Misplaced Pages

:Templates for discussion: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 04:52, 20 November 2004 editTa bu shi da yu (talk | contribs)32,902 edits →November 5← Previous edit Revision as of 04:55, 20 November 2004 edit undoTa bu shi da yu (talk | contribs)32,902 edits →November 5Next edit →
Line 59: Line 59:
*] - misuse of templates; articles related as such should be categorized --]] 06:12, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC) *] - misuse of templates; articles related as such should be categorized --]] 06:12, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
** '''D''' Not a "misuse" just an early template created before categories. Delete redir at ] too. -- ] ] 06:16, 2004 Nov 6 (UTC) ** '''D''' Not a "misuse" just an early template created before categories. Delete redir at ] too. -- ] ] 06:16, 2004 Nov 6 (UTC)
** '''Delete''': I think it's not useful or necessary. - ] 04:55, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)
*] - what is "premier" is POV and poorly defined and we dont need a box for poorly related institutions. --]] 06:19, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC) *] - what is "premier" is POV and poorly defined and we dont need a box for poorly related institutions. --]] 06:19, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
** '''D''' replaceable w/ categories. Was previously ] (]). If deleted now, take care of Talk page and redirects at ] and ]. -- ] ] 06:29, 2004 Nov 6 (UTC) ** '''D''' replaceable w/ categories. Was previously ] (]). If deleted now, take care of Talk page and redirects at ] and ]. -- ] ] 06:29, 2004 Nov 6 (UTC)

Revision as of 04:55, 20 November 2004

Shortcut
  • ]

Deletion tools
Policy (log)
Articles (howto · log)
Templates (howto · log)
Categories (howto · log)
Mergers
Page moves
Speedy
All speedy templates
Unfree files
Transwiki (howto · log)
All transwiki templates

About TFD:

  • TFD is a page where requests for deletion of inappropriate Templates can be posted for comment and voting.
  • In addition to voting "Keep" or "Delete," a valid vote on this page is "Convert to category." In this case, all pages with the template should be added to an appropriately named category, and the template should be deleted.
  • Templates that have been listed for over 7 days are eligible for deletion if either a consensus to do so (other than the proposer) has been reached or no objects to its deletion have been raised. Such templates should be dealt with as soon as possible. Archived discussions are located at /Log.


When may deletion be appropriate:

  • Article category, list and series boxes which are either not noteworthy, are redundant with categories, or which have simply been orphaned may be requested to be deleted. Misplaced Pages has guidelines on acceptable templates of this kind. If you vote to keep a series box, be prepared to explain how it meets the criteria on this page.
  • Be aware that "Not in use" is not necessarily a reason to delete, likewise "Seems limited" is POV. Meeting Wiki guidelines for templates, for neutrality (as with all contributions) and a sense that it could be useful, is the important thing.


How to request deletion of a template:

  • Templates listed on this page do not need to be orphans prior to listing, and in fact should not be removed from pages prior to listing. However, templates should be removed from all pages prior to deletion. Currently, this can only be done manually.
  • To list a template on this page, add it to the list below under the appropriate date. Link to it as ] instead of as {{Insert template here}}. When listing a template on this page, add {{tfd}} to the top of the template itself as well. This will add a note to the template indicating it has ben requested to be deleted.
  • When adding this message to templates that are in the form of series boxes, the message should be placed inside the box, to make it clear what is being proposed for deletion. When being added to templates which have already been blanked, and are just sitting around as blanks, the message should be added to the template talk page. Again, do not blank templates to list them here - this is just if the template is already blank when you are listing it.


Resources:


Listings

Please put new listings at the bottom of the page.


October 26

November 5

  • Template:Nintendochar - A huge box for the bottom of Nintendo character articles like Zelda. Unwieldy and unnecessary with Category:Nintendo characters and its subcats. --Whosyourjudas (talk) 23:00, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)
    • This box is a crime. Delete it with haste. Snowspinner 23:54, Nov 5, 2004 (UTC)
    • Perhaps if we shrink the font down another few percent... No, just delete it. -- Netoholic @ 00:22, 2004 Nov 6 (UTC)
    • delete, too huge --Jiang 05:52, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
    • I was a big editor of this, but it's gotten too big. Delete. Andre (talk) 23:14, Nov 11, 2004 (UTC)
    • Perhaps it should be split into Nintendo universes? Like Mario, Zelda, etc. However, as it is, delete. - Vague Rant 12:57, Nov 12, 2004 (UTC)
    • Instead of deleting, merge the characters into one link and put on the template (for example, Mario Characters), or shrink the template down with another <small>, or both. ––67.81.178.64 4:42, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
      • <small><small> is illegible. Mrwojo 16:31, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete: The category is enough. --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 18:36, Nov 15, 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete: Far too large! - Ta bu shi da yu 04:50, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Template:Religion - orphaned, POV, and useless --Jiang 06:12, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
    • D I don't think its POV, but certainly a better case for categories. Delete redir at MediaWiki:Religion too. -- Netoholic @ 06:16, 2004 Nov 6 (UTC)
    • Delete: It is POV, just like all those various other earlier religion templates.
    • Delete: all the things Jiang said. - Ta bu shi da yu 04:52, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)

—Lowellian (talk)] 04:18, Nov 19, 2004 (UTC)

November 6

November 10

November 11

November 12

Reasons for tag:
The tag was created as NPOVNPOV. I modified and renamed it to deflect dispute into collaboration. It reflects a very pragmatic approach and reorients debate to the article with a strong request to the effect "now you've both had your say, agree where you stand by choosing a better tag between you". It is quite likely to work, because theres a real difference between removing or changing a tag someone else put there which you disagree with (edit/revert war) and adding a tag to say its disputed (no edit/revert war). Right now articles end up as "totallydisputed" being the one thing that's agreed on beyond which you cant go. Fewer edit wars = more focus on article. Yes they shouldnt get that way but we all know huge numbers at any time do. This might just be the way to seriously reduce that and ebncourage article collaborators to compromise and talk instead of lock it up while they squabble. Please see more specific notes on talk page. FT2 23:31, Nov 12, 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. The fact that someone put a dispute tag on an article is fairly good evidence of a dispute, no? Snowspinner 19:39, Nov 12, 2004 (UTC)
It can (and regularly has) also lead to article status being seriously misrepresented as regards the actual debate. And also sometimes it has ended up with the article PROT or VPROT in that state for a long time, locked and misrepresented. FT2 01:08, Nov 13, 2004 (UTC)
    • Unsure This template disputes the original dispute; that is, disagrees that the article is actually in dispute. e.g. non-involved party applying a dispute when a talk page discussion gets lively, but when none of the involved parties have called the article in dispute. OTOH, if it is not in use... Amgine (added siggy)
    • Keep (Logically it wont be in use till its been round a while) It is highly non-trivial to be able to say "the above tag is disputed". It's useful and it serves a genuine purpose. The circumstances Amgine mentions are one example. Tags do get disputed and whatever should happen, that's the reality. There's a real benefit to having a way to say "I am leaving that tag for now but I do disagree" in order to avoid an edit war. FT2 23:31, Nov 12, 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Confusing and unnecessary. ] 22:08, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep In lieu of responsibility to the community and the accuracy of our work, some individuals will use tags as a means of silencing or derailing information. Unless I am missing something, this circumstance is not well addressed by other means. As the topic's importance increases, the likelihood of this mendacious behavior occuring increases. -- RyanFreisling @ 23:28, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. "Not in use" is not a reason to delete; "seems extremely limited" is just your own POV and not true. It's quite a useful template, and I'd even go so far it's just as necessary to have this one as it is to have templates for NPOV disputes etc. -- Schnee 23:32, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep - POV disputes often (usually?) involve an argument over whether there's any POV issue at all. --Whosyourjudas (talk) 23:39, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Although I'm not completly convinced by its usefulness, I don't see a reason to delete the template. Let's wait a bit and see if it will be useful. --Conti|✉ 23:43, Nov 14, 2004 (UTC)
Keep I am definitely convinced. CheeseDreams 00:13, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)

November 14

  • Template:ConstellationList is too large to make it useful as a template, at least without some sort of organization within the template. (Now it is just an alphabetical list.) Josh 16:53, Nov 14, 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete and Convert to Category. Some are alrady in Category:Constellations; put all of them there. --Whosyourjudas (talk) 23:35, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. It is useful and unobtrusive on the articles. Categories are useful but not a replacement for everything. —Mike 04:27, Nov 16, 2004 (UTC)
  • Template:Protectedwho - I have strong feelings against a template like this. I feel like it's existence will only foster more ill-will during an edit dispute. Disputes are a problem for the community - listing out the specific "combatents" seems petty. -- Netoholic @ 18:28, 2004 Nov 14 (UTC)
    • Agree with the above, delete, and keep the personalities on the talk page FT2 18:45, Nov 14, 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete: agree with Netoholic. Also violates Misplaced Pages:Avoid self-reference even more; readers don't care who is arguing. --Whosyourjudas (talk) 23:36, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete: for reasons given by Netoholic and Whosyourjudas -- Chris j wood 00:46, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Pointing fingers will just make such problems worse. Josh 03:51, Nov 15, 2004 (UTC)

November 15

November 17

November 19

  • Keep Rubbish it's very usefull, pubs are and important part of the social fabric of the UK. Their importance needs to be documented both indivdually and as a group.--Jirate 14:09, 2004 Nov 19 (UTC)

Holding Cell

These templates need to be deleted, but may still be in use on some pages. Somebody (Admin or otherwise) should remove them from pages so that they can be deleted. If you've cleared a page, note it here.

Remove Entirely

Convert to category

Footer

Category: