is rendered by default before the subsequent parameter default phrases, which bar none seem to begin with capitals (e. g. "Please help improve this article if you can" or "Relevant discussion may be found …").--Hildeoc (talk) 19:29, 26 September 2019 (UTC) Hildeoc (talk) 19:29, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: See above. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:20, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Does anybody maintain this template?

When one puts e. g.

one gets interesting results:

This garbage dump may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. The specific problem is: primary sources. Please help improve this garbage dump if you can.

Is the template supposed to work like that? --Ouro (blah blah) 10:32, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ouro: You may want to see the template's history and its doc page history to see if, who and how often does anything about the template. --CiaPan (talk) 11:32, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, templates are not meant to be fool- and vandal-proof. Instead, users are supposed to not be fools or vandals.

CiaPan (talk)

Edited the question a bit. --CiaPan (talk) 17:18, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is supposed to work like that. The unnamed parameter |1= is documented as changes the default descriptor. Whatever is put into that parameter appears after the word "this" in the rendered template. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:05, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template-protected edit request on 16 March 2025

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Could someone please cleanup (pun intended) this template so it displays properly inside the {{multiple issues}} template? See Draft:Manish Shah (film producer) for an example of how it does not display properly. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 13:49, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit template-protected}} template. This incompatibility seems almost intentional. Per Template:Multiple issues/doc: {{Cleanup}} is very vague and so should be replaced with a more specific template whenever possible. —⁠andrybak (talk) 16:32, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with editor Andrybak. This template will display correctly in the {{multiple issues}} template when it is included in mainspace. In any other namespace it transfers from using {{Ambox}} to {{Mbox}}, and Mbox does not yield the desired result like Ambox does (in mainspace). Here is a list of other cleanup templates that might be useful. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^{put'er there} 19:58, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Paine Ellsworth: I was surprised to see it display improperly on the draft, as I haven't seem anything display improperly in articlespace in a long time. Thanks for the explanation of the difference. GoingBatty (talk) 16:59, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to help! Paine 17:29, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Template:Cleanup-since" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Template:Cleanup-since 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/2026 January 23 § Template:Cleanup-since until a consensus is reached. Jay 💬 07:20, 30 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed new icon for the broom

I know, I know, the little cartoon is a classic seen all over with derivative templates, if it ain't broke don't fix it, etc, but hear me out: This practically-unused one is newer without looking like an ultra-minimalistic eyesore. It's slightly 3D (reaches to the weary user of our age) without looking tacky. Slightly more eye-catching colors to reel attention for concern, yet not garish. Amber-orangey-yellow signals caution yet welcoming/hope. Consistent. inb4 "It's a paintbrush not a broom"; I think it looks more like a square dustpan brush (non-cherrypicked example).

Ultimately not only should Wikipedia look pretty-ish if feasible, but if it nudges users even 1% somehow to look closer at the template too, I think that's in spirit of it all. What do we say? ~Sıgehelmus♗_(Tøk) 04:28, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That's a paintbrush. Do a web search for "magimate thick paintbrush with rectangular base" and you'll see a variety of these. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:16, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]