Template talk:Db-meta

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Do we need db-p1?[edit]

Moved to Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion#Do we need db-p1?


sir can you please update the page bibek bhattarai — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bbkbhatt (talkcontribs) 15:21, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

  • Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: this is the talk page for discussing improvements to the template {{Db-meta}}. Please make your request at the talk page for the article concerned. — {{U|Technical 13}} (tec) 16:33, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 24 July 2014[edit]

First - I am submitting a Do Not Delete recommendation here because the appropriate button on the deletion comment page is not working. Second - this article is a set of direct and factual statements of the functions and capabilities of the SSDS system. I wrote the original operational specification for the SSDS, and this article closely matches what I said in 1996. It does not advertise for any company or commercial entity. /s/ Archer M. Macy, retired Navy. (talk) 11:56, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi, which article does this refer to? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:01, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure that this is in reference to Ship Self-Defense System. Mr. Macy, the article is not currently nominated for deletion, although it does more or less say "the wording should read more like a press release." I would guess that in this case an attempt to delete would be very unlikely, as there is enough in the way of sourcing in the article to preclude deleting it, the "message" on the article which lead you here didn't do a great job of explaining that. You might want to add your comments to Talk:Ship Self-Defense System, but I think the warning notice was placed not so much in an attempt to delete the article as to call attention to the fact that some of the features/benefits language there reads a bit non-neutrally and unencyclopedically, and the boilerplate nature of the warning message really miscommunicates the underlying concern. Anyway, you want to discuss this at Talk:Ship Self-Defense System, it's our fault you got to this location, but I can see how you did, but it's the talk page is the place that would be best (within our maze-like bueracracy) for this. Drop me a note on my talk page ( User Talk:Joe Decker ) if I can explain further. --j⚛e deckertalk 18:59, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

U1 and G7 - A softer description?[edit]

Like every other speedy deletion template I see, u1 and g7 is when the author or user requests deletion to his/her page. But there is one abnormality, they do not have to be such a legal or if I can say it phrase. I want the presentation of the templates to be softer. That is, they do not use 'speedy deletion' in a hard and fast style. I have a live preview here. That is how I want them to look like, both templates should be nice to everyone, not organised in a way that only administrators can really get the personality of those strict templates. Thanks! DSCrowned (talk) 10:55, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

If you like this idea, please ask me about it on my talk page so I can change the template pages if requested. Thanks! DSCrowned (talk) 12:11, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

  • Oppose If it ain't broke, don't fix it. — {{U|Technical 13}} (etc) 12:49, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
DSCrowned (talk) - What do you mean by that? 08:54, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose I see no reason to go against the standard that all of our other speedy deletion tags use. Jackmcbarn (talk) 19:53, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
The only reason I have is that the standard form kind of distracts the user that requested to delete the page. As the author requests deletion, there is no need for anyone except for admins to be notified. So there should not be a harsh message to the author, unlike other speedy deletion tags. It shouldn't be this legal way or otherwise such harsh db-u1 templates may end up distracting rather than telling others to delete. DSCrowned (talk) 07:00, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
Sometimes a {{db-u1}} or {{db-g7}} will be improperly used. For example, user A creates a template. User A later realises that it is not needed after all, and blanks the page: this can legitimately be tagged G7 by user B. However, if User C decides that this template is not needed and blanks the page, it cannot be tagged G7 by either user B or user C. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:05, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Support the edit that conditionally adds, This page was last edited by a user other than the owner of the userspace in which it was used. Please make sure the page was tagged by the correct user before deleting. to the template and identifies that user. I see no argument above that contests that this is an improvement. --{{U|Elvey}} (tc) 16:11, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
@Elvey: That's a feature I added to the sandbox a while back, and is completely independent of the change he's proposing. Jackmcbarn (talk) 14:29, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
Ah, OK. Would an admin kindly just make Jack's feature live?--{{U|Elvey}} (tc) 12:09, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
@Elvey: {{db-u1}} is only semi-protected, so you should be able to do this if you want. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 13:13, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
I just brought https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Db-u1/sandbox&action=edit&oldid=574271933 live (less the redirect-causing addition of an s) per above. Thanks, User:Mr. Stradivarius, Jackmcbarn
BTW, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Db-u1/testcases doesn't work.
As for DSCrowned's changes, I mildly Support those too; I prefer the proposed version to the current version. {{U|Elvey}} (tc) 17:36, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 1 August 2014[edit]

<text of article in another language removed> (talk) 12:18, 1 August 2014 (UTC) (talk) 12:18, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: this is the talk page for discussing improvements to the template {{Db-meta}}. Please make your request at the talk page for the article concerned. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:44, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
(e/c) Hello person editing from, You seem to have mistaken the talk page of an article you wish to edit with the talk page of the speedy deletion template that was placed on it (or some other confusion brought you here). IN any event, you are not in the right place. If my first guess is at all correct, go back to the article, click "Talk" at the top, and place any request on that articles talk page, if not already deleted. However, Wikipedia is written in English, and a request should start with a description of what you want done. In no event is anyone going to place a swath of foreign language content into an English article.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:50, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

add {{Find sources}} to {{db-a7}}[edit]

The {{Find sources}} template is used as part of an AfD nomination to make it easier to look up sources for an article at AfD. I would like to suggest that {{Find sources}} be included in {{db-a7}} to allow editors to check for sources in an article tagged for {{db-a7}} with a single click. Eastmain (talkcontribs) 03:09, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

This sounds like a good idea, and I've tried to implement this in Template:Db-a7/sandbox. I keep getting a big gap between the find sources line and the administrators' advice line, though. Can anyone see what's going on there? — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 03:41, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Mr. Stradivarius, the problem is in {{Db-meta}}. I really have no ambition to fix it right now, but that is where to look. — {{U|Technical 13}} (etc) 14:12, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
    The problem seems to be a stray </small><br> in db-meta, right after that parameter. Jackmcbarn (talk) 16:31, 1 September 2014 (UTC)