Wikipedia talk:Templates for discussion: Difference between revisions
→Citation needed nomination: Thanks |
→Delete: new section |
||
Line 50: | Line 50: | ||
::: Yes, they do. [[WP:PERF|Don't worry too much about crashing the servers, though]]; the most you're likely to be able to do by editing templates is slow things down a bit. [[User:Anomie|Anomie]][[User talk:Anomie|⚔]] 12:53, 18 August 2012 (UTC) |
::: Yes, they do. [[WP:PERF|Don't worry too much about crashing the servers, though]]; the most you're likely to be able to do by editing templates is slow things down a bit. [[User:Anomie|Anomie]][[User talk:Anomie|⚔]] 12:53, 18 August 2012 (UTC) |
||
:::: Ok, thanks! — '''''[[User:Mr. Stradivarius|<span style="color: #194D00; font-family: Palatino, Times, serif">Mr. Stradivarius</span>]]''''' <sup>([[User talk:Mr. Stradivarius|have a chat]])</sup> 12:55, 18 August 2012 (UTC) |
:::: Ok, thanks! — '''''[[User:Mr. Stradivarius|<span style="color: #194D00; font-family: Palatino, Times, serif">Mr. Stradivarius</span>]]''''' <sup>([[User talk:Mr. Stradivarius|have a chat]])</sup> 12:55, 18 August 2012 (UTC) |
||
== Delete == |
|||
::After being recommended to put in my input, I skimmed through the last discussion and can clearly see their is no reliable citations sourced and none of the top 3 contestants have become successful enough post the series except for [[Elliot Yamin]] so it is not worth even having the template here on Wiki. [[User:ATC|<span style="font-variant: small-caps;">'''ATC'''</span>]]<sup> '''.''' [[User talk:ATC|Talk]]</sup> 23:52, 23 August 2012 (UTC) |
Revision as of 23:52, 23 August 2012
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 |
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Deletion (defunct) | ||||
|
Module:WikiProject banner/doc
This page is a soft redirect.
This template has been replaced by Module:WikiProject banner |
To help centralise discussions and keep related topics together, Wikipedia talk:Templates for discussion/Holding cell redirects here. |
Relisting instructions
I have added a section to Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Administrator instructions about how to relist discussions. I would be grateful if people could look it over and check it complies with common practice. Since the {{tfd}} template now links directly to the daily log page, it is now necessary to update the link to the new page. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 17:34, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) tag
I suggest that this tag is inappropriate. It is insensitive and it trivializes a genuine issue. The term stalker should be replaced with something less sinister and offensive. ~ GabeMc (talk|contribs) 21:47, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
- I quite agree. "Talk Page Randomer" springs too mind, but possibly too slangy. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:53, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
- Well, almost anything would be preferable to the current term. "Talk page follower"? ~ GabeMc (talk|contribs) 22:07, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
- That seems perfectly reasonable and neutral. But also a bit sad to see an element of goofy quaintness/ humour being lost here - halcyon days when the project was less stressed perhaps. Those pictures of big wild carnivorous cats are quaint, aren't they?? Martinevans123 (talk) 22:13, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
- Yeah, you make a good point. What I try to remind others is that this is a family friendly site (at least I think it is), and children can and do see the things adults post here. Even follower seems a little creepy. There must be an even better term. ~ GabeMc (talk|contribs) 22:28, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
- Talk page eavesdropper? ~ GabeMc (talk|contribs) 22:31, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
- Talk page watcher? Not quite as sinister as stalker (?) and technically accurate. DH85868993 (talk) 23:10, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
- "Talk page stalker" is no more inappropriate than "a murder of crows". "Stalker" in this case does not mean "sexual predator". This is twisting the language into something that it isn't. And this is not exactly a "family-friendly site". If "not family-friendly" were a valid reason to delete something we wouldn't have articles like this or this. Joefromrandb (talk) 05:49, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
- Even "watcher" isn't entirely innocent. See Lady Godiva, last sentence of opening paragraph. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:16, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
- "Talk Page crow-murderer" sounds fine to me too. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:49, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
- "Talk page stalker" is no more inappropriate than "a murder of crows". "Stalker" in this case does not mean "sexual predator". This is twisting the language into something that it isn't. And this is not exactly a "family-friendly site". If "not family-friendly" were a valid reason to delete something we wouldn't have articles like this or this. Joefromrandb (talk) 05:49, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
- Talk page watcher? Not quite as sinister as stalker (?) and technically accurate. DH85868993 (talk) 23:10, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
- That seems perfectly reasonable and neutral. But also a bit sad to see an element of goofy quaintness/ humour being lost here - halcyon days when the project was less stressed perhaps. Those pictures of big wild carnivorous cats are quaint, aren't they?? Martinevans123 (talk) 22:13, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
- Well, almost anything would be preferable to the current term. "Talk page follower"? ~ GabeMc (talk|contribs) 22:07, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
- How about "Talk page snoop"? (It's non-serious, and gets to the point.) Ihardlythinkso (talk) 08:22, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
- "Talk Page Sleuth" perhaps, complete with appropriate hat? Martinevans123 (talk) 12:31, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
- Can't have that kind of hat - we'd be back where we started! ... How about "Talk page onlooker"? DH85868993 (talk) 14:14, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
- "Talk Page Sleuth" perhaps, complete with appropriate hat? Martinevans123 (talk) 12:31, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
- How about "Talk page snoop"? (It's non-serious, and gets to the point.) Ihardlythinkso (talk) 08:22, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Withdrawn nominations
I recently nominated a template for deletion, then subsequently withdrew the nomination because the issue which caused me to nominate the template for deletion had been resolved. A non-admin then closed the discussion. Could I (a non-admin) have closed the discussion as soon as I withdrew the nomination? Or do discussions have to be closed by someone other than the originator? Thanks. DH85868993 (talk) 23:16, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
- If no one else is supporting the deletion, feel free. If other people are supporting the deletion, it generally shouldn't be closed (by anyone) only because the nominator withdrew their own support. Anomie⚔ 23:26, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks. DH85868993 (talk) 23:35, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Watchlist?
I've nominated some templates for deletion. I see that I'm supposed to watchlist the templates themselves; no problems with that. But how do I keeps tabs of the discussion itself? Do I really have to watchlist the discussion log for the whole day? This appears to be a high traffic page, drowning my watchlist with a lot of line items that I'm not really interested in. Not sure whether it's been suggested before, but the nomination system at DYK might be a good system to copy. Each item sits on its own subpage, and I watchlist the subpage only, i.e. anything that shows up on my watchlist is of relevance to me. I'm happy to explain it in more detail if there's interest. Schwede66 09:12, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
- I don't think you need to follow every edit to the discussion, but instead, just check it once every couple days. as far as a redesign goes, the most recent suggest was probably here. Frietjes (talk) 23:37, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
Citation needed nomination
I just answered an edit request for {{Citation needed}} after it was nominated for merging, but due to the large number of transclusions I added the {{tfm}} template with "noinclude" tags rather than the usual {{tfm-inline}} template. Can people more experienced than me at TfD take a look at the request and see if I made the right call? Thanks — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 14:59, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
- Personally, I would have stuck with your first instinct there, particularly since the proposed merge doesn't seem too well thought through. But what's done is done. Anomie⚔ 04:23, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
- Sorry, next time I'll ask first before doing anything that looks like it might crash the servers... So, just to get this straight - even though the change I made to the template is all between <noinclude></noinclude> tags, the servers still have to process the change for all 250,000 transclusions? — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 04:52, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, they do. Don't worry too much about crashing the servers, though; the most you're likely to be able to do by editing templates is slow things down a bit. Anomie⚔ 12:53, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
- Ok, thanks! — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 12:55, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, they do. Don't worry too much about crashing the servers, though; the most you're likely to be able to do by editing templates is slow things down a bit. Anomie⚔ 12:53, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
- Sorry, next time I'll ask first before doing anything that looks like it might crash the servers... So, just to get this straight - even though the change I made to the template is all between <noinclude></noinclude> tags, the servers still have to process the change for all 250,000 transclusions? — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 04:52, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
Delete
- After being recommended to put in my input, I skimmed through the last discussion and can clearly see their is no reliable citations sourced and none of the top 3 contestants have become successful enough post the series except for Elliot Yamin so it is not worth even having the template here on Wiki. ATC . Talk 23:52, 23 August 2012 (UTC)