| Revision as of 18:43, 31 December 2007 editRa2007 (talk | contribs)854 edits →Template:Unaccredited: Speedy delete per WP:CSD#T2← Previous edit | Revision as of 18:50, 31 December 2007 edit undoB (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators63,958 edits →Template:Unaccredited: +?Next edit → | ||
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
| *'''Speedy delete''' per ] - blatant misrepresentation of established policy (])<font color="forestgreen">]</font>‑<font color="darkorange">]</font> 18:18, 31 December 2007 (UTC) | *'''Speedy delete''' per ] - blatant misrepresentation of established policy (])<font color="forestgreen">]</font>‑<font color="darkorange">]</font> 18:18, 31 December 2007 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Speedy delete''' per ], which is sufficient. (But see also ]). ] (]) 18:43, 31 December 2007 (UTC) | *'''Speedy delete''' per ], which is sufficient. (But see also ]). ] (]) 18:43, 31 December 2007 (UTC) | ||
| **Wow ... where did that CSD criterion come from? T2 used to be religious/political userboxes. --] (]) 18:50, 31 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ==== ] ==== | ==== ] ==== | ||
Revision as of 18:50, 31 December 2007
| < December 30 | January 1 > |
|---|
December 31
Template:IPsock
This template seems to encourage violation of the Meta privacy policy and the Meta checkuser policy. Editors have a right to edit while not logged in, and there are valid reasons for doing so (for example, to divorce real-life identities from such controversial areas as WP:P*.) If a user is being disruptive with their IP address, this should be established via checkuser and the underlying IP blocked without disclosing it, per the above-mentioned Checkuser policy.
An example of a problematic usage of this template can be seen at this IP userpage, which apparently belongs to the IP address of a user (User:Jinxmchue) who is not banned or blocked. An administrator (User:FeloniousMonk) placed the template on the page, and the user apparently did not wish it there (as seen by their reversions of the template placement).
I'm afraid I can't see any legitimate usages of this template that don't run afoul of the Privacy and Checkuser policies.. Videmus Omnia 18:19, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Template:Unaccredited
This is a disclaimer template for tagging unaccredited schools and diploma mills that warns users, "its degrees and credits might not be acceptable to employers or other institutions, and use of degree titles may be restricted or illegal in some jurisdictions.". Misplaced Pages:No disclaimers in articles says that we do not use disclaimers. It is not Misplaced Pages's job to warn you that if you get a degree from a diploma mill that you deserve what you get. Also, when this template is applied to a particular school, it's drawing a conclusion about that school that (1) may be untrue and (2) constitutes original research. — B (talk) 16:21, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- Speedy delete per WP:CSD#T2 - blatant misrepresentation of established policy (No disclaimers in articles)Happy‑melon 18:18, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- Speedy delete per WP:CSD#T2, which is sufficient. (But see also WP:NOR). Ra2007 (talk) 18:43, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- Wow ... where did that CSD criterion come from? T2 used to be religious/political userboxes. --B (talk) 18:50, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Template:Wookieepedia box
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the debate was Speedy keep as a temporary measure - we're still sorting out the Memory Alpha template on DRV, and a clear precedent from that would be useful in this. The template has now been orphaned, and I think we can leave it be for five or six days while we sort out the precedent then renominate it from there. But right now this seems an unhelpful expansion of the discussion, and the template is not doing any harm sitting around unused. Note that I have no issue whatsoever with this template being renominated once the Memory Alpha DRV closes, regardless of which way that DRV closes - but given that there is a discussion in progress on this exact issue, starting another one seems likely to cause confusion rather than generate a meaningful consensus. Phil Sandifer (talk) 04:47, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
This box is barely used (mostly in a few Star Wars novels, and Jedi). The plain text link, {{Sww}}, is much, much more widely used (290 pages in mainspace, vs. 10 for the box). Per the precedent of the similar {{Memory Alpha}} template, this should go too. Regardless of the opinions of using the boxes, consensus on the ground clearly favors a plain text link. Phirazo 03:45, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- Strong keep I'm currently listing Template:Memory Alpha on WP:DRV. I'm also annoyed at the nom's tactic of trying to pick off these templates when efforts to use them again are being explored. There are even alternative versions in discussion that some people felt more comfortable with. Taking this to deletion is unnecessary, and is disrupting the natural evolution of the template. It should also be noted that the nom (User:Phirazo) likes to remove these templates from articles before nominating the template. -- Ned Scott 03:49, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- I boldly removed the template for consistency across the Star Wars articles and because it wasn't used. It was not restored until after the TfD for {{Memory Alpha}}. Instead of edit-warring over it, I took it to TfD. --Phirazo 04:05, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.