Template talk:ML

Template being deprecated?
SatanicSanta, I noticed that a lot of the links to pages I've been creating have changed from  to. Is this just for consistency? --SirMoogle (talk) 07:34, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
 * It's probably hating on ML and preferring the pipe trick. AFAIK the template isn't being deprecated? Xbony? --  Satanic  Santa 🎅F T B Wiki Admin 09:03, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
 * L is only suppose to be used in translated pages. ML is derived from L. L is about 20x slower than using regular links (sometimes slower, sometimes faster) and of course ML is even slower. Not sure if either templates will make it through T3 -Xbony2 (talk) 12:17, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Oh, I see. Perhaps the documentation can be edited to reflect the intended usage? The transclusion's confusing me as to how to edit it myself. --SirMoogle (talk) 16:04, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
 * The actual documentation is here.  Chocohead Nag • Edits • Staff 16:07, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Actually, there is virtually no difference in performance between L and ML --  Satanic Santa 🎅F T B Wiki Admin 16:25, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
 * There is however a difference between standard wikilinks and L/ML. The difference between L and ML is within the margin of error. 16:29, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Definitely. I was just correcting Xbony's assumption that ML is "of course ... even slower." --  Satanic Santa 🎅F T B Wiki Admin 18:54, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
 * ML has been slower on average than L from my testing. The speed results for Lua are always inconsistent, so it's eh. It's obviously not faster though. -Xbony2 (talk) 23:39, 6 March 2017 (UTC)