This template (Template:Copyright violation) was considered for merging with Template:Copyvio link on 2015 December 16. The result of the discussion was "keep".

It has been proposed in this section that Template:Copyright violation be renamed and moved to Template:Copyvio inline. A bot will list this discussion on requested moves' current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil. Please use ((subst:requested move)). Do not use ((requested move/dated)) directly. Links: current log • target log • direct move

Template:Copyright violation → Template:Copyvio inline – Ambiguous name, proposed title matches other inline versions of amboxes such as Template:Original research inline. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 11:59, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@LaundryPizza03: Would this change the name of the template itself, or simply the name of the page? Fredlesaltique (talk) 01:46, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think that the current title should be redirected to Template:Copyvio. The proposed new title currently redirects to Template:Copyvio link, which is confusing. So a lot of transclusions for this one and ((copyvio link)) would have to be renamed. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:49, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, strong oppose.

Every template should have a unique page whose title matches the template itself. ((copyvio)), ((copyright violation)), and ((copyvio link)) are all distinct templates, and should each have their own page.

It seems like the confusion is coming about because the name of this template, "copyright violation", doesn't quite match how it's used. You could try wording this template page to make it clearer that it's used for inline violations. Another option is to propose that Template:Copyvio inline (there is no template ((copyvio inline))) redirect to this template page instead.

Hope that helps? Cheers, Fredlesaltique (talk) 02:42, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose shortening to "copyvio". --Gonnym (talk) 12:52, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]