This page is a work in progress page, not an article or policy, and may be incomplete and/or unreliable.
Please offer suggestions on the talk page.

On this page, Commons users can request edits to templates, the addition of complex templates to pages, and the creation of new templates. Here, users experienced with templates can find tasks to work on.

On Commons, templates are used for aiding navigation, adding standardized categories at scale, enabling adjusting various things from a central place, overviews, warning messages, and much more.

Create a new section for every new request:

Add a request

Please use a descriptive title that briefly explains the change. Currently, edit requests for the {{Wikidata infobox}} are not included here – please see Template talk:Wikidata Infobox for these.

If a request has been implemented or there is strong consensus against the requested change (for example because it seems impossible to implement), please mark it as solved via {{Section resolved}} as described below.

	SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved\|1=~~~~}} after 3 days.

Requests

Parameter auto=yes for ArchiveBox to detect and link/transclude archive subpages

Please add a parameter to the template so that it gets all subpages that have the prefix /Archive and links them. For example at Commons talk:Welcome, I think it could be possible to just take these pages from Special:PrefixIndex/Commons talk:Welcome and link them by the title after the /Archive/ which here is the year instead of having to manually write them out.

The current state of things is problematic as it needs continuous maintenance and people can forgot to add the achivebox or make other mistakes. For example, I forgot or didn't know I had to add the archive box when adding {{Autoarchive resolved section}}. I think it may be better if things were just by default archived per page per year instead of just numerating the archive number but unlike the box at Commons talk:Welcome, it would transclude the per-year pages into one archive page that is as long as possible without templates breaking in it as with Commons talk:Tools. Having all the years there directly can become long even if new pages don't need to be added manually and having just a few threads per page can make it difficult to go through the archives. However, when per-year pages are used which are then transcluded, it needs to be made sure that the transclusions all work (maybe it breaks with too many years or too many threads).
See the discussion here.
Prototyperspective (talk) 14:07, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Parameter for "review impossible" for LicenseReview template

At Commons:Village_pump/Proposals/Archive/2025/02#Add_an_outcome_of_LicenseReview there is a discussion about to modify Template:LicenseReview so it is possible to mark files with some sort of "review impossible". I tried to fix the template per Template_talk:LicenseReview#Outcome but it did not work as planned. And there is no reason to modify MediaWiki:Gadget-LicenseReview.js untill we have a working review template. Can someone fix? MGA73 (talk) 10:26, 12 October 2025 (UTC)

Relayed from Commons:Village pump/Technical#Add an outcome of LicenseReview. Prototyperspective (talk) 14:27, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, see work in progress in {{LicenseReview/sandbox}}. If someone else wants to continue the work, please feel free to do so. Thanks. Tvpuppy (talk) 03:30, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fix Topic in country template linking to the redlink Template:Byby

I am trying to decode how this is happening, but I'm at a loss: categories such as Category:Construction in Guam which feature {{Topic in country}} have some nonsense code linking to the redlink Template:Byby, but it's only a little over 600 out of the 17,700 transclusions. I don't know why. Can someone smarter than me fix this? Thanks in advance. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 11:38, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Relayed from Commons:Village pump/Technical#Broken template. Prototyperspective (talk) 14:30, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Computer science in Catalonia and 800 other pages are also showing the same error. The same error would happen if you added the template to Category:Construction in Puerto Rico. See also this discussion from May 2025. Somewhere the wikitext {{{byby}}} is being used and the parser thinks it is a template call inside single braces, instead of a template parameter. It may be one of these six pages. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:29, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Make template Shortcut show again

The {{Shortcut}} box isn't showing on any of the pages it's being used. Could somebody please fix this? First asked about this here. Prototyperspective (talk) 14:33, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I think {{Shortcut2}} is the correct template to use if you want to display the box. Tvpuppy (talk) 03:52, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why would the shortcuts be intentionally not shown? What would be the reason or benefit of adding that template when it's not shown to the reader? Even if it was intentional, I think it should be shown but as of now and given that nobody said so in the linked prior thread, I doubt this is the case. Prototyperspective (talk) 12:47, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Moreover, in the documentation of the template it says This template shows the shortcuts of the current page. and at the bottom it has a table with a column "input" where there is the template and a column "result" where it does display something. Prototyperspective (talk) 12:49, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Per this edit [1] in 2009, it appears this was designed to display without a box. Also, the template does display the shortcut links in mobile view. Not sure why it isn't displaying the links in desktop view. Thanks. Tvpuppy (talk) 13:24, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, things are clear now; I thought emphasis was on "display", not on "the box". The request is about displaying it anyhow (on desktop too if it does display on mobile). Prototyperspective (talk) 13:30, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I thought it was weird that a 21-year-old template only displays correctly for mobile view. So, I checked and this template does display the links with Vector legacy 2010 (old skin), but it isn't displaying for Vector 2022 (new skin). So, I think this needs to be updated, but I'm not sure how. Thanks. Tvpuppy (talk) 13:40, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Florida memory – Attribution-FLGov-PhotoColl should contain image number

Can Template:Attribution-FLGov-PhotoColl be modified to contain the image number, we do that with the Library of Congress template. --RAN (talk) 18:41, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The problem for this is the link (URL) to the source image does not contain the image number, so having the image number in the template will not create a link like the ones in the LOC templates (e.g. {{LOC-image}}).

Alternatively, it is possible to include the source image link to the template, but I don't see how that will be useful since it will probably be redundant. Thanks. Tvpuppy (talk) 22:41, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If there's no objections, this may be best to archive as not done (impossible and/or not useful), is it? Prototyperspective (talk) 14:54, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Setting Videos by xyz category based on license templates like PD-USGov-USDA

Shouldn't all videos with {{PD-USGov-USDA}} as license template also be in Category:Videos by the United States Department of Agriculture – when I checked that category had just 6 files but there's many more files in the category set by the license template Category:PD USDA.

Could the license template please be changed to automatically also add the videos category if the file is a video?

I think media-type detection could be implemented similar to how it was done at Template:Prompt.

Then there's probably many similar license templates associated with organizations that would also benefit from such a change.

Some may not yet have a video (*in some cases also/instead audio?) subcategory or already have one that isn't flat. For example, Category:Videos by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention posted on YouTube is a very large deeply nested category that organizes things by subject. I think for such cases implementing this would be much less useful but even there it could be useful to let this get set by the template for three reasons:

One could create a parallel flat category with the files directly which is useful to for example search through all CDC videos which can be problematic with a category that has very many subcategories and is deeply nested into many layers as one can then better use deepcategory to search through all or -deepcategory to exclude them all (in this case of a flat category even incategory).
Some files with the correct license template may not be in the Videos category.
One could use this to scan which of the files in the category do not have that license template set.

Maybe it would be best to discuss things here and implement just the U.S. Department of Agriculture case and then creating a separate new request about any further identified license template where this would also be useful. Prototyperspective (talk) 20:04, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, I have taken a look and it appears there isn't a lot of videos with this template, see incategory:"PD USDA" filetype:video. Since there isn't a lot, I think it makes more sense to just manually categorize them (i.e. using Cat-a-lot). This can allow others to subcategorize them if needed, without changing the template (which is template editor protected).

I think the existing flat category for the license template (e.g. Category:PD USDA) is sufficient to search for videos. Users can just do the same search above (i.e. incategory:"PD USDA" filetype:video) to filter the category for videos. Alternatively, we can add {{Category search by}} to the categories, to provide a easier way to filter.

This is just my opinion, so I'm interested in others' opinions on this, especially those who do categorizing work or those who import US-Gov videos. Thanks. Tvpuppy (talk) 23:19, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for looking into it and the feedback. Probably you're right and the solution is to just not do this. Haven't yet discarded idea though since most of the files missing in that category is a bit of evidence that adding autocategorization to the license template would put things into the associated category (e.g. Videos by the United States Department of Agriculture->Videos by the United States Department of Agriculture (flat)).

Another point there is that not all videos by USDA have that license template set and when uploaders know/use organization-specific license templates or other editors add them, it's quite likely they also know the category / how categories work for it to be usually added. I thought it would be a good way videos are included in categories without any extra maintenance and right after upload.

I've added the category to the videos and one had to exclude like so -deepcategory:"Wikivideos" because these videos only included a small clip from the USDA videos but had the license template too.

As for {{Category search by}}, I think it's overkill providing so many and so fine options even down to the hour (& not by year) and at the same time not having a box for search terms. Maybe you meant to say one or a few of those templates: I'll add {{Category search by/filetype}} and {{Search in category}} – adding these to pages of categories that are set by license templates may be the better action. I'm also curious what other users who import US-Gov videos think about this. Maybe Trade who created the USDA videos cat has something to add? Prototyperspective (talk) 01:12, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to have seperate categories for "Videos by the United States Department of Agriculture" and "Videos by the United States Department of Agriculture posted on YouTube". Perhaps a parameter in the template could do that? Maybe have an bot detect if the author is listed as USDAFoodSafety and move the files accordingly? Trade (talk) 01:25, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What would be the reason or use of subcategorizing by where the video was first or also posted?
I think there's many files in Category:Videos by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention posted on YouTube now that haven't been posted on YouTube because it's the category with the deep nesting about CDC videos by topic (without YouTube being in their title)
I think it could be done by using a search like deep/incategory:"Videos by the United States Department of Agriculture" insource:youtube.com/.

Prototyperspective (talk) 14:41, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bodycam and dashcam template

Could someone create these two templates with the text from Category:Dashcam related deletion requests/pending, Category:Body camera related deletion requests/pending, Category:CCTV related deletion requests and Category:Mug shots related deletion requests

The goal is to discourage users from using {{PD-automated}} when more appropriate templates are already available. The templates themself should look similar to {{Template:PD-USGov-DOJ}} with the image to the right either being a image or a icon that illustrates the subject--Trade (talk) 02:47, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, I don't understand the purpose of the templates, are these suppose to be copyright tags? If the purpose of these templates is to encourage users to use other more specific {{PD-USGov}} templates instead, what is the purpose of adding these templates to a file when they can just add that specific license to the file instead? Thanks. Tvpuppy (talk) 03:32, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand the requests as well: is this meant to be for user talk pages to notify them that other templates are available and should be used or how are these intended to be used? Prototyperspective (talk) 14:38, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

They are meant to be used on files to inform the uploader when the PD-automated is inappropriate and does not apply. It's also helpful to the reader and any future reusers because it informs them that the stated license might be invalid Trade (talk) 20:26, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see, so you mean these are supposed to be problem tags, similar to {{Wrong license}}?

I can help create this, but I think it makes more sense to create just one overall template (e.g. {{US-automated}}), since the message related to the US for bodycam and dashcam appears to be overall the same. Thanks. Tvpuppy (talk) 00:44, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is a decent change that the Commons community will stop allowing dashcam files to use the PD-automated template. It's better to keep them seperate for the sake of future proofing Trade (talk) 15:46, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted your edit in the text about the mugshots or the files outside of the US, since I don't think it is part of the scope of this template. Unless you would like to widen the scope to those as well? Tvpuppy (talk) 15:56, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I have created the template, you can add parameters to specify the footage type and reason. See example at {{US-automated}}. Tvpuppy (talk) 16:27, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nice, thank you! Trade (talk) 01:08, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done {{US-automated}} with parameters to specify the footage type and reason has been created by Tvpuppy. Prototyperspective (talk) 10:58, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Prototyperspective (talk) 10:58, 24 November 2025 (UTC)

Knoxville, Tennessee by year template

I'd like to request a version of Template:Memphis, Tennesseeyear for Knoxville, Tennessee. ElToAn123 (talk) 04:46, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@ElToAn123 Done, see {{Knoxville, Tennesseeyear}}. Thanks. Tvpuppy (talk) 23:26, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Prototyperspective (talk) 10:56, 24 November 2025 (UTC)

{{optimized}} template

The template's goal is to tag images that have been losslessly optimized with tools such as OptiPNG. This is to signify that the image has been optimized and there is little reason to try optimizing it again. The template could be put into "other fields" tab of the image to not waste too much space. Files with this template should automatically be put in the category "Optimized files". Dabmasterars [EN/RU] (talk/uploads) 19:37, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why would this info be so important to show to the user in the file information template instead of just the file revision history further down? Prototyperspective (talk) 21:56, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Images may be uploaded with optimization already applied (I do that, for example). Dabmasterars [EN/RU] (talk/uploads) 09:25, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The nearly same question can be asked there: why would this be important / good to show to readers? It's not shown how many layers a png file has or the level of compression of jpg files for example. I think this would just bloat up the Information template to make it less readable, and less understandable without any clear benefit. Prototyperspective (talk) 10:56, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I somewhat agree with Prototyperspective, I don't really see how useful this template will be, but I don't do optimization work, so perhaps there are others that will find it useful. Anyways, I still created {{Optimized}}, please feel free to change it (or just let me know) if anything needs to be changed. Thanks. Tvpuppy (talk) 20:37, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Prototyperspective (talk) 22:17, 24 November 2025 (UTC)