Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 February 12

< February 11	>

February 12, 2006

Template:Wdefcon

Template:Wdefcon (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
It's the complement of the MFD on Wikipedia:WikiDefcon: [1]. After seeing comments like "vandalbot is trying us to get defcon raised to 1" it seems clear to me that this is inviting to vandalism, and we don't want to encourage that. -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 07:48, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Per drini and my comments on Wikipedia:WikiDefcon's MFD page. --lightdarkness^(talk) 07:52, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delete per my comments on the MDF: It's unnecessary, since most users who would use it are already active in countervandalism. Worst, I think that it's actually harmful to Wikipedia: it encourages vandalism by transforming the issue of vandalism into a militaristic vision of epic battle. This is one of many similar manifestations of this militarism that should be eliminated in favour of simple tools. A Defcon is not a 'simple tool'. // Pathoschild (_admin / ^talk) 07:53, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
No vote. Technically, the vandalbot wants us at DefCon 1, but his main purpose is to get us to disallow all anons from editing, and he thinks that by getting us at DefCon 1 would make us realize a problem. However, if there were no organized system, he'd just have to vandalize even more for us to really notice, so deleting DefCon may not be the answer. Then again, Pathoschild is right, it's not really useful anyway. And it's 3am and I have no idea if I'm even coherent. --Rory096 07:55, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

you realize that even if defcon goes to 1, anon edits WON'T be restricted? the defcon is an unofficial subjective thing. Carries no weigh whatsoever. -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 07:58, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User anti-fascism

Template:User anti-fascism (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Delete - Template is clearly divisive and/or inflammatory, and, like User:No Rand and User:No Marxism, should be speedy deleted. Deletions must be consistent and fair. This template is not NPOV in nature. (nominated by User:Nhprman)

Strong Keep If you are going to nominate a 'anti' something, you must to be NPOV nominate the 'pro' as well. The nomination is POV and therefore invalid. Would you also have a problem with a User Anti-Hitler as well? It is not divisive or inflammatory. Jwissick ^(t)^(c) 05:52, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Have you read the policy on templates at WP:TFD?--Alhutch 06:15, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Neither divisive nor inflamatory. --Blu Aardvark | ^{(talk) | (contribs)} 05:59, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: "User No..." and "user anti..." are divisive sentiments. "User Marxism" or "User fascist" are not. Nhprman 06:15, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Such a claim is an opinion. I happen to disagree. I also think that too many users and admins are abusing CSD T1 - a criterion which I oppose vehemently due to the conflicts it has invariably created, but which was instated by rule of dictator, and therefore didn't have to go through all that bothersome nonsense of "consensus". --Blu Aardvark | ^{(talk) | (contribs)} 06:06, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And this new policy must be used equally and fairly. For the record, this is not a POV deletion. I am solidly anti-Hitler. Nhprman 06:10, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Userfy per WP:UUB. —Andux^␅ 06:11, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:TFD, which says that all templates must be NPOV and encyclopedic. This template is neither.--Alhutch 06:15, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:TFD doesn't say that all templates must be NPOV and encylopedic - it simply states that you may want to nominate it for deletion if it is not - and as this template is intended to be used in userspace, that's a moot issue anyway. --Blu Aardvark | ^{(talk) | (contribs)} 06:24, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all userboxes, this one included. --Cyde Weys 07:53, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Isnt opposing fascism a good thing? Or do the admins (rightly) assume that it can refer to them as well as Hitler? - • | ĐÜ§§§Ť | • ^{T | C} 10:13, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:TucsonInfoBox

Template:TucsonInfoBox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Delete not used, redundant with {{Infobox City}}. --Sherool (talk) 03:13, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User vomit

Currently categorized under Wikipedia:Userboxes/Funny. Therefore, Keep. Sct72 02:19, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- So just because someone says it's funny, that means it's funny, which in turn means we're obliged to keep it? --MarkSweep (call me collect) 02:31, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Yes, for people with a sense of humor. Sct72 02:35, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I laughed when i saw it.. There should be a lighter side to WP... especialy with all this devisive TFD and Speedy deletes. Jwissick ^(t)^(c) 02:48, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep let there be humor, FREE THE USERBOXMike McGregor (Can) 03:13, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy per WP:UUB. —Andux^␅ 06:01, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all userboxes, this one included. --Cyde Weys 07:53, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete. I pity any user for whom this box is continuously accurate. Michael Slone (talk) 08:09, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Its funny, and cannot possibly offend anyone! And Cyde, you can't just say "delete all userboxes, this one included". Its not a vote, its a discussion. You just saying that wont count for anything when the discussion is closed - • | ĐÜ§§§Ť | • ^{T | C} 10:15, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User ga-?

Template:User ga-? (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Doesn't make sense. "?" is not one of the standard language categories at Category:User ga. Should be in Irish, not English if it is meant to be a real language template. Angela . 01:55, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I'm sure someone is making a point with this...Mike McGregor (Can) 03:10, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Making a WP:POINT perhaps? I don't understand your reasoning to keep this. It isn't used anywhere. Angela . 04:52, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, per nom. If it were a language template, it would be in Irish. EWS23 | (Leave me a message!) 05:16, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User m1911

Template:User m1911 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Redundant with various NRA-related templates, and needlessly provocative by combining politics and religion. Next thing you know, there will be boxes asserting that She always keeps a round in the chamber. --MarkSweep (call me collect) 00:46, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Legitimate template that is merely humorous and makes absolutely no reference to the NRA or politics. --Aaron 01:49, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and block MarkSweep for deletion spree against Jimbo's Instructions, WP:POINT and WP:DICK. Jwissick^(t)^(c) 01:57, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- There were two parts of Jimbo's Instructions - "...don't make any crazy userboxes designed to try to trip this rule, and don't go on any sprees deleting ones that already exist." The continued creation of all kinds of userboxes without regard to the "this rule" or the discussions is also very disruptive. Btw, I am abstaining on this one for now Trödeltalk 03:50, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - I would HARDLY call this "crazy". Template:User admins ignoring policy (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) sure. User m1911 hardly. Jwissick^(t)^(c) 04:04, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    - I would disagree. {{User admins ignoring policy}} is a valid sentiment that many Wikipedia editors share, and which Wikipedia policy agrees with. (Personally, I display the box on my userpage - but I always subst: my userboxen, so it wasn't affected by the template's out-of-process deletion) --Blu Aardvark | ^{(talk) | (contribs)} 06:20, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    - I agree, User admins ignoring policy is a very valid point, which i display in subst form on my userpage. But i think this userbox is funny, and shouldnt be deleted - • | ĐÜ§§§Ť | • ^{T | C} 10:20, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep not provocative at all. makes no refrence to the NRA. slippery slope argument is not a valid reason for deleation. FREE THE USER BOX! Mike McGregor (Can) 03:06, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy per WP:UUB. —Andux^␅ 06:02, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete. I cannot see any value whatsoever in this template, but if a person wants to display it, so be it. --Blu Aardvark | ^{(talk) | (contribs)} 06:20, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all userboxes, this one included. --Cyde Weys 07:53, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Userfied to {{User:Userboxes/M1911}}. Please attempt to seek a reasonable compromise rather than continue these disruptive nominations. Crotalus horridus (TALK • CONTRIBS) 08:08, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WTF?!?! Moving it to [[User:Userboxes/M1911] is an attempt to end-run around the template namespace and this deletion vote. -- Netoholic @ 10:17, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It appears to me to be a good faith attempt to try and reach a compromise and end userbox nominations, which tend to be highly disruptive. --Teh Puppet 10:20, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]