Template talk:Subst

Shouldn't this use of subst be called 'rsubst', 'subst_r' or such instead to reflect the intended recursiveness of this template? I think 'subst' makes more sense as a means of quoting a subst that someone is suppose to copy. Wikipedia isn't the only website to use the subst template this way. --darklama 01:51, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Hello. This template is simply the wikitext {{subst:. The name reflects that exactly. Or, if you like, you may consider the naming recursive. It comes from meta:template:subst. This name has been so widely and deeply used that it is hard to change. Your use of this template name as a shorthand is not as critically functional. I suppose that you are trying to import some of the functions of b:template:subst, but since that has hardly been used on wikiversity, I suggest that you pick another name. --Hillgentleman|Talk 02:00, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

And, since we are on this topic, did you check the page history and whatlinkshere, or asked somebody (because substituted templates would not show up in special:whatlinkshere) before you made the change? :) You must know that changing the functionality of a template, especially those looking extremely simple (like template:! or template:rightbraces), could break a lot of things. :( Happy editing. --Hillgentleman|Talk 02:20, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Page history showed only one edit at the time, that it was a new template, and what links here showed that it wasn't being included anywhere. When I saw what this template consisted of I assumed it was broken. --darklama 12:48, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

If you check the page [1] again, you will find several back-links, dating back to year 2007. It always helps if you ask whenever you see something you don't understand. Thanks. Happy editing. Hillgentleman|Talk 09:28, 27 August 2008 (UTC)