Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively
← Previous edit
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Frexe (talk | contribs)
168 edits
we only need to nowiki the brackets, not random strings of text
 
Line 1:
{{Short description|Page for discussing mergers and deletions of templates}}
{{Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Header}}
{{Redirect|WP:TFD|the page used for TimedText or talk page deletion discussions|Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion|a list of templates used for discussion|Wikipedia:List of discussion templates}}
{{pp-move-indef}}
{{offer help}}
{{#ifexpr:{{#invoke:XfD old|total|title=Wikipedia:Templates for discussion}}>10|{{Admin backlog|bot=AnomieBOT}}}}
{{floating link|Closing instructions}}
<div class="tfd-header">
{{Ombox
| style = text-align: center
| type = notice
| image = none
| text = {{hlist|''[[#toc|Skip to table of contents]]''|''[[#Current discussions|Skip to current discussions]]''|''{{Purge|Purge this page}}''}}<inputbox>
type=fulltext
prefix=Wikipedia:Templates for d
break=no
width=50
placeholder=Enter &#x5b;&#x5b;Template:Example&#x5d;&#x5d; to find a discussion
searchbuttonlabel=Search archives
</inputbox>
| imageright = {{Shortcut|WP:TFD}}
}}
{{XFD backlog|right}}
{{Deletion debates}}
 
On this page, the deletion or merging of '''[[Help:Template|templates]]''' and '''[[Wikipedia:Lua|modules]]''', with a few [[#What not to propose for discussion here|exceptions]], is discussed.
==Listings==
{{TOC limit|3}}
 
===How Januaryto 13use =this page==
===<span id="NOT"></span> What ''not'' to propose for discussion here===
{{shortcut|WP:TFD#NOT}}
The majority of deletion and merger proposals concerning pages in the [[WP:Template namespace|template namespace]] and [[WP:Lua|module namespace]] should be listed on this page. However, there are a few exceptions:
 
; Stub templates
==== [[Template:Note JapanRailwaysFormat]] ====
: Stub templates and categories should be listed at [[WP:CFD|Categories for discussion]], as these templates are merely containers for their categories, ''unless'' the stub template does not come with a category and is being nominated by itself.
{{tln|Note JapanRailwaysFormat}}<br />
; Userboxes
'''Delete''' — This is a weird one from [[Wikipedia:Templates with red links]] - unused, unconventional, and unedited since mid '04. [[User:BDAbramson|<font style="background:gold">'''''BDAbramson'''''</font>]] [[User talk:BDAbramson|'''T''']] 05:36, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
: Userboxes should be listed at [[WP:MFD|Miscellany for deletion]], regardless of the namespace in which they reside.
: '''Delete''' -- I'm sure it covered a need back when I first created it, probably replacing repeated content, but if it's obsolete by now then it's time to delete. [[User:Aris Katsaris|Aris Katsaris]] 06:15, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
; Speedy deletion candidates
: If the template clearly satisfies a [[WP:CSD|criterion for speedy deletion]], tag it with a [[:Category:Speedy deletion templates|speedy deletion template]]. For example, if you wrote the template and request its deletion, tag it with {{t|Db-author}}. See also [[WP:T5]].
; Policy or guideline templates
: Templates that are associated with particular [[WP:PAG|Wikipedia policies or guidelines]], such as the [[:Category:Speedy deletion templates|speedy deletion templates]], cannot be listed at TfD separately. They should be discussed on the talk page of the relevant guideline.
; Template redirects
: List all redirects at [[WP:RFD|Redirects for discussion]].
; Moving and renaming a template
: Use [[Wikipedia:Requested moves|Requested moves]].
 
===<span class="anchor" id="REASONS"></span> Reasons to delete a template===
====[[Template:User antiracist]]====
{{shortcut|WP:TFD#REASONS}}
*'''Strong Keep''' as per below [[User:Athf1234|Athf1234]] 04:15, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
# The template violates some part of the [[WP:TMP|template namespace guidelines]], and can't be altered to be in compliance.
*'''Merge''' with [[:Template:User true antiracist]] as below. - [[User:Cuivienen|Cuivienen]] 04:19, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
# The template is redundant to a better-designed template.
*'''Strong Keep''' per all userboxes until the userbox hunt ends. Wikipedia is [[WP:NOT]] censored.[[User:Karmafist|karmafist]] 04:30, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
# The template is not used, either directly or by [[WP:SUBST|template substitution]] (the latter cannot be concluded from the absence of backlinks), {{Strong|and has no likelihood of {{em|being}} used}}.
*Just '''delete''' it already. I don't know what I was thinking using the phrase "By any means necessary!" in there. After seeing how much trouble it brings to try to defend a point, I think Malcolm should have used "By some means considered acceptable!" --[[User:Dtasripin|Daniel]] 04:42, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
# The template violates a policy such as [[WP:NPOV|Neutral point of view]] or [[WP:CIVIL|Civility]] and it can't be fixed through normal editing.
*'''Strong Keep''' - Malcolm was antiracist. This attack on Malcolm is racist. (see also discussion [[Template_talk:User_antiracist]]). Therefore, all the more reason to keep this template! -- [[User:ActiveSelective|ActiveSelective]] 09:49, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
:*Your logic is impeccable. A regular Descartes, you are. We are all humbled. -[[User:Silence|Silence]] 09:56, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
 
Templates should not be nominated if the issue can be fixed by normal editing. Instead, you should edit the template to fix its problems. If the template is complex and you don't know how to fix it, [[WP:WPT|WikiProject Templates]] may be able to help.
====[[Template:User true antiracist]]====
The drift I get is that we are going to sterilize User Talkpages of anything other than "I support", "I consume", or "I like" messages in userboxes. So I say no one should be able to state their non-support, or opposition to(!) anything. Somebody's feelings might get hurt, and we would never want anything to cramp the rights of people who use English Wikipedia not to have to think or question themselves. And good Lord in Heaven forbid, that anyone use of the image of either one of these [[Letter_from_Birmingham_Jail|unrepentant lawbreakers]] - it might make them inclined to [[Civil disobedience|violate policy]]! --[[User:Dtasripin|Daniel]] 03:49, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
 
Templates for which none of these apply may be deleted by [[Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] here. If a template is being misused, consider clarifying its documentation to indicate the correct use, or informing those that misuse it, rather than nominating it for deletion. Initiate a discussion on the template talk page if the correct use itself is under debate.
*'''Speedy keep''' both, [[WP:POINT]]. However, switch the MLK image (and possibly the Malcolm X one) for a non-Fair Use one. Additionally, recommend moving [[Template:User true antiracist]] to [[Template:User antiracist2]], as its current title makes it sound like (and it probably is) an unnecessary jab at people who prefer to use the more militant first template. -[[User:Silence|Silence]] 03:56, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Speedy Keep.''' This nomination is a [[WP:POINT]]. I also recommend merging with [[:template:user antiracist]] with the use of a (non-fair use) MLK image rather than Malcolm X, though such recommendations aren't really the point of the TfD page. - [[User:Cuivienen|Cuivienen]] 04:13, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong Keep''' for both anti-racist templates. I see no reason for them to be deleted. [[User:Athf1234|Athf1234]] 04:14, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
 
===Listing a template===
*'''Strong delete''': WP:POINT doesn't apply. I've changed my mind - it's part of the beauty of having one and the freedom to express what's on it. So since we are getting rid of inflammatory userboxes, we may as well get the ones that offend a good number of English-speaking Wikipedia users out of the way. --[[User:Dtasripin|Daniel]] 04:27, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
{{shortcut|WP:TFDHOWTO|WP:TFDHOW}}
*'''Strong Keep''' per all userboxes until the userbox hunt ends. Wikipedia is [[WP:NOT]] censored.[[User:Karmafist|karmafist]] 04:30, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
{{Strong|To list a template for deletion or merging, follow the three-step process below.}} Do {{em|not}} include the "Template:" prefix in any of the steps.
*'''Sarcastic delete''''. "Anti-racist" could be interpreted as a personal attack against racist people. — '''[[User:Philwelch|Phil]]''' ''[[User_talk:Philwelch|Welch]]'' <small>[[User:Katefan0/Poll|Are you a fan of the band Rush?]]</small> 07:13, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
:*ACtually, that's not a bad point. It's also disingenuous to have the templates named "antiracist" when the content of the template makes it clear that the user is opposed to '''racism''', not just to all people who happen to ''be'' racist. So, in addition to my above recommendation that the caustic and pointed name "true antiracist" be moved to "antiracist2", I now feel that the two templates should be named: (1) antiracism, and (2) antiracism2. By the way, I also happen to feel that these are some remarkably silly templates (what's next, anti-rape templates? anti-genocide? anti-suffering? anti-ignorance? oy.), but then again, lots of our userboxes are, and they still get used, so I see no problem with bringing these ones up to snuff for those people who ''do'' want to use them, for one reason or another. -[[User:Silence|Silence]] 07:20, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong keep''', and then '''Name Change''' -- leave out the 'true' in 'true antiracist'. I suggest to leave the other antiracist template with the same name, and rename the 'true antiracist' into 'antiracist MLKing' because: (1) it has to be renamed anyway, (2) it has less users using it. -- [[User:ActiveSelective|ActiveSelective]] 10:05, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
 
If you have never nominated a template for deletion or used [[WP:Twinkle|Twinkle]] before, you might want to do it manually to avoid making mistakes. For more experienced editors, using Twinkle is recommended, as it automates some of these steps. (After navigating to the template you want to nominate, click its dropdown menu in the top right of the page: TW [[File:OOjs UI icon caretDown.svg|15px|link=]], and then select "XFD".)
====[[Template:User vandal]]====
{| class="wikitable" style="clear: both;"
Apparantly created only to make a point in the discussion below. Not used. [[User:JYolkowski|JYolkowski]] // [[User talk:JYolkowski|talk]] 02:08, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
|- id="Step I"
*'''Speedy delete''' anything that actually encourages violations of Wikipedia policy.--[[User:Sean Black|Sean]]|[[User talk:Sean Black|Bla]]<font color="green">[[Wikipedia:Esperanza|ck]]</font> 02:15, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
! scope="row" style="background-color: #ffff99;" | Step 1
*'''Speedy delete''' and no cookies to the creator's for his weird [[WP:POINT]]. This is created and unused, knowing it will be nominated for an acrimonious deletion; what a waste of time! --[[User:Doc glasgow|Doc]] [[User talk:Doc glasgow|<sup>ask?</sup>]] 02:23, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Tag the template
*'''Conditional Keep''' - If and only if more than one person is actually using this template for being a graduate of UI. It ''is'' the UI nickname. - [[User:69.86.17.202|69.86.17.202]] 03:13, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
| style="padding: 0.5em;" | '''Paste one of the following notices to the top of the template page:'''
**Heh, that was me. - [[User:Cuivienen|Cuivienen]] 03:14, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''For deletion:''' {{Tlxs|Tfd}}
*If anyone decides to take up this template - I will defend it, however '''delete''' for now.--'''[[User:God_of_War|God of]][[User Talk:God_of_War| War]]''' 03:42, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
* For deletion of a sidebar or infobox template: {{Tlxs|Tfd|2=type=sidebar}}
*'''Keep'''. I think it's funny, and the [[University of Idaho]] is a major school. If it's not used, that might just be because it's new. In no way encourages breaking policy, unless the word "vandal" is a form of light treason now. [[User:Lord Bob|Lord Bob]] 04:20, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
* For deletion of an inline template: {{Tlxs|Tfd|2=type=inline}} and don't add a newline after the notice.
*'''Keep''' Maybe [[WP:POINT]] and maybe not, but UI's teams are called the "Vandals" so what's the beef? (I'm pretty sure they mean these [[Vandal]]s, not those [[Wikipedia:Vandalism|Vandals]]. Probably not even [[Vandalism|them]] or [[The Vandals|them]].) ''[[User:Csernica|TCC]]'' <small>[[User_talk:Csernica|(talk)]] [[Special:Contributions/Csernica|(contribs)]]</small> 04:31, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''For merging:''' {{Tlxs|Tfm|{{var|{{Gray|name of other template}}}}}}
*'''Keep''' Nothing wrong with it, no need to delete it. [[User:DaGizza|<b><font color="darkblue"> D</font><font color="teal">a</font><font color="lightblue">Gizza</font></b>]]''<sup><font color="orange">[[User_talk:DaGizza|Chat]]</font></sup>'' <sup><b><font color="gold">[[Special:Contributions/DaGizza|(c)]]</font></b></sup> 04:56, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
* For merging an inline template: {{Tlxs|Tfm|2=type=inline|3={{var|{{Gray|name of other template to be merged}}}}}} and don't add a newline after the notice.
*'''Keep''' --[[User:Peace Inside|Peace Inside]] 05:42, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
* To delete a [[Help:Module|module]] or a different type of template, see {{section link|Template:Template for discussion#Display on articles}}
*'''Comment'''. I didn't create this to WP:POINT, more as a WP:JOKE. It's for identifying one's self as someone who went to U of I. — '''[[User:Philwelch|Phil]]''' ''[[User_talk:Philwelch|Welch]]'' <small>[[User:Katefan0/Poll|Are you a fan of the band Rush?]]</small> 07:04, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nom and per [[encyclopedia]]. --[[User:Pjacobi|Pjacobi]] 09:32, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
 
'''Note:'''
====[[Template:User POV pusher]]====
* If the template is [[Wikipedia:Page protection|protected]], request that the TfD notice be added on the template's talk page using the {{Tlx|editprotected}} template, to catch the attention of [[Wikipedia:Administrators|administrators]] or [[Wikipedia:Template editors|template editors]].
Apparantly created only to make a point in the discussion below. Not used, doesn't seem really useful anyway. [[User:JYolkowski|JYolkowski]] // [[User talk:JYolkowski|talk]] 02:08, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
* If the template is designed to be [[WP:SUBST|substituted]], add {{tag|noinclude}} around the TfD notice to prevent it from being substituted alongside the template. Example: <code><nowiki><noinclude></nowiki><nowiki>{{subst:Tfd}}</nowiki><nowiki></noinclude></nowiki></code>
:Speedied per creator requested below. --[[User:Wgfinley|Wgfinley]] 07:08, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
* Use an edit summary like<br /><code>Nominated for deletion/merging; see <nowiki>[[Wikipedia:Templates for discussion#</nowiki>Template:{{var|{{Gray|name of template}}}}<nowiki>]]</nowiki></code>
**'''Speedy delete''' anything that actually encourages violations of Wikipedia policy.--[[User:Sean Black|Sean]]|[[User talk:Sean Black|Bla]]<font color="green">[[Wikipedia:Esperanza|ck]]</font> 02:15, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
* Before saving your edit, preview the page to ensure the TfD notice is displayed properly.
*'''Speedy delete''' and no cookies to the creator's for his weird [[WP:POINT]]. This is created and unused, knowing it will be nominated for an acrimonious deletion; what a waste of time! --[[User:Doc glasgow|Doc]] [[User talk:Doc glasgow|<sup>ask?</sup>]] 02:23, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
*Ummm... '''Delete''' because it was made as a [[WP:POINT]]. I would support the return of this template were it not making a point as it explicitly does not promote POV on Wikipedia. - [[User:Cuivienen|Cuivienen]] 04:16, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Speedy Del''' Per all above [[User:DaGizza|<b><font color="darkblue"> D</font><font color="teal">a</font><font color="lightblue">Gizza</font></b>]]''<sup><font color="orange">[[User_talk:DaGizza|Chat]]</font></sup>'' <sup><b><font color="gold">[[Special:Contributions/DaGizza|(c)]]</font></b></sup> 05:07, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Speedy delete'''. Serious [[WP:POINT]] violation. -- [[User:SCZenz|SCZenz]] 05:13, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Speedy delete''' obvious failure of [[WP:NOT]].--[[User:MONGO|MONGO]] 06:15, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
*On second thought, '''go ahead and delete''', not as funny as User vandal. — '''[[User:Philwelch|Phil]]''' ''[[User_talk:Philwelch|Welch]]'' <small>[[User:Katefan0/Poll|Are you a fan of the band Rush?]]</small> 07:05, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nom and per [[encyclopedia]]. --[[User:Pjacobi|Pjacobi]] 09:31, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
 
<hr style="margin-top:1em; margin-bottom:1em;" />
=== January 12 ===
==== [[Template:User edit warrior]] ====
I'm generally in favor of giving Wikipedians a lot of latitude on user content, but this goes a bit too far, IMO. Edit warring is [[Wikipedia:Edit war|specifically discouraged]], and I'd rather we did not have a template which specifically advocates behavior harmful to the Wikipedia community. (This is a bit different than {{tl|User allow fairuse}}, which was mostly argued based on disputed legal issues.) We don't have {{tl|User vandal}} or {{tl|User POV pusher}}, so I don't think we should have this either. <TT>[[User:Crotalus horridus|Crotalus horridus]] <SMALL>([[User talk:Crotalus horridus|TALK]] • [[Special:Contributions/Crotalus horridus|CONTRIBS]])</SMALL></TT> 21:12, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*I agree here, specifically advocatign violating policy, or claiming to be a violator, is different from advocating changing policy. '''Delete'''. [[User:DESiegel|DES]] [[User talk:DESiegel|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 21:25, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*Makes it easier to find and control them. '''Keep'''. — '''[[User:Philwelch|Phil]]''' ''[[User_talk:Philwelch|Welch]]'' <small>[[User:Katefan0/Poll|Are you a fan of the band Rush?]]</small> 21:35, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''''Delete''''', as per Ch. [[User:E Pluribus Anthony|E Pluribus Anthony]] | [[User talk:E Pluribus Anthony|''talk'']] | 21:37, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Weak Delete'''. Yes, I see it as a POV, but it does have some devaluation of Wikipedia Policy involved. [[User:Ian13|Ian]]<sup>[[User_talk:Ian13|13]]</sup><sub>ID:540053</sub> 21:42, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Weak Keep'''. Freedom of speech is involved here, I believe. Merely saying that a person is an edit warrior does not make him an edit warrior, just like how a person doesn't become an admin just because he said he is an admin. Yes, it does devaluate the rules a little bit, but if they do it, we catch them. We cannot prevent people from discussing their beliefs on their own page. [[User:Arbiteroftruth|Arbiteroftruth]] 22:03, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
**'''Comment''' If the template said "This user advocates changing Wikipedia policy to allow edit warring", I wouldn't have nominated it. The only problem I have with it is that it amounts to a confession of deliberately violating Wikipedia guidelines. <TT>[[User:Crotalus horridus|Crotalus horridus]] <SMALL>([[User talk:Crotalus horridus|TALK]] • [[Special:Contributions/Crotalus horridus|CONTRIBS]])</SMALL></TT> 22:06, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nom. --[[User:Pjacobi|Pjacobi]] 22:12, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nom. [[User:JYolkowski|JYolkowski]] // [[User talk:JYolkowski|talk]] 22:22, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' &mdash; This could be useful for admins, just for them to block everyone using this box for edit warring :) <sub>→<font style="color:#975612">[[User:AzaToth|Aza]]</font><font style="color:#325596">[[User_talk:AzaToth|Toth]]</font></sub> 22:25, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
**Thisa is not formatted like a warnign template (of which we already have many, see {{tl|TestTemplate}}), and strioctly speakign beign an edit warrior is not a blockable offense anyway. If soemone thinks we need a warnign template specifically about edit warring that is disruptive enough to be blockable, fine, but this isn't that template. [[User:DESiegel|DES]] [[User talk:DESiegel|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 23:05, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
***Hehe, I was merly ironic, I ment, let the warriors mark themselve, so the sdmins don't need to look after them. :-) <sub>→<font style="color:#975612">[[User:AzaToth|Aza]]</font><font style="color:#325596">[[User_talk:AzaToth|Toth]]</font></sub> 01:52, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong delete''' - no sign of humorous intent in this template (which would be its only saving grace IMO), and it advertises breaking policy. Claiming to be an admin falsely is not kosher, either. I'm sure the Userbox Cabal will come right in telling me I'm trampling all over their fun, however... -- [[User:Nae'blis|nae'blis]] <i><sub>[[User_talk:Nae'blis|(talk)]]</sub></i> 22:59, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' Editors can say anything they want about themselves on their own user pages. The only thing deleting this template will do is reduce the transparency of Wikipedia. --[[User:Peace Inside|Peace Inside]] 23:11, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''BJAODN''' --[[User:Phroziac|Phroziac]] <sub>.</sub> <small>o</small> º<sup> O ([[User talk:Phroziac|♥♥♥♥ chocolate!]])</sup> 23:19, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. In a perfect Wikipedia, there would never be a need for edit warriors. But even in this Wikipedia, quite different from that imaginary perfect one, an editor ''defining him or herself'' as an edit warrior is on the wrong track. -- [[User:Antaeus Feldspar|Antaeus Feldspar]] 23:30, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Comment'''. Speedied by [[User:MarkSweep]]. [[User:Jkelly|Jkelly]] 23:35, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
** I was just about to say that myself. If anyone is looking for me, I'll be at an undisclosed ___location. Thank you. --[[User:MarkSweep|MarkSweep]]&nbsp;<small>[[User talk:MarkSweep|(call me collect)]]</small> 23:39, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*Speedied out of process, so I re-created it and changed it to a more inoffensive, ironic wording:
<div style="float: left; border:solid red 1px; margin: 1px;">
{| cellspacing="0" style="width: 238px; background: CRIMSON;"
| style="width: 45px; height: 45px; background: white; text-align: center; font-size: 8pt; color: lightgrey;" | '''[[Image:foilfen.gif|45px]]'''
| style="font-size: 8pt; padding: 0pt; padding-left: 4px; line-height: 1.25em; color: black;" |This user is an '''edit warrior,''' using frequent Wikipedia editing as a weapon against ignorance. ('''This user does not [[Wikipedia:Edit war|edit war with other Wikipedians]] and finds the practice horrendous'''.)
|}</div>
I hope this is a suitable compromise. — '''[[User:Philwelch|Phil]]''' ''[[User_talk:Philwelch|Welch]]'' <small>[[User:Katefan0/Poll|Are you a fan of the band Rush?]]</small> 23:53, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 
; Multiple templates: If you are nominating multiple templates, choose a meaningful title for the discussion (like "[[Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2008 August 14#American films by decade|American films by decade templates]]"). Tag every template with {{Tlxs|Tfd|2=heading={{var|{{Gray|discussion title}}}}}} or {{Tlxs|Tfm|{{var|{{Gray|name of other template}}}}|3=heading={{var|{{Gray|discussion title}}}}}} instead of the versions given above, replacing <code>{{var|discussion title}}</code> with the title you chose (but still not changing the <code>PAGENAME</code> code).
: Minor comment: User vandal, user van and user POV pusher all exist and are not up for deletion ;D [[User:68.39.174.238|68.39.174.238]] 23:55, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
; Related categories: If including template-populated tracking categories in the TfD nomination, paste {{Tlx|Catfd|{{var|{{Gray|template name}}}}}} to the top of any categories that could be deleted as a result of the TfD, replacing <code>{{var|template name}}</code> with the name of the nominated template. (If you instead nominated multiple templates, use the meaningful title you chose earlier: {{Tlx|Catfd|2=header={{var|{{Gray|title of nomination}}}}}}.)
::I created those with similar ironic meanings. User vandal identifies someone as someone from the [[University of Idaho]], for instance. — '''[[User:Philwelch|Phil]]''' ''[[User_talk:Philwelch|Welch]]'' <small>[[User:Katefan0/Poll|Are you a fan of the band Rush?]]</small> 23:58, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
; TemplateStyles pages: If you are nominating [[WP:TemplateStyles|TemplateStyles]] pages, these templates won't work. Instead, paste this CSS comment to the top of the page:
*'''Emphatic Delete''': There is a good side to edit waring?? It is one thing having templates that are useless to this project, it is another having ones that glorify harmful behaviour. --[[User:Doc glasgow|Doc]] [[User talk:Doc glasgow|<sup>ask?</sup>]] 01:57, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
:<code>/* This template is being discussed in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy. Help reach a consensus at its entry: <nowiki>https://</nowiki>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/{{CURRENTYEAR}}_{{CURRENTMONTHNAME}}_{{CURRENTDAY}}#Template:{{var|{{Gray|template_name}}}}.css */</code>
*'''Delete''' per Doc glasgow. -- [[User:Ianbrown|Ian]] &equiv; [[User_talk:Ianbrown|talk]] 02:19, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' I completely agree with the nominator --[[User:Angelo.romano|Angelo]] 02:21, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' As the creator of the template in question, let me just say that it was in fact a joke. [[User:A.J.A.|A.J.A.]] 02:36, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
:Sorry, joke not appreciated. You have caused another pointless debate on an already tense issue, and wasted a lot of time. No cookies. --[[User:Doc glasgow|Doc]] [[User talk:Doc glasgow|<sup>ask?</sup>]] 02:47, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''For heavens sake'''', aint this userbox vs commonsense thing starting to be a nuisance? Couldnt Jim or someome save us from from this crap?
*'''Keep'' I agree with [[User:Peace Inside]]. --[[User:Falcorian|Falcorian]] | [[User talk:Falcorian|Talk]] 07:36, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
 
|- id="Step II"
==== [[Template:User against Saud]] ====
! scope="row" style="background-color: #ffcc00;" | Step 2
I speedied this as having as its sole purpose an attack on the Saudi government, calling for its overthrow. On discussion in [[WP:DRV]], this was rejected as a speedy deletion and so I have undeleted and list it here for deletion. --[[User:Tony Sidaway|Tony Sidaway]]|[[User talk:Tony Sidaway|Talk]] 18:42, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
List the template
*'''Keep''': Reasonable political statement against a brutal regime. Free speech on user pages. Suggest that the nominator's time would be better spent fixing [[Hyundai Motor Company]]'s NPOV problems. — '''[[User:Philwelch|Phil]]''' ''[[User_talk:Philwelch|Welch]]'' <small>[[User:Katefan0/Poll|Are you a fan of the band Rush?]]</small> 18:52, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
| style="padding: 0.75em;" | {{Clickable button|Edit today's TfD log|url={{fullurl:Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/{{CURRENTYEAR}} {{CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{CURRENTDAY}}|action=edit&section=1}}|class=mw-ui-progressive}} '''and paste the following text to the top of the list''':
*'''Keep''' This and all similar templates until and unless a comprehensive policy on userboxes and/or "Attack templates" gains consensus approval. [[User:DESiegel|DES]] [[User talk:DESiegel|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 18:55, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*:Indeed we should develop such a policy and I hope we reach consensus. In that context I'd like to ask you what you think of the merits of this particular template? - [[User:Haukurth|Haukur]] 22:08, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' inappropriate use of Wikipedia resources. [[User:Jkelly|Jkelly]] 18:57, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''', as Phil and DES - [[User:Keithgreer|<strong>Keith Greer </strong>]] [[Image:Flag of Northern Ireland2.svg|30px]] 19:00, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' like everything that doesn't help writing an encyclopedia. --[[User:Pjacobi|Pjacobi]] 19:01, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. Free speech on user pages does not require pages in the template namespace. THis userbox provides no benefit to writing an encyclopedia. [[User:Carbonite|Carbonite]] | [[User talk:Carbonite|Talk]] 19:09, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', destructive templates. [[User:Christopher Parham|Christopher Parham]] [[User talk:Christopher Parham|(talk)]] 19:10, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. Inappropriate use of template space. &mdash; [[User:Knowledge Seeker|Knowledge Seeker]] [[User talk:Knowledge Seeker|&#2470;]] 19:14, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*<strike>'''Strong Keep''': If one cannot speak out against useless decadent, hereditary tyrants, then what is free speech for? --[[User:Dtasripin|Daniel]] 19:16, 12 January 2006 (UTC)</strike> '''Strongest possible delete'''. End of story. --[[User:Dtasripin|Daniel]] 04:19, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
:::Why the change of heart?[[User:Maprov|Maprov]]
:::If we're all allowed to make random decisions on the acceptability of free speech, then I'm allowed to be totally inconsistent in the manner I vote from hour to hour. --[[User:Dtasripin|Daniel]] 06:23, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
**Why do you require a template to speak out (on this or any other topic)? [[User:Carbonite|Carbonite]] | [[User talk:Carbonite|Talk]] 19:21, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
<strike>***That's a far more general question than the one presented here. The question is not whether POV userboxes should be banned, it's whether a ''particular'' POV userbox should be banned. There is nothing in this particular userbox that is different from many other POV userboxes (many of them against something or other). The only thing different is the target of the attack, the Saudi royal family. Being a believer in the somewhat antiquated idea of equal protection under law - then if other POV userboxes attacking anarchism, Marxism, monarchism, and racism, are allowed then this one is as well.--[[User:Dtasripin|Daniel]] 19:42, 12 January 2006 (UTC)</strike> People have made a decision, I guess, and I'm willing to abide by it for the sake of consensus. --[[User:Dtasripin|Daniel]] 04:19, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
****I raised the question in response to your comment, which implied that the deletion of this template would in some way prevent you from speaking out against useless decadents and hereditary tyrants. I'm just having a difficult time understanding why some users (perhaps you're not included in this group) equate a template with free speech. To me, POV userboxes reduce everyone's opinion to the level of a bumper sticker. This template doesn't even provide rationale for ''why'' "''This user thinks the House of Saud should be overthrown.''" Instead of promoting free speech, these POV userboxes promote [[McDonaldization|McOpinions]]. [[User:Carbonite|Carbonite]] | [[User talk:Carbonite|Talk]] 19:57, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
<strike>***That's a fine opinion, if you were calling for the end of POV userboxes in general. Or even if you were calling for the end of POV "attack" boxes. However, <strike>you</strike> Tony picked out two targets - ones attacking the Nepali and Saudi royal families. Not the ones attacking, say, Marxism or pacifism or Microsoft.
***As for your dismissal of "McOpinions" - since when was this an elitist institution? Wikipedia is supposed to be by the masses, for the masses. If you're afraid of the political sentiments of the masses, perhaps it's time to change this to a subscriber/editors-only service. --[[User:Dtasripin|Daniel]] 20:34, 12 January 2006 (UTC)</strike> I guess there are some merits to the Ivory Tower approach to Wikipedia. --[[User:Dtasripin|Daniel]] 04:19, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
****Well, I actually would like to see the end of POV userboxes in general. I'd especially like to see the end of userboxes that exist solely to attack a person or group. As for targeting certain POVs, I haven't voted on any Nepali userbox, so perhaps you're confusing me with another user? [[User:Carbonite|Carbonite]] | [[User talk:Carbonite|Talk]] 20:51, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
***Sorry, that comment was aimed at Tony. <strike>But at any rate: I'm of the opinion that our userbox policy be a) a universal ban, b) a ban that can be consistently enforced, or c) freedom of speech. While those questions are still sorted, it's inappropriate to target a few individual userboxes while not punishing comparable ones. --[[User:Dtasripin|Daniel]] 21:11, 12 January 2006 (UTC)</strike>
**Because a member of the House of Saud could be one of your fellow editors right now, and creating a welcoming atmosphere for editors is one of Wikipedia's hallmarks? Thus we should remove pointlessly incendiary templates. [[User:Christopher Parham|Christopher Parham]] [[User talk:Christopher Parham|(talk)]] 20:24, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
<strike>***Wikipedia has no law shielding the already over-privileged Saudi royals from criticism. If one were a member of the House of Saud, you'd be offended by any number of things on Wikipedia: women having the right to speak out of turn, people pointing out that you have no divine right to rule over other Arabs, et cetera et cetera. --[[User:Dtasripin|Daniel]] 21:24, 12 January 2006 (UTC)</strike>
*'''Delete'''. I, for one, draw the userbox line at "inciting revolution". [[User:Lord Bob|Lord Bob]] 19:39, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strongest Possible Keep'''. As far as I am aware, nothing in current policy precludes using the template system for expressing opinions on user pages, and frankly, censoring expressions of opinion is chillingly paternalistic. [[User:Nohat|Nohat]] 20:12, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' [[User:Musical Linguist|AnnH]] [[User talk:Musical Linguist|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 20:36, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Speedy Delete''' as per Lord Bob and others. [[User:Guettarda|Guettarda]] 20:39, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*I applaud Tony for undeleting the template and taking it here. I'm fine with contributors expressing their political viewpoints in their own words on their userpages. But I think it makes the project look silly to use its resources to mass-produce stickers with standardized opinion statements. It gives people the wrong idea about what this place is all about. I would thus like to vote '''delete''' but I would like even better to come to some sort of understanding with those who want these templates. - [[User:Haukurth|Haukur]] 20:41, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
<strike>** If you don't like the idea of userboxes then you are perfectly free '''not to use them.''' --[[User:Dtasripin|Daniel]] 20:54, 12 January 2006 (UTC)</strike>
*** I know, and I really don't want to force my views on others which is why I'm saying I want to know why you want these templates around and also why I voted for their undeletion at [[WP:DRV]] so we could discuss them here. I'm trying to make the case for why individually written political statements would be better both for the people who want to express themselves and for the project itself. - [[User:Haukurth|Haukur]] 22:54, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*<s>'''Delete''' or '''Tone Down.'''</s> "Overthrow" is a bit too strong. You can be opposed to the House of Saud, but calling for a revolution is over the limit. - [[User:Cuivienen|Cuivienen]] 20:44, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
**<s>I've [[WP:BOLD|been bold]] and changed the wording. I now vote '''Keep''' on the new version.</s> '''Strong Delete'''. See [[:Template:user against Saud2]], which should be moved in to replace this. - [[User:Cuivienen|Cuivienen]] 20:50, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''', within the boundaries of acceptability for userspace content, IMO. [[WP:NPOV]] applies to articles, not userpages. I also think the rewording to make it less inflammatory was a good idea. <TT>[[User:Crotalus horridus|Crotalus horridus]] <SMALL>([[User talk:Crotalus horridus|TALK]] • [[Special:Contributions/Crotalus horridus|CONTRIBS]])</SMALL></TT> 20:51, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
<strike>:::Doing that when no consensus has been reached is a breach of good faith. This is a jury that is still deliberating; it is inappropriate to unilaterally act as judge and executioner. --[[User:Dtasripin|Daniel]] 21:00, 12 January 2006 (UTC)</strike>
::::I'm not aware of any policy that says we can't edit templates or pages while they're nominated for deletion. In fact, such edits are often encouraged if they result in an increased quality and therefore an increased likelihood of Keep. If you disagree, you are of course free to revert the edit in question. <TT>[[User:Crotalus horridus|Crotalus horridus]] <SMALL>([[User talk:Crotalus horridus|TALK]] • [[Special:Contributions/Crotalus horridus|CONTRIBS]])</SMALL></TT> 21:03, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
<strike>:::I did revert it. --[[User:Dtasripin|Daniel]] 21:17, 12 January 2006 (UTC)</strike>
::::I have reverted thsi to the edited version. By reverting an edit for no reason you are the one violating good faith. See [[User:Crotalus horridus|Crotalus horridus]]. - [[User:Cuivienen|Cuivienen]] 23:28, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
<strike>:::Do you see any final consensus here? No. Acting as if your decision is the final consensus is an act of bad faith against this forum.
:::Moreover, this is an issue of personal free speech - do you know, for a fact, that people who have run this userbox are willing to settle for merely "oppposing" the House of Saud, when they in fact they added the template to their Talk pages when it was written "support the overthrow"? If you didn't, then why not simply go and vandalize their Talk Pages while you're at it?
:::I'm reverting this back to "support the overthrow" until this matter is settled. In the meantime, "oppose the rule of" is at [[Template:User against Saud2]] --[[User:Dtasripin|Daniel]] 01:35, 13 January 2006 (UTC)</strike>
::::You should make yourself more aware of conventions. Editing a template (or an article, or anything else) up for deletion to make it more acceptable is an accepted and encouraged practice. Your unwillingness to cooperate is not going to make you many friends. As it stands, it is clear that the consensus will be against you, and I would recommend that you retire with some dignity and agree to the changes. - [[User:Cuivienen|Cuivienen]] 03:21, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', of course. What a waste of time. --[[User:Ngb|Nick Boalch]]<sup> [[User_talk:Ngb|?!?]]</sup> 20:55, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' - nonconstructive use of template namespace --- [[User:Chalst|Charles Stewart]] 21:06, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. [[user:violetriga|violet/riga]] [[User_talk:violetriga|(t)]] 21:21, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. What, we can have "serial comma" userboxes but not political ones? The whole concept is stupid, but since the others are allowed, it's retarded to not allow this one. [[User:Avriette|Avriette]] 21:27, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. Unproductive use of template space. Some user badges handy and useful, but this isn't one of them. --[[User:NormanEinstein|NormanEinstein]] 21:31, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''''Delete''''' Political. [[User:E Pluribus Anthony|E Pluribus Anthony]] | [[User talk:E Pluribus Anthony|''talk'']] | 21:38, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' Opposing a dictatorial regime with an appalling human rights record is perfectly justifiable. Why shouldn't people be able to admit to holding such a view? [[User:Jtdirl|<span style="color:#006666; background-color:orange">'''Fear''ÉIREANN'''''</span>]][[Image:Ireland-Capitals.PNG|15px]]\<sup><font color="blue">[[User talk:Jtdirl|(caint)]]</font></sup> 21:43, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*:They should. And they should even be allowed to do so on their userpages on Wikipedia. All we're saying (well all ''I'm'' saying, anyhow) is that they don't need a standardized sticker to do so. If anything it cheapens the value of the protest. - [[User:Haukurth|Haukur]] 22:05, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' doesn't serve any encyclopedic purpose (subst: into your userspace if you want) --[[User:Doc glasgow|Doc]] [[User talk:Doc glasgow|<sup>ask?</sup>]] 22:09, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', I'm fine with people mentioning things like this on their userpage, but we don't need a template in the template namespace to do so. [[User:JYolkowski|JYolkowski]] // [[User talk:JYolkowski|talk]] 22:27, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. Wikipedia is not your car. Please apply your bumperstickers elsewhere. [[User:Android79|<span style="color: green">android</span>]][[User talk:Android79|<span style="color: purple">79</span>]] 22:29, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strongest possible keep''' per <strike>Daniel</strike> above.[[User:Benami|Benami]] 22:39, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Neutral'''. A week ago I was pretty generous about POV userboxes, but stuff like this has me thinking otherwise. I am now leaning towards an idea that a template userbox should either directly aid in the writing of an encyclopdia, or contribute constructively to building a community of editors. That is still a pretty broad definition, but I do not see how this box does either one. I am not suggesting banning such non-template userbox on userpages. In fact, in the Spirit of 1776, I am all for dumping hereditary rulers. Still, I can't say I actually support template space for userboxes ''against'' things, it just does not feel constructive. &mdash; [[User:Eoghanacht|<font color="green">''Eoghanacht''</font>]] <sup>[[User_talk:Eoghanacht|<font color="gray">talk</font>]]</sup> 22:53, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' Editors can say anything they want about themselves on their own user pages. The only thing deleting this template will do is reduce the transparency of Wikipedia. --[[User:Peace Inside|Peace Inside]] 23:13, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' Attack template. Should have been speedied. DRV is obviously out to lunch. [[User:Kelly Martin|Kelly Martin]] ([[User talk:Kelly Martin|talk]]) 23:15, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
::Is that one of those attacks where people hold a gun to their own head? --[[User:Peace Inside|Peace Inside]] 23:22, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' crap. --[[User:Phroziac|Phroziac]] <sub>.</sub> <small>o</small> º<sup> O ([[User talk:Phroziac|♥♥♥♥ chocolate!]])</sup> 23:20, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per Carbonite. <small>[[User:Cdc|CDC]] [[User talk:Cdc|(talk)]]</small> 00:25, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' - nothing to do with WP. -- [[User:Ianbrown|Ian]] &equiv; [[User_talk:Ianbrown|talk]] 02:21, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Weak delete''' I normally accept and use userboxes, even if non-neutral, but now I'm seeing a dangerous growth of "way too POV" ones. There must be a limit for POVism, I think, and userboxes like this clearly get over it. --[[User:Angelo.romano|Angelo]] 02:26, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' I would like to think userboxes can convey any message. But I must point out that at least one anti-Bush userbox -
<div style="float:left;border:solid #ffb3b3 1px;margin:1px">
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#ffe0e8"
| style="width:45px;height:45px;background:#ffb3b3;text-align:center;font-size:10pt" | [[image:George-W-Bush.jpeg|44px|George W. Bush]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em" | This '''[[:Category:Wikipedians who dislike George W. Bush|user]]''' believes that [[George W. Bush]]'s [[USA PATRIOT Act|edits to the constitution]] need to be [[Movement to impeach George W. Bush|reverted]].
|}</div>
<br /><br /><br /><br />
:- has been deleted. If this opinionated userbox can be deleted, there is no reason why an equally useless and insulting box like the one in question should be deleted. [[User:Joturner|joturner]] 02:40, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
The template above has been speedily deleted out of process even though it has popular support. It is currently thrown in with other similar templates for undeletion at the DRV page. '''Keep''' freespeech in wikipedia.--'''[[User:God_of_War|God of]][[User Talk:God_of_War| War]]''' 03:48, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong Keep''' per all userboxes until the userbox hunt ends. Wikipedia is [[WP:NOT]] censored.[[User:Karmafist|karmafist]] 04:31, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
**I believe you are reading that policy incorrectly. It reads in full "Wikipedia is not censored ''for the protection of minors''" (emphasis mine). Wikipedia explicitly is censored in other ways, such as policies to prevent and remove personal attacks, as well as ''x''fD, where ''x'' can be anything. [[User:Lord Bob|Lord Bob]] 05:06, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Super Strong Keep''' Stop attacking Userboxes, people can still write this POv message on their userpage without a userbox. [[User:DaGizza|<b><font color="darkblue"> D</font><font color="teal">a</font><font color="lightblue">Gizza</font></b>]]''<sup><font color="orange">[[User_talk:DaGizza|Chat]]</font></sup>'' <sup><b><font color="gold">[[Special:Contributions/DaGizza|(c)]]</font></b></sup> 04:59, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. Inappropriate use of template space. -- [[User:SCZenz|SCZenz]] 05:06, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep Strong Strong Keep'''. I'm getting very tired of this same argument again and again. POV userboxes are allowed, free speech should not be censored. Judging by the number of delete votes suggesting ''"waste of resources"'' & ''"Inappropriate use of template space"'' (thats a new one) '''this looks a lot like vote stacking to me!''' &mdash;[[User:Gorgan almighty|gorgan_almighty]] 10:18, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong Keep''' because (1) it is reasonable political statement against a brutal regime, and (2)
it saves wikispace! Against Saud means: against torture, religious fundamentalism, absolute monarchism, extreme poverty, racism, sexism, the oil industry, the secrecy around the perverted love relation between the Bush clan and Saud clan, etc. etc. See how many userboxes are summerized in one if you would use this one? -- [[User:ActiveSelective|ActiveSelective]] 10:39, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
 
* '''For deletion:''' {{Tlxs|Tfd2|{{var|{{Gray|template name}}}}|text{{=}}{{var|{{Gray|Why you think the template should be deleted.}}}} <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>}}
==== [[Template:sfd-current]] ====
* '''For merging:''' {{Tlxs|Tfm2|{{var|{{Gray|template name}}}}|{{var|{{Gray|other template's name}}}}|text{{=}}{{var|{{Gray|Why you think the templates should be merged.}}}} <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>}}
Template formerly used by [[Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion]] to announce on TFD and CFD what stub templates and categories were nominated for deletion. Not used over a month (it even says on it that it's been deprecated), and not likely to be needed again. '''Delete'''. [[User:Grutness|Grutness]]...''<small><font color="#008822">[[User_talk:Grutness|wha?]]</font></small>'' 06:56, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' as per nom. [[User:Conscious|Conscious]] 10:33, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*Why has this been deprecated? I think it was useful in keeping the variopus deletion processes infomed of what was going on at SfD? [[User:DESiegel|DES]] [[User talk:DESiegel|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 15:45, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
** Probably because it was tedious to keep it updated. It served it's purposed when stub-templates were split from this page, so I vote '''delete''' -- [[User:Netoholic|Netoholic]] [[User talk:Netoholic|@]] 17:37, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
***see [[Wikipedia talk:Templates for deletion#SFD]] - also it looks like it was only intended to be a temporary thing while sfd was getting established (see [[Wikipedia talk:Templates for deletion/archive2#Stub types for deletion]]). '''delete'''. <font color="red">[[User:BL Lacertae|BL]]</font> <small><font color="#555555">[[User talk:BL Lacertae|kiss the lizard]]</font></small> 23:09, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' Did it's job well, but not needed or used any more. --[[User:TheParanoidOne|TheParanoidOne]] 20:53, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nom --[[User:Loopy|Loopy]] <sup>[[WP:EA|<font color="green">e</font>]]</sup> 21:21, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nomination. --[[User:Lbmixpro|LBMixPro]][[User talk:Lbmixpro|<sup>&lt;Sp</sup>]][[WP:EA|<font color="green"><sup>e</sup></font>]][[User talk:Lbmixpro|<sup>ak|on|it!&gt;</sup>]] 01:52, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nominator. -- [[User:Ianbrown|Ian]] &equiv; [[User_talk:Ianbrown|talk]] 02:15, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
 
If the template has had previous TfDs, you can add {{tlx|Oldtfdlist|{{var|{{Gray|previous TfD without square brackets}}}}|{{var|{{Gray|result of previous TfD}}}}}} in the {{para|text}} field immediately before your rationale (or alternatively at the very end, after the last <code><nowiki>}}</nowiki></code>).
==== [[Template:Image source]] ====
{{tln|image source}}<br />
'''Delete and redirect''' — This template is redundant with [[Template:Image copyright]], originally created by the same author a few days apart and since expanded. // [[User:Pathoschild|Pathoschild]] 08:12, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''Del and redirect''' Per nom [[User:DaGizza|<b><font color="darkblue"> D</font><font color="teal">a</font><font color="lightblue">Gizza</font></b>]]''<sup><font color="orange">[[User_talk:DaGizza|Chat]]</font></sup>'' <sup><b><font color="gold">[[Special:Contributions/DaGizza|(c)]]</font></b></sup> 11:51, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''', this is for source, the other is for license... just like we have [[Template:No source]] and [[Template:No license]]. Right? [[User:Grenavitar|gren]] [[User talk:Grenavitar|グレン]] <sup>[[Wikipedia:Limited administrators|?]]</sup> 14:57, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' as per [[User:Grenavitar|gren]]. [[User:DESiegel|DES]] [[User talk:DESiegel|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 15:31, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Just redirect''', seriously, why even bother with a vote? It's got lots of internal links, and a useful history. -- [[User:Netoholic|Netoholic]] [[User talk:Netoholic|@]] 17:40, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
**Why redirect? why not just keep? This is not redundant as per the nom, it is for a different albiet related case. The two could be merged, just as {{tl|Nosource}} and {{tl|No license}} could be mreged, but there would be a loss of precision and no particular gain IMO. Why Redir? [[User:DESiegel|DES]] [[User talk:DESiegel|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 18:59, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' per Gren --[[User:Loopy|Loopy]] <sup>[[WP:EA|<font color="green">e</font>]]</sup> 21:22, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' as per [[User:Grenavitar|gren]]. [[User:Zzyzx11|Zzyzx11]] [[User talk:Zzyzx11|(Talk)]] 01:05, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
 
Use an edit summary such as <code>Adding deletion/merger nomination of <nowiki>[[</nowiki>Template:{{var|{{Gray|template name}}}}<nowiki>]]</nowiki></code>.
==== [[Template:CompTIA]] ====
{{tln|CompTIA}}<br />
'''Delete''' — I have merged all the CompTIA certification stubs into [[CompTIA]]. This is the navigation box for those and is no longer needed. See also [[WP:CFD#Category:CompTIA]]. <span class="user-sig user-Quarl"><i>&mdash;[[User:Quarl|Quarl]] <sup>([[User Talk:Quarl|talk]])</sup> <small>[[2006-01-12]]&nbsp;06:26[[ISO 8601|Z]]</small></i></span>
* '''Delete''' -- [[User:Netoholic|Netoholic]] [[User talk:Netoholic|@]] 17:47, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nom --[[User:Loopy|Loopy]] <sup>[[WP:EA|<font color="green">e</font>]]</sup> 21:23, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nominator. -- [[User:Ianbrown|Ian]] &equiv; [[User_talk:Ianbrown|talk]] 02:23, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nom -- [[User:DaGizza|<b><font color="darkblue"> D</font><font color="teal">a</font><font color="lightblue">Gizza</font></b>]]''<sup><font color="orange">[[User_talk:DaGizza|Chat]]</font></sup>'' <sup><b><font color="gold">[[Special:Contributions/DaGizza|(c)]]</font></b></sup> 05:06, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
 
<hr style="margin-top:1em; margin-bottom:1em;" />
=== January 11 ===
==== [[Template:Oldvfd]] ====
{{tln|Oldvfd}}<br />
'''Delete''' — Obsolete and now unused. —[[User:Phil Boswell|Phil]] | [[User talk:Phil Boswell|Talk]] 19:07, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
 
; Multiple templates: If you are nominating multiple templates, paste the following code instead. You can add up to 50 template names (separated by vertical bar characters <code>|</code>). Use the same meaningful title that you chose in Step 1.
*'''Delete.''' Obsolete. - [[User:Cuivienen|Cuivienen]] 20:40, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
:* Multiple templates for deletion: {{Tlxs|Tfd2|{{var|{{Gray|template name 1}}}}|{{var|{{Gray|template name 2 ...}}}}|title{{=}}{{var|{{Gray|meaningful title}}}}|text{{=}}{{var|{{Gray|Why you think the templates should be deleted.}}}} <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>}}
*'''Delete.''' Per nomination. [[User:Schuminweb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User_talk:Schuminweb|Talk]]) 06:02, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
:* Multiple templates for merging: {{Tlxs|Tfm2|{{var|{{Gray|template name 1}}}}|{{var|{{Gray|template name 2 ...}}}}|with{{=}}{{var|{{Gray|main template (optional)}}}}|title{{=}}{{var|{{Gray|meaningful title}}}}|text{{=}}{{var|{{Gray|Why you think the templates should be merged.}}}} <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>}}
*'''Delete''' Per nom [[User:DaGizza|<b><font color="darkblue"> D</font><font color="teal">a</font><font color="lightblue">Gizza</font></b>]]''<sup><font color="orange">[[User_talk:DaGizza|Chat]]</font></sup>'' <sup><b><font color="gold">[[Special:Contributions/DaGizza|(c)]]</font></b></sup> 11:49, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
:** If there is a template you want the other templates to be merged into, you can optionally specify it using {{para|with}}.
*'''Delete'''. <TT>[[User:Crotalus horridus|Crotalus horridus]] <SMALL>([[User talk:Crotalus horridus|TALK]] • [[Special:Contributions/Crotalus horridus|CONTRIBS]])</SMALL></TT> 18:13, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
; Related categories: If this template deletion proposal involves a category populated solely by templates, paste this code in the {{para|text}} field of the <code><nowiki>{{Tfd2}}</nowiki></code> template, before your rationale: {{Tlxs|Catfd2|{{var|{{Gray|category name}}}}}}
*[[Template talk:Oldvfd]] contains useful discussion and should be retained, perhaps as [[Template talk:Oldafd]]. [[User:Uncle G|Uncle G]] 19:20, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
|- id="Step III"
**Done. — '''[[User:Philwelch|Phil]]''' ''[[User_talk:Philwelch|Welch]]'' <small>[[User:Katefan0/Poll|Are you a fan of the band Rush?]]</small> 00:02, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
! scope="row" style="background-color: orange" | Step 3
*'''Delete''' per nom --[[User:Loopy|Loopy]] <sup>[[WP:EA|<font color="green">e</font>]]</sup> 21:24, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Notify users
*'''Redirect''' just like what we did when we renamed all the '''V'''FD pages and dicussions to '''A'''FD. And as per [[User:Uncle G|Uncle G]], [[Template talk:Oldvfd]] contains useful discussion and should be retained. [[User:Zzyzx11|Zzyzx11]] [[User talk:Zzyzx11|(Talk)]] 01:02, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
| style="padding: 0.5em;" | Notify the creator of the template, the main contributors, and (if you're proposing a merger) the creator of the other template. (To find them, look in the [[Help:Page history|page history]] or [[Help:Talk page|talk page]] of the template.) To do this, paste one of the following in their user talk pages:
 
* '''For deletion:''' {{Tlxs|Tfd notice|{{var|{{Gray|template name}}}}}} <code><nowiki>~~~~</nowiki></code>
====[[Template:User allboxes]]====
* '''For merging:''' {{Tlxs|Tfm notice|{{var|{{Gray|template name}}}}|{{var|{{Gray|other template's name}}}}}} <code><nowiki>~~~~</nowiki></code>
{{tln|User allboxes}}<br />
* '''Multiple templates:''' There is no template for notifying an editor about a multiple-template nomination. In these cases, write a personal message.
The purpose of this template is to stack consultations against anti-userbox deletions, disciplinary actions, and changes to policy. It subverts the attempt to find reasoned positions in these processes into tug of wars, or in brief, it is disruptive. Templates expressing support for userboxes in a non-disruptive manner exist, for example, [[Template:Userbox Love]]. The template should be '''delete'''d. --- [[User:Chalst|Charles Stewart]] 18:44, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Nom edited''': I missed a ''non-'' before ''disruptive'' when talking about [[Template:Userbox Love]], which I think is a good template for expressing support for userboxes. Sorry about this. --- [[User:Chalst|Charles Stewart]] 20:40, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' A user should be allowed to state they are in favour of userboxes. This does so. If I notice a userbox expressing an opposite viewpoint, my vote will be the same. This is a comment on a wikipedia phenomenon. As I understand it, this is not only possible, but encouraged. This is after all, a collaborative project and such projects encourage feeback, even if said feedback may be interpreted as negative in content. - [[User:Hayter|Hayter]] 19:06, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
:*This opinion can be expressed in a non-disruptive manner with [[Template:Userbox Love]]. Templates can be used for vote-stacking, which is highly discouraged: the emphasis on intent to vote separates this bad template from the love template. --- [[User:Chalst|Charles Stewart]] 20:43, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
::I fail to see how this is disruptive, certainly I fail to see how it is more disruptive that the example you provide as an alternative. If it's the inclusion of a category, one need only check the 'what links here' list to find the users who use the box. That aside, not everyone likes pink. - [[User:Hayter|Hayter]] 21:34, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' per Hayter. &mdash;[[User:Andux|Andux]] 19:14, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Very strong keep'''. 'Nuff said. &mdash;[[User:Cjmarsicano|CJ Marsicano]] 19:20, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' per Hayter - [[User:Keithgreer|<strong>Keith Greer </strong>]] [[Image:Flag of Northern Ireland2.svg|30px]] 19:22, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. Definately that userbox love. What's disruptive about that?? I can possible see some people thinking User allboxes as disruptive, but it doesn't actually attack anyone either. -- [[user:Sneltrekker|Sneltrekker]]<small>'''†'''[[User_talk:Sneltrekker|My Talk]]</small> 19:36, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
**This TfD nom does not make the false claim that the template is an attack template, but instead I claim that it is tailor made for vote-stacking. --- [[User:Chalst|Charles Stewart]] 20:37, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong keep'''. May I highlight the word '''''rampant''''', if its not rampant, then it should be voted upon how the user so wishes. [[User:Ian13|Ian]]<sup>[[User_talk:Ian13|13]]</sup><sub>ID:540053</sub> 20:30, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Super Glue.''' Stating an opinion in a userbox should not be a problem. This crusade really has to stop. - [[User:Cuivienen|Cuivienen]] 20:37, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' and ban all users with a stupid userbox on their page. [[user:violetriga|violet/riga]] [[User_talk:violetriga|(t)]] 20:46, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' (and ban stupid threats like that directly above). [[User:Jtdirl|<span style="color:#006666; background-color:orange">'''Fear''ÉIREANN'''''</span>]][[Image:Ireland-Capitals.PNG|15px]]\<sup><font color="blue">[[User talk:Jtdirl|(caint)]]</font></sup> 21:28, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*A userbox created in an attempt to form a voting bloc to protest the deletion of userboxes that attempt to form voting blocs... the mind boggles. '''Delete'''. &mdash;[[User:Cryptic|Cryptic]] [[User talk:Cryptic|(talk)]] 22:00, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' the template, as User POV is allowed. (I do wonder about the [[:Category:Users who support userboxes]] as encouraging voter canvassing -- but as I know of no policy against informing interested parties of votes, I see no crime in it.) &mdash; [[User:Eoghanacht|<font color="green">''Eoghanacht''</font>]] <sup>[[User_talk:Eoghanacht|<font color="gray">talk</font>]]</sup> 22:08, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' How on earth is this supposed to form a voting bloc, when the only way I even knew it existed was when I saw this TfD? ''[[User:Csernica|TCC]]'' <small>[[User_talk:Csernica|(talk)]] [[Special:Contributions/Csernica|(contribs)]]</small> 23:06, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' [[User:Station Attendant|Station Attendant]] 23:29, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' as we should any and all userboxes. --[[User:Dschor|Dschor]] 23:32, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''Keep''' [[User:Larix|Larix]] 00:31, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' and start a [[Wikipedia:Userboxes for deletion]] section where these petty squabbles can take place.--[[User:Ezeu|Ezeu]] 00:37, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Speedy Delete''' as ungood '''[[crimethink]]''' and replace with this:{{userbox|honeydew|mintcream|[[Image:face icon bland.jpg]]|This user does '''[[opinion|not have an opinion]]''' about '''[[anything]]'''.}} [[User:Herostratus|Herostratus]] 04:52, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' just let the people show their opinions about userboxes. --[[User:Angelo.romano|Angelo]] 04:59, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' but perhaps remove the category. Does the nom have evidence that this box is actually being used for vote stacking or is the nom just saying that maybe it might be? #wikipedia IRC might be used for vote stacking too, right? ++[[User:Lar|Lar]]: [[User_talk:Lar|t]]/[[Special:Contributions/Lar|c]] 05:47, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. No personal attack or anything. Remove the category, if you want. &mdash;[[User:Nightstallion|<span style="font-variant:small-caps">Nightstallion</span>]] [[User talk:Nightstallion|''(?)'']] 08:02, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong Keep'''. Well, what a surprise! Another userbox is up for deletion! Why don't people get it into there heads that userboxes are here for opinion, lots of people use them, people like them, they're not harming anyone, and they ''should not be deleted!". This is a huge waste of time. — [[User:Wackymacs|Wackymacs]] 08:04, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' and carefully watch the keepers. --[[User:Pjacobi|Pjacobi]] 11:41, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. I do not see this as in any way disruptive. [[User:DESiegel|DES]] [[User talk:DESiegel|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 15:56, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
**It advertises a clear intention to vote a particular way. It is the very picture of a vote-stacking template. I'm surprised you don't see the disruptive nature of this template. --- [[User:Chalst|Charles Stewart]]
*'''Keep''', no evidence of disruption. <TT>[[User:Crotalus horridus|Crotalus horridus]] <SMALL>([[User talk:Crotalus horridus|TALK]] • [[Special:Contributions/Crotalus horridus|CONTRIBS]])</SMALL></TT> 18:12, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strongest imaginable keep'''. Fer cryin' out loud, would y'all stop already with the campaign against userboxes? As others have said, there is no evidence of disruption.
*'''Comment''' I'm not surprised to see that for many participants find that the issue of freedom of expression trumps the risk of vote-stacking, but I'm very surprised that templates formulated in a manner explicitly inviting vote-stacking are not seen as being in any way disruptive (even to the extend of invoking the pinciple of not shutting barn doors unless the horse has already bolted). Are there any circumstances which keep voters think that vote-stacking templates should be deleted on the grounds of vote-stacking? --- [[User:Chalst|Charles Stewart]] 21:15, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
**I don't see this as "vote stacking" but rather as expressing an opnion on a currently debated issue of wikipedia policy. If someone wanted to argue for removing the category as possibly likely to lead to block voting, I could understand that. [[User:DESiegel|DES]] [[User talk:DESiegel|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 21:29, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
***Just to be clear: you think that ''<nowiki>This '''[[:Category:Users who support userboxes|user]]''' supports userboxes and '''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Userboxes/Alerts|votes]]''' to stop their rampant deletion.</nowiki>'' does not invite attention from people trying to stack polls to protect userboxes? --- [[User:Chalst|Charles Stewart]] 00:30, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
***'''Postscript''' I am assuming that you are aware that most (probably 2/3s of) people do not subst templates, and so they can provide an effective tool for vote-stacking. --- [[User:Chalst|Charles Stewart]] 00:33, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
*delete --[[User:Phroziac|Phroziac]] <sub>.</sub> <small>o</small> º<sup> O ([[User talk:Phroziac|♥♥♥♥ chocolate!]])</sup> 23:23, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' Anyone who would censor what other editors say about themselves on their own user pages cannot be trusted with administration or arbitration power. --[[User:Peace Inside|Peace Inside]] 00:54, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
 
If you see any [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Directory|WikiProjects]] banners ([[Template:WikiProject banner shell/testcases#Template|they look like this]]) at the top of the template's talk page, you can let them know about the discussion. Most WikiProjects are subscribed to [[Wikipedia:Article alerts|Article alerts]], which means they are automatically notified. If you think they have not been notified, you can paste the same message in the projects' talk pages, or use [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Compact|Deletion sorting lists]]. Note that Twinkle does not notify WikiProjects.
*'''Keep''' And stop those that would use the tfd to silence contrary opinions. I noticed that template [[Template:user noboxes]] has not been listed for deletion.--'''[[User:God_of_War|God of]][[User Talk:God_of_War| War]]''' 03:45, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
**The fact that that template exists is more than slightly ironic and is indicative of the ridiculousness of the position taken by the anti-userbox minority. - [[User:Cuivienen|Cuivienen]] 04:10, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' using [[MOAB]] and send remains (if any) to [[Yucca Mountain]]--[[User:MONGO|MONGO]] 06:13, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
*''Strongest Possible Keep'' I didn't find this through vote-stacking, I found it on my own, and now that I found it, I will put it on my page b/c it expresses my opinion. That is allowed on userpages, so why do people want to ban that now? I am disturbed by the number of people who want to delete any userbox that dares express a negative opinion of a person (such as King George W. Bush) or an idea. This isn't even all that negative. [[User:The Ungovernable Force|The Ungovernable Force]] 06:19, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
 
==== [[Template:Uncyclopedia]] ====
{{tln|Uncyclopedia}}<br />
This template is currently not used, nor should it be. It somehow survived a TfD debate [[Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/Not_deleted/September_2005#Template:_Uncyclopedia|here]].
* '''Delete'''. &mdash;''[[User:R.Koot|Ruud]]'' 12:13, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''Keep''', though possibly reword. I suspect this is designed to be used on the user talk pages of Uncyclopedia users who get their wires crossed. -- [[User:Nae'blis|nae'blis]] <i><sub>[[User_talk:Nae'blis|(talk)]]</sub></i> 13:46, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''Keep''' - this is for the talk pages of articles like [[Flying Spaghetti Monster]], whose humourous subject matter could tempt many to non-encyclopaedic updates. Surprised it's not more widely used. &mdash; [[User:ciphergoth|ciphergoth]] 13:50, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''': [[User:Wangi|wangi]] 14:12, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. NPOV does the job. [[User:Grenavitar|gren]] [[User talk:Grenavitar|グレン]] <sup>[[Wikipedia:Limited administrators|?]]</sup> 14:32, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''Delete''' NPOV covers it's use. If it had a use, it would have been used by now - [[Image:Union flag 1606 (Kings Colors).svg|20px|UK]] [[User:Bourbons3|'''«ßØÛ®ßÖѧ3»''']] <sup>[[User_talk:Bourbons3|T]] | [[special:contributions/Bourbons3|C]]</sup> 15:35, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete.''' --[[User:Stbalbach|Stbalbach]] 15:37, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. We don't need a template for this. If we did, we certainly wouldn't need one that includes a plug for a specific non-Wikimedia website (rather than referring to satirical wikis in general). &mdash;[[User:David Levy|David Levy]] 20:31, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep.''' It doesn't have to do with NPOV. This is useful for articles such as [[Flying Spaghetti Monster]] or [[Exploding whales]] that have a tendency to attract silly edits. - [[User:Cuivienen|Cuivienen]] 20:34, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. Firstly, uncyclopedia isn't all that famous. Secondly, the guidance the template offers is, or ought to be, common sense. Thirdly, it's unused. I think pages such as FSM have a large majority of sensible people around them who will prevent the page being hijacked by non-sensible editors. [[User:Dbiv|David]] | [[User talk:Dbiv|Talk]] 23:35, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' Useful for [[Flying Spaghetti Monster]] and others. Prevents silly and funny edits, not NPOV. [[User:DaGizza|<b><font color="darkblue"> D</font><font color="teal">a</font><font color="lightblue">Gizza</font></b>]]''<sup><font color="orange">[[User_talk:DaGizza|Chat]]</font></sup>'' <sup><b><font color="gold">[[Special:Contributions/DaGizza|(c)]]</font></b></sup> 23:42, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' Really unnecessary -- '''<font color="navy">[[User:Dalbury|Dalbury]]</font><sup><font color="green">([[User talk:Dalbury|<font color="green">Talk]])</font></font></sup>''' 00:17, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' for article talk and user talk pages only. — '''[[User:Philwelch|Phil]]''' ''[[User_talk:Philwelch|Welch]]'' <small>[[User:Katefan0/Poll|Are you a fan of the band Rush?]]</small> 00:20, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', probably a sneaky attempt to promote Uncyclopedia.--[[User:Ezeu|Ezeu]] 00:24, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Note'''. Uncyclopedia is not completely irrelevant in the scheme of things. For example (and rather unexpectedly), MediaWiki provides it as a built-in interwiki [[uncyclopedia:]]. It is also part of Jimbo's commercial project, [[Wikia]]. In my understanding, however, Wikia is not anything at all to do with Wikimedia (both Wikicities and Uncyc are absent from http://www.wikimedia.org, the Foundation's homepage). -[[User:Splash|Splash]]<small><sup>[[User talk:Splash|talk]]</sup></small> 02:51, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' --[[User:Angelo.romano|Angelo]] 04:50, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. Pointless advertisements like this will cause more vandalism than they prevent. -[[User:Silence|Silence]] 12:04, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''''Delete''''' Unnecessary and pointless. [[User:E Pluribus Anthony|E Pluribus Anthony]] | [[User talk:E Pluribus Anthony|''talk'']] | 21:40, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per David Levy <small>[[User:Cdc|CDC]] [[User talk:Cdc|(talk)]]</small> 00:27, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' - usually articles which contain nonsense or stupid content get speedied or sent to BJAODN, both using their own templates. --[[User:Lbmixpro|LBMixPro]][[User talk:Lbmixpro|<sup>&lt;Sp</sup>]][[WP:EA|<font color="green"><sup>e</sup></font>]][[User talk:Lbmixpro|<sup>ak|on|it!&gt;</sup>]] 01:58, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
 
==== [[Template:Simon]] ====
{{tln|Simon}}<br />
'''Delete''' — Template is overly large and somewhat unwieldy, and is mostly full of red links. Discussion on the template's talk page shows a preference for this information to be a simple category, rather than a full template. [[User:Schuminweb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User_talk:Schuminweb|Talk]]) 01:57, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', too unwieldy to be of any use. Since all of the articles in the template are now in the same category anyway, I don't see a point in keeping this. - [[User:Bobet|Bobet]] 02:32, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''Delete''' too big (even with the font reduction), and full of red links. Also, I'm not sure if it's particularly useful or warranted. -- [[User:MisterHand|MisterHand]] 02:47, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', unwieldly, no reason to know who owns all of those places, etc. [[User:Grenavitar|gren]] [[User talk:Grenavitar|グレン]] <sup>[[Wikipedia:Limited administrators|?]]</sup> 14:34, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete it''' [[User:Ike9898|ike9898]] 14:37, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per [[User:MisterHand|MisterHand]] --[[User:Loopy|Loopy]] <sup>[[WP:EA|<font color="green">e</font>]]</sup> 22:33, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*Convert to a proper category, and delete the template. [[User:Robchurch|Rob Church]] <sup>''[[User_talk:Robchurch|Talk]]''</sup> 23:18, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''''Don't'' Delete''' - I fixed It, so that almost 30 out of 100 shopping malls remain. LOOK AGAIN: [[Template:Simon]] {{unsigned|SpongeJustin4}}
*'''Strong Keep''' - Its use is the same as what the [[Template:Mills|Mills]] template is used for, PLUS I cut it short. --[[User:SpongeJustin4|SpongeJustin4]]
::'''Comment:''' The shortening of the template reduced it to Simon malls that already have articles on Wikipedia, meaning that all the red links were cut out. I now consider the template to be incomplete, because it's not giving the whole picture anymore. [[User:Schuminweb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User_talk:Schuminweb|Talk]]) 05:59, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' Replace by {{tl|otherarticles}} [[User:Pmanderson|Septentrionalis]] 05:41, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' like so many navigation templates. [[User:DESiegel|DES]] [[User talk:DESiegel|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 15:59, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' A category is enough. [[User:Flowerparty|Flower]][[User talk:Flowerparty|party<font color="ccffee">■</font>]] 21:37, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 
=== January 10 ===
==== [[Template:Protected Area Table]] ====
{{tln|Protected Area Table}}<br />
'''Delete template, subtemplates, and associated talk pages''' — Obsolete; this template (along with its associated subtemplates listed below) has been superceded by [[Template:Infobox protected area]]. &mdash; [[User:Eoghanacht|<font color="green">''Eoghanacht''</font>]] <sup>[[User_talk:Eoghanacht|<font color="gray">talk</font>]]</sup> 21:31, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
:List of subtemplates:
*[[Template:Protected Area Table Title]]
*[[Template:Protected Area Table Title Ia]]
*[[Template:Protected Area Table Title Ib]]
*[[Template:Protected Area Table Title II]]
*[[Template:Protected Area Table Title III]]
*[[Template:Protected Area Table Title IV]]
*[[Template:Protected Area Table Title V]]
*[[Template:Protected Area Table Title VI]]
*[[Template:Protected Area Table IUCN Title]]
*[[Template:Protected Area Table IUCN Title Ia]]
*[[Template:Protected Area Table IUCN Title Ib]]
*[[Template:Protected Area Table IUCN Title II]]
*[[Template:Protected Area Table IUCN Title III]]
*[[Template:Protected Area Table IUCN Title IV]]
*[[Template:Protected Area Table IUCN Title V]]
*[[Template:Protected Area Table IUCN Title VI]]
*[[Template:Protected Area Table Visitation]]
 
*'''Delete''' all these are now obsolete and I do not believe they are used anywhere in this wiki.--[[User:MONGO|MONGO]] 03:59, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' - let them clean after themselves ;) [[User:Renata3|Renata]] 16:48, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' Not used [[User:DaGizza|<b><font color="darkblue"> D</font><font color="teal">a</font><font color="lightblue">Gizza</font></b>]]''<sup><font color="orange">[[User_talk:DaGizza|Chat]]</font></sup>'' <sup><b><font color="gold">[[Special:Contributions/DaGizza|(c)]]</font></b></sup> 11:56, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nom --[[User:Loopy|Loopy]] <sup>[[WP:EA|<font color="green">e</font>]]</sup> 21:36, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 
==== [[Template:State park]] ====
{{tln|State park}}<br />
'''Delete template and talk page''' — Obsolete template, supplanted by the more general [[Template:Infobox protected area]]. &mdash; [[User:Eoghanacht|<font color="green">''Eoghanacht''</font>]] <sup>[[User_talk:Eoghanacht|<font color="gray">talk</font>]]</sup> 18:22, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''Delete''' as per above. --[[User:Kralizec!|Kralizec!]] 23:11, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
** '''Comment''': as [[User:Kralizec!]] was the only editor of this template, does it qualify for a speedy delete? &mdash; [[User:Eoghanacht|<font color="green">''Eoghanacht''</font>]] <sup>[[User_talk:Eoghanacht|<font color="gray">talk</font>]]</sup> 14:07, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''Delete''' ditto --<b><font style="background: lightblue"><font color="darkblue">[[User:DaGizza|D]]</font><font color="blue">[[User:DaGizza|a]]</font><font color="yellow">[[User:DaGizza|Gizza]]</font></font></b> ''<sup><font color="orange">[[User_talk:DaGizza|Chat]]</font></sup>'' 02:11, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' This template is now obsolete.--[[User:MONGO|MONGO]] 04:00, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. In with the new, out with the old.'''[[User:Voice of All(MTG)|<font color="blue">Voice</font><font color="darkblue"> of </font><font color="black">All</font>]]'''<sup>[[user_talk:Voice_of_All(MTG)|<font color="blue">T</font>]]|[[Special:Emailuser/Voice of All(MTG)|@]]|[[WP:EA|<font color="darkgreen">ESP]]</font></sup> 04:00, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Speedy Delete''' &mdash; per CSD G7 and vote of Kralizec! above. <sub>→<font style="color:#975612">[[User:AzaToth|Aza]]</font><font style="color:#325596">[[User_talk:AzaToth|Toth]]</font></sub> 14:15, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nom --[[User:Loopy|Loopy]] <sup>[[WP:EA|<font color="green">e</font>]]</sup> 21:36, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 
==== [[Template:NihonG]] ====
{{tln|NihonG}}<br />
'''Speedy delete''' — Unlinked template. 2 edits. Replaced by, perhaps, [[Template:Politics of Japan]]. —[[User:Philip_Nilsson|Philip N.]][[User_talk:Philip_Nilsson|✉]] 21:16, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nom, obsolete template. - [[User:Bobet|Bobet]] 02:38, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nom --[[User:Loopy|Loopy]] <sup>[[WP:EA|<font color="green">e</font>]]</sup> 21:36, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 
==== [[Template:List of Salt Lake City neighborhoods]] ====
{{tln|List of Salt Lake City neighborhoods}}<br />
'''Delete''' — This template is only in use by one article, [[Salt Lake City, Utah]]. I wish to convert the entire article to prose, but I don't want to change that part until this template is deleted. I believe I can describe it much more informatively on prose. In addition, all of these neighborhoods are already listed on [[Template:Salt Lake City]]. [[User:Bob rulz|bob rulz]] 04:04, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' as per nom, unused. *\o/* [[User:Dustimagic|'''Dustimagic''']] *\o/* 04:21, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Speedy delete''', there will be minimal consequence from doing so as the templete is only present in one article <del>and it can easily be copied and pasted</del>. &mdash; [[User:Seven Days|<strong><font color="#666">Seven Days</font></strong>]] <strong>&raquo;</strong> [[User talk:Seven Days|<strong><font color="#666">talk</font></strong>]] 05:21, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' after converting into article text, if needed. -- [[User:Nae'blis|nae'blis]] <i><sub>[[User_talk:Nae'blis|(talk)]]</sub></i> 16:06, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*Yes, '''Delete'''. Seems pretty much useless in one article.[[User:TheScurvyEye|The Scurvy Eye]] 22:09, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. [[User:Niffweed17|Niffweed17]] 20:41, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nom --[[User:Loopy|Loopy]] <sup>[[WP:EA|<font color="green">e</font>]]</sup> 21:36, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 
=== January 9 ===
 
==== [[Template:Event y]] ====
Templates that just create categories makes that space hard to maintain... ask anyone that works [[WP:CFD]]. -- [[User:Netoholic|Netoholic]] [[User talk:Netoholic|@]] 08:17, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' after manually updating any pages using it. --[[User:CBDunkerson|CBD]] <big><sub>[[User talk:CBDunkerson|&#x260E;]]</sub></big> <sup>[[Special:Emailuser/CBDunkerson|&#x2709;]]</sup> 12:33, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per above - [[Image:Union flag 1606 (Kings Colors).svg|20px|UK]] [[User:Bourbons3|'''«ßØÛ®ßÖѧ3»''']] <sup>[[User_talk:Bourbons3|Talk]] | [[special:contributions/Bourbons3|Contrib's]]</sup> 20:20, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per CBD. -- [[User:Nae'blis|nae'blis]] <i><sub>[[User_talk:Nae'blis|(talk)]]</sub></i> 16:20, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*<s>'''Keep''' The month and day of many events is not known, only the year. Add [[Template:Event ym]] for when only the year/month is known. [[User:NevilleDNZ|NevilleDNZ]] 12:28, 11 January 2006 (UTC)</s>
*'''Delete''': Only used on a handful of pages. [[User:NevilleDNZ|NevilleDNZ]] 00:25, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*Ye gods. Give the guy a Barnstar for Excessive Cleverness [[Uncyclopedia:Uncyclopedia:Ninjastars|or something]] and then '''delete 'em all'''. —[[User:Ilmari Karonen|Ilmari Karonen]] <small>([[User talk:Ilmari Karonen|talk]])</small> 14:21, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. per nom. What links here is empty. --[[User talk:Adrian Buehlmann|Adrian Buehlmann]] 23:11, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
 
==== [[Template:Locale length]] ====
Meta-template. Uses the "P" templates mentioned below. -- [[User:Netoholic|Netoholic]] [[User talk:Netoholic|@]] 08:17, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' after manually updating any pages using it. --[[User:CBDunkerson|CBD]] <big><sub>[[User talk:CBDunkerson|&#x260E;]]</sub></big> <sup>[[Special:Emailuser/CBDunkerson|&#x2709;]]</sup> 12:33, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per CBD. -- [[User:Nae'blis|nae'blis]] <i><sub>[[User_talk:Nae'blis|(talk)]]</sub></i> 16:20, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*<s>'''Keep''' Converts meters to '''locale (feet)'''
::eg. <nowiki>{{Locale length|10}}</nowiki> gives '''{{Locale length|10}}''' and <nowiki>{{Locale length|1000}}</nowiki> gives '''{{Locale length|1000}}''', useful when metric measurments (without imperial feet) are encountered in some pages. Also can be used to in sed no-line-break-space after the between number and unit. eg 1000&nbsp;m, this is commonly missed and leads to messy pages. - [[User:NevilleDNZ|NevilleDNZ]] 09:27, 11 January 2006 (UTC)</s>
*'''Delete''': Only used on a handful of pages. [[User:NevilleDNZ|NevilleDNZ]] 00:25, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. This conversion to feet should be done by hand to ensure that the correct number of significant digits is used. Or you will get something like "approximately 1000 m (3281 feet)" instead of "approximately 1000m (3300 feet)" which is more appropriate. [[User:Kusma|Kusma]] [[User_talk:Kusma|(討論)]] 13:19, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*Ye gods. Give the guy a Barnstar for Excessive Cleverness [[Uncyclopedia:Uncyclopedia:Ninjastars|or something]] and then '''delete 'em all'''. —[[User:Ilmari Karonen|Ilmari Karonen]] <small>([[User talk:Ilmari Karonen|talk]])</small> 14:21, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' meta meta [[User:Grenavitar|gren]] [[User talk:Grenavitar|グレン]] <sup>[[Wikipedia:Limited administrators|?]]</sup> 14:40, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*I think Mediawiki says it best: "This page is 55 kilobytes long. This may be longer than is preferable; see [[Wikipedia:article size|article size]]." And it's all but a few bytes on a '''''single line'''''! '''Obliterate''' this template. --[[User:CesarB|cesarb]] 22:46, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
 
==== [[Template:Country GB]], etc. ====
([[Template:Country GB]], [[Template:Country PT]], [[Template:Country NP]], [[Template:Country NZ]])
 
Meta-templates. Used with the "event" templates mentioned below. -- [[User:Netoholic|Netoholic]] [[User talk:Netoholic|@]] 08:27, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' after manually updating any pages using it. --[[User:CBDunkerson|CBD]] <big><sub>[[User talk:CBDunkerson|&#x260E;]]</sub></big> <sup>[[Special:Emailuser/CBDunkerson|&#x2709;]]</sup> 12:33, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per CBD. -- [[User:Nae'blis|nae'blis]] <i><sub>[[User_talk:Nae'blis|(talk)]]</sub></i> 16:20, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' Does it ''have'' a purpose? - [[Image:Union flag 1606 (Kings Colors).svg|20px|UK]] [[User:Bourbons3|'''«ßØÛ®ßÖѧ3»''']] <sup>[[User_talk:Bourbons3|Talk]] | [[special:contributions/Bourbons3|Contrib's]]</sup> 19:53, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 
*<s>'''Keep''' - Some templates, eg '''[[Template:Infobox Country]]''', are passed the XX country code, and, this provides enough information determin Country name: '''Britian''', and even Nationality: '''British'''. i.e. esp useful for template. Maybe we should limit these to important tags... such as '''only''' country, nationality and type of event etc... This approach is used extensively by the '''[[Template:coor dms]]''', '''[[Template:coor dm]]''', '''[[Template:coor d]]''' and '''[[Template:coor]]''' etc and documented in the wiki help pages. [[User:NevilleDNZ|NevilleDNZ]] 09:11, 11 January 2006 (UTC)</s>
** Don't use other poor examples to defend this. Those templates as well are on my list. -- [[User:Netoholic|Netoholic]] [[User talk:Netoholic|@]] 18:37, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''': Only used on a handful of pages on a sup-trial basis. Also I will nominate the "poor examples" [[:Template:coor]], [[:Template:coor d]], [[:Template:coor dm]] [[:Template:coor dms]] for deletion tomorrow. [[User:NevilleDNZ|NevilleDNZ]] 00:25, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*Ye gods. Give the guy a Barnstar for Excessive Cleverness [[Uncyclopedia:Uncyclopedia:Ninjastars|or something]] and then '''delete 'em all'''. —[[User:Ilmari Karonen|Ilmari Karonen]] <small>([[User talk:Ilmari Karonen|talk]])</small> 14:21, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
 
==== Several meta-templates related to months ====
([[Special:Allpages/Template:P|all templates in the form of "P#"]], [[Template:CentaryN]], [[Template:MonthN]], [[Template:Convert month]], [[Template:Month name]], [[Template:Born]], [[Template:Died]], [[Template:Battle]], [[Template:Disaster]], [[Template:Event]])
 
I stumbled onto a pretty arcane series of [[WP:AUM|nested meta-templates]]. They seem basically devised to compose a complicated structure around converting numbers to months and back again. [[Template:CentaryN]] and [[Template:MonthN]] seems to be used only for sorting articles into strict time order within categories. This can be achieved [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=October_2005_in_Britain_and_Ireland&diff=34472417&oldid=25555569 manually] without all this template-within-template structure. [[Template:Born|Born]], [[Template:Died|Died]], [[Template:Event|Event]], [[Template:Battle|Battle]], [[Template:Disaster|Disaster]], and others create four-layer-deep meta-templates that seem to be used to present dates in a non-standard format (see [[Edmund Hillary]]). -- [[User:Netoholic|Netoholic]] [[User talk:Netoholic|@]] 08:09, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' after manually updating any pages using it. --[[User:CBDunkerson|CBD]] <big><sub>[[User talk:CBDunkerson|&#x260E;]]</sub></big> <sup>[[Special:Emailuser/CBDunkerson|&#x2709;]]</sup> 12:33, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per CBD. -- [[User:Nae'blis|nae'blis]] <i><sub>[[User_talk:Nae'blis|(talk)]]</sub></i> 16:20, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*<s>'''Keep''': I checked the [[Edmund Hillary]] page and it has entries like: <nowiki> {{Born|1919|7|20|region=NZ}} </nowiki> that correctly puts Edmund into the [[:Category:New Zealand people]] and [[:Category:1919 births]]. And correctly formats the dates as per wiki standard. The templates Born, Died, Battle, Disastor and Event seem to categorise corectly also. [[User:NevilleDNZ|NevilleDNZ]] 08:47, 11 January 2006 (UTC)</s>
*'''Delete''': Only used on a handful of pages. [[User:NevilleDNZ|NevilleDNZ]] 00:25, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
** You "checked" it and it "seems to"? [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Edmund_Hillary&diff=19300317&oldid=19260494 Aren't you the one] that created all this and put it there in the first place? Have you read [[WP:AUM]]? I don't blame you too much for creating this system, but it's disallowed by policy. Categorization and dates are already handled by existing mechanisms that are easier to maintain and avoid being hogs on the server. -- [[User:Netoholic|Netoholic]] [[User talk:Netoholic|@]] 08:56, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
***ThanX for your "friendly" feedback. [[User:NevilleDNZ|NevilleDNZ]] 12:59, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
**Many of these (not 'Locale length') could be converted to non-meta templates. I like the concept behind standardized data formatting, but I think these templates should then always be subst'd in once they are formatted to use widely agreed upon standards. --[[User:CBDunkerson|CBD]] <big><sub>[[User talk:CBDunkerson|&#x260E;]]</sub></big> <sup>[[Special:Emailuser/CBDunkerson|&#x2709;]]</sup> 13:07, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Comment'''. My wiki forensic revealed that there are 10'000 (in words: '''ten thousand''') templates P1..P10000. Patrick created P1..P3 and NevilleDNZ continued up to astronomic 10000. I must say Neto ''is'' very friendly... --[[User talk:Adrian Buehlmann|Adrian Buehlmann]] 13:04, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
**Actually, it looks like they go up to p31 and then only hit major milestones and specific instances up to p10000. So not quite as bad, but wouldn't work properly until all of the entries were filled out. --[[User:CBDunkerson|CBD]] <big><sub>[[User talk:CBDunkerson|&#x260E;]]</sub></big> <sup>[[Special:Emailuser/CBDunkerson|&#x2709;]]</sup> 13:12, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
***Poor admin who has to delete them. I'm asking myself whether it makes sense to do that delete work at all. Deleted articles/templates are still around just marked as deleted, right? So we just increase the garbage by deleting them without gaining much. --[[User talk:Adrian Buehlmann|Adrian Buehlmann]] 13:18, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
****'''Comment''' there are only about 20 of them (as CBDunkerson mentions), I will nominate them for deletion tomorrow. [[User:NevilleDNZ|NevilleDNZ]] 00:25, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*Ye gods. Give the guy a Barnstar for Excessive Cleverness [[Uncyclopedia:Uncyclopedia:Ninjastars|or something]] and then '''delete 'em all'''. —[[User:Ilmari Karonen|Ilmari Karonen]] <small>([[User talk:Ilmari Karonen|talk]])</small> 14:21, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
 
==== [[Template:User-AmE-0]] ====
{{tln|User-AmE-0}}<br />
'''Delete''' — Quite rudely claims that American English isn't English and is actually spelling and grammatical errors, in contradiction to official policies here. Serves no purpose other than nationalistic arrogance. {{unsigned|DreamGuy}}
*'''Keep''' this and all American English templates. Someone should make a policy about userboxes so these don't keep coming up. [[User:Cookiecaper|cooki]][[WP:EA|<font color="green">e</font>]][[User:Cookiecaper|caper]] ([[User talk:Cookiecaper|talk]] / [[Special:Contributions/Cookiecaper|contribs]]) 08:55, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
:This TFD discussion is tainted by talk page spamming by [[User:Jamal al din|Jamal al din]]: e.g. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Brian_New_Zealand&diff=prev&oldid=34534893] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Captain_scarlet&diff=prev&oldid=34534978] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Carolynparrishfan&diff=prev&oldid=34535014] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Celestianpower&diff=prev&oldid=34535136] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Chairman_S.&diff=prev&oldid=34535172] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Chaosfeary&diff=prev&oldid=34535281] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Closedmouth&diff=prev&oldid=34535371] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Daisy-berkowitz&diff=prev&oldid=34535612] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Deadkid_dk&diff=prev&oldid=34535688] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:DivineShadow218&diff=prev&oldid=34535750] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Djr_xi&diff=prev&oldid=34535814] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Dleigh&diff=prev&oldid=34535838] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Duke_toaster&diff=prev&oldid=34535888] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Dwilke&diff=prev&oldid=34535922] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:ElizabethEeyore&diff=prev&oldid=34535978] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Englishrose&diff=prev&oldid=34536154] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:EuropracBHIT&diff=prev&oldid=34536221] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Elian&diff=prev&oldid=34536665] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Falcon9x5&diff=prev&oldid=34536760] [[User:Demi|Demi]] <sup>[[User_talk:Demi|T]]</sup>/<sub>[[Special:Contributions/Demi|C]]</sub> 22:56, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
::'Tainted'? Are those people's opinions unworthy of consideration because they had to be told there was a vote? Do you think they are only voting because somebody else wants them to? ~~ '''[[User:Nickptar|N]]''' ([[User talk:Nickptar|t]]/[[Special:Contributions/Nickptar|c]]) 17:27, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete.''' Templates like these are the reason why everyone wants to delete useful Babel templates now, without taking to drawing up a policy proposal. And cookiecaper, there ''is'' a policy discussion on userboxes: [[WP:UBP]]. This template is just for user-fun and bears no relevance to writing an encyclopedia or translating. If it has to be kept the wording needs to be changed because as accessed now it is offensive. --[[User:Fenice|Fenice]] 09:12, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' on the grounds that it's offensive. There aren't enough offensive templates on Wikipedia right now. Templates by and large tend to be far too pleasant and civil; it's repulsive and runs contrary to our interests here, which is to create a hostile and factionalist environment for inefficient and contentious editing. However, I vote to keep this template only on the grounds that I can also make a template calling all of the Romance languages "poorly-spoken Latin" in a similar way to how American English is poorly-spoken English. Fair's fair. -[[User:Silence|Silence]] 09:19, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' this and all userboxes that express negative views or that attack others or their beliefs. &mdash; [[User:Knowledge Seeker|Knowledge Seeker]] [[User talk:Knowledge Seeker|&#2470;]] 10:18, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. There is another userbox with the same text {{[[Template:User AmE-0]]}}. In itself it is not any more offensive than {{[[Template:User AIM-0]]}}, {{[[Template:user gb-0]]}} or {{[[Template:user 1337-0]]}}. -- [[User:Sneltrekker|Sneltrekker]] 10:24, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' I'm ambivalent about this style of userbox (I've removed the joke userboes I created for myself), but I think we should hold on ad-hoc deletions until there is some consensus on a coherent policy about userboxes. -- '''<font color="navy">[[User:Dalbury|Dalbury]]</font><sup><font color="green">([[User talk:Dalbury|<font color="green">Talk]])</font></font></sup>''' 10:49, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. [[User:the wub|the wub]] [[User_talk:The wub|<font color="green">"?!"</font>]] <sup>[[Wikipedia:Requests for rollback privileges|RFR - a good idea?]]</sup> 13:47, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' this and its counterpart that insults users of Commonwealth English, if it exists. Not useful for user categorization. Wikipedia itself is dialect-neutral; if its users aren't, there's no reason to allow themselves to factionalize like this. [[User:Android79|<span style="color: green">android</span>]][[User talk:Android79|<span style="color: purple">79</span>]] 14:19, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' - I live in America so I speak American English; saying things like color and fall. I don't find this offensive at all. I have no problems with people stating their choosen dialect.--'''[[User:God_of_War|God of]][[User Talk:God_of_War| War]]''' 14:54, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
:*Yes, this applies to me as well; it's all very silly, isn't it? Like linguistic nationalism. Fact is, some Americanisms are more linguistically efficient than the Britishisms ("color" is simply faster and simpler to type than "colour"), some Britishisms are more linguistically efficient than the Americanisms ("arse" rather than "ass" makes sense as a handy way to avoid confusion with the donkey "ass"), and most variations are just too trivial for any sane person to make a fuss about. If I was the God of Language, I'd just hold a giant international superpoll and have all the neutral parties go through every spelling and meaning variance and pick the most coherent, efficient, simple, and clear form for each and forget about the rest. But since I'm not that, best to just live with it, and to let people hate on (or poke fun at hating on) whichever dialect they want. -[[User:Silence|Silence]] 21:10, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per [[User:Silence|Silence]]. — [[User:BrianSmithson|BrianSmithson]] 14:59, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong keep''' There's a whole list of American English templates, these language templates shouldnt be deleted. Plus, if something like this causes offence, then you're obviously too touchy - [[Image:Union flag 1606 (Kings Colors).svg|20px|UK]] [[User:Bourbons3|'''«ßØÛ®ßÖѧ3»''']] <sup>[[User_talk:Bourbons3|Talk]] | [[special:contributions/Bourbons3|Contrib's]]</sup> 15:16, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' Saying any language is an improper form of another is a completely false statement. In fact, by saying this, this user should also have taken into account that English is a form of Germanic and, by there way of thinking, is also just "grammatical errors". Not acknowledging this means, or atleast how I have interpreted, just a biased, rude thing to say.
*'''Keep''' [[User:Keithgreer|<strong>Keith Greer </strong>]] [[Image:Flag of Northern Ireland2.svg|30px]] 17:01, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' --[[User:Kiand|Kiand]] 17:14, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' &mdash; Offensive, useless. &mdash; [[User:Seven Days|<strong><font color="#666">Seven Days</font></strong>]] <strong>&raquo;</strong> [[User talk:Seven Days|<strong><font color="#666">talk</font></strong>]] 17:26, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' per God of War. &mdash;[[User:Andux|Andux]] 17:30, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' I know Am English's beginnings, I know modern English's beginning and I know where old Germanic languages came from. Knowing all this, I can offer my educated opinion. This is humerous. Leave it be. [[User:Silence|Silence]] is right, though. - [[User:Hayter|Hayter]] 17:34, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*Strong keep. &mdash;[[User:Nightstallion|<span style="font-variant:small-caps">Nightstallion</span>]] [[User talk:Nightstallion|''(?)'']] 17:34, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. I personally find this userbox a bit offensive, but everyone has their opinions, and they are free to express them in the user namespace. — [[User:TheKMan|'''<font color="#0000FF">The</font><font color="#FF0000">KMan</font>''']][[User_talk:TheKMan|<font color="#000000"><sup><u>talk</u></sup></font>]] 17:44, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' Seems fairly light hearted to me. [[User:Boddah|Boddah]] 18:35, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' per Silence, and make some more for other ignorant deviations from proper Proto-Indo-European. &#8212;[[User:Mirv|Charles&nbsp;P.]][[User talk:Mirv|&nbsp;<small>(Mirv)</small>]] 18:39, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
:*That's what I'm talkin' about! Bring back PIE! Lazy linguistic louses, losing lingering locatives later! -[[User:Silence|Silence]] 21:10, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''keep''' as it is humorous and not offensive at all. [[User:Larix|Larix]] 19:21, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. If it's a joke, it's not a very funny one. So it sounds more like an attack than a joke. [[User:Rspeer|'''<span style="color: #63f; text-decoration: none;">r</span><span style="color: #333;">speer</span>''']] / [[User talk:Rspeer|<span style="color: #333;">ɹəəds</span><span style="color: #63f; text-decoration: none;">ɹ </span>]] 19:33, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
:*I agree, though that hasn't influenced my vote. -[[User:Silence|Silence]] 21:10, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*<s>'''Comment:''' The idea behind these userboxes is to entertain. While I'm no longer a member of the userboxes project (and not particularly such a large fan of userboxes anymore), let 'em have their fun. [[User:Cernen|Cernen]] 19:37, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
**With that said, '''Keep.''' [[User:Cernen|Cernen]] 19:37, 9 January 2006 (UTC)</s>
*'''Delete immediately''' - while I am a big fan of British English and sometimes make fun of American English, I do believe that this opinion espressed in such a way is far too vulgar to be accepted by anyone[[User:Msoos|Msoos]]
**'''Comment''' For the record, British English is just English (its not a version of the language, it '''is''' the language) and it's not exactly immoral. People get offended by anything nowadays. Seeing as it's not hugely bad, can't you just resort to not using it? An American above said they werent offended, maybe if people were as sensible as him we wouldnt have a backlog in the deletion section - [[Image:Union flag 1606 (Kings Colors).svg|20px|UK]] [[User:Bourbons3|'''«ßØÛ®ßÖѧ3»''']] <sup>[[User_talk:Bourbons3|Talk]] | [[special:contributions/Bourbons3|Contrib's]]</sup> 21:18, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
:*Are you saying that it ''isn't'' accepted by anyone (in which case the template won't find any use and can be deleted as an orphan (just as we do with human orphans)), or are you saying that we shouldn't ''let'' it be accepted by anyone? Both seem like strange statements to make; I can understand saying that we should make people express this opinion in customized or fully userfied templates, or simply have them express it in prose, but saying that it's too vulgar to be expressed ''at all'' seems a tad odd... What's so terrible about being vulgar every once in a while? -[[User:Silence|Silence]] 21:10, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong Delete''' - How would you non-American speakers of English feel if I created a userbox mocking Commonwealth English? --[[User:TML1988|TML1988]] 21:24, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
**I wouldnt be bothered. It wouldnt take a userbox mocking proper English for me to know that Americans dont like Brits. Plus, if u mocked English, then you would be mocking American English because it is the original version of your "language" - [[Image:Union flag 1606 (Kings Colors).svg|20px|UK]] [[User:Bourbons3|'''«ßØÛ®ßÖѧ3»''']] <sup>[[User_talk:Bourbons3|Talk]] | [[special:contributions/Bourbons3|Contrib's]]</sup> 21:33, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
::*Actually, no, for the record American English is closer to the original version of English than British English. Studies show that people living in the Appalachia Mountains are closest to Elizabethan English... not that it is somehow better for that. You might want to go educate yourself instead of assuming that your version is somehow more correct. The point, however, is that nobody should be mocking anyone, especially ikn a way that goes against clear Wikipedia policies that American English is just as real as British English. [[User:DreamGuy|DreamGuy]] 23:25, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
:::The moon is made of cheese. See, i can do it too - [[Image:Union flag 1606 (Kings Colors).svg|20px|UK]] [[User:Bourbons3|'''«ßØÛ®ßÖѧ3»''']] <sup>[[User_talk:Bourbons3|Talk]] | [[special:contributions/Bourbons3|Contrib's]]</sup> 16:23, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
::::He's telling the truth. Spoken American English, at least the Appalachian form, is more like spoken Elizabethan English than any other form still around today. Given the inconsistency of spelling in Elizabethan times, no form can be said to be the most similar in spelling. - [[User:Cuivienen|Cuivienen]] 20:29, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' (as a user of american english). This is an expression of opnion. Any edits in which such a user attempted to "correct" such "errors" would be in violation of policy, and would I trust, be promptly revted. But I see no reason why the suer should not be entitled to express such a view, at elast until there is a more comprehensive policy on user boxes. If a user had such a statement on his or her user page not in a box, how far would soemone get who wanted to remove it as a policy violation? [[User:DESiegel|DES]] [[User talk:DESiegel|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 21:31, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. I'm a supporter of userboxes in general, but this one is just so silly I have to vote delete. I mean gees, all languages evolve. That doesn't make one more "right" than the other. --[[User:Fang Aili|Fang Aili]] 21:39, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
:::*Wrong. Written chinese doesn't evolve, not that is in any way relevant.--'''[[User:God_of_War|God of]][[User Talk:God_of_War| War]]''' 02:18, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''', a harmless userbox with a sense of fun, adds colour to this encyclopaedia. [[User:Lord Bob|Lord Bob]] 21:42, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*Concur completely with Lord Bob. All you people who are offended, every language template as a -0 version, and stop being to touchy! - [[Image:Union flag 1606 (Kings Colors).svg|20px|UK]] [[User:Bourbons3|'''«ßØÛ®ßÖѧ3»''']] <sup>[[User_talk:Bourbons3|Talk]] | [[special:contributions/Bourbons3|Contrib's]]</sup> 21:46, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' factionalizing userbox --[[User:Wikiacc|Wikiacc]] [[User talk:Wikiacc|¶]] 21:55, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong keep''' This is undoubtedly the stupidest TfD nomination ever. Mindboggling. [[User:Jtdirl|<span style="color:#006666; background-color:orange">'''Fear''ÉIREANN'''''</span>]][[Image:Ireland-Capitals.PNG|15px]]\<sup><font color="blue">[[User talk:Jtdirl|(caint)]]</font></sup> 22:04, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''', as per [[User:Lord Bob|Lord Bob]]. It's clearly very tongue-in-cheek; I don't think it warrants your evident indignation.--[[User:CapitalLetterBeginning|CapitalLetterBeginning]] 23:15, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. While I don't understand how this could be considered offensive, I know that I find other various things offensive which others don't understand and tell me I'm "being too touchy" (eg, butchers' windows, horse racing). No need for a template which offends others. --[[User:Qirex|Qirex]] 23:35, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong delete'''. Violates Wikipedia's ideals about etiquette and "good faith". We are supposed to be working ''together'' here, not sniping at one another over language differences.--[[User:Srleffler|Srleffler]] 23:38, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''', mostly harmless userspace template. [[User:Gerritholl|Gerrit]] <sup>[[Special:Contributions/Gerritholl|C]][[User:Gerritholl|U]][[User_talk:Gerritholl|T]][[Special:Emailuser/Gerritholl|E]][[Special:Whatlinkshere/User:Gerritholl|D]][http://topjaklont.student.utwente.nl/ H]</sup> 23:39, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', elitist and factually incorrect. ''[[User:Csernica|TCC]]'' <small>[[User_talk:Csernica|(talk)]] [[Special:Contributions/Csernica|(contribs)]]</small> 23:42, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong Keep''' &mdash; Has to be one of the most ridiculous TFD's so far.. --''[[User:Mistress Selina Kyle|<span style="color:#18186b;text-decoration:underline">Mistress Selina Kyle</span>]] <sup>'''<span style="color:#800080">(</span>'''[[User_talk:Mistress Selina Kyle|<span style="color:#18186b;cursor:help;">Α⇔Ω</span>]] ¦ [[Special:Emailuser/Mistress Selina Kyle|<span style="color:#18186b;cursor:help;">⇒✉</span>]]'''<span style="color:#800080">)</span>'''</sup>'' 00:54, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Comment #2''': My watchlist has seen at least a few of these userboxes be sent here to die. Can't Wikiproject Userboxes make their own TfD page? This is supposed to be for ''useful'' templates that might have outlived their usefulness, not usercruft. [[User:Cernen|Cernen]] 01:37, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', offensive and insulting. [[User:Kelly Martin|Kelly Martin]] ([[User talk:Kelly Martin|talk]]) 01:49, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', serves no purpose but to violate [[WP:CIVIL]].--[[User:Sean Black|Sean]]|[[User talk:Sean Black|Bla]]<font color="green">[[Wikipedia:Esperanza|ck]]</font> 01:53, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''<font color="green">Comment</font>''' &mdash; Will this be deleted too? Just the same, but the opposing POV: [[Template:User AmE-5]]:
*'''Keep'''. No problems with the template; it's a reasonable template, and its "rude" factor is totally irrelevant due to the fact that it's a POV template. [[User:Niffweed17|Niffweed17]] 20:50, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
{{User AmE-5}}{{clear}}
:Definite American bias here - but that's not surprising when such a large portion of editors are American..--''[[User:Mistress Selina Kyle|<span style="color:#18186b;text-decoration:underline">Mistress Selina Kyle</span>]] <sup>'''<span style="color:#800080">(</span>'''[[User_talk:Mistress Selina Kyle|<span style="color:#18186b;cursor:help;">Α⇔Ω</span>]] ¦ [[Special:Emailuser/Mistress Selina Kyle|<span style="color:#18186b;cursor:help;">⇒✉</span>]]'''<span style="color:#800080">)</span>'''</sup>'' 02:18, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
::[[WP:AFG|Assume god faith]], will ya? And yes, I hope that one is deleted too.--[[User:Sean Black|Sean]]|[[User talk:Sean Black|Bla]]<font color="green">[[Wikipedia:Esperanza|ck]]</font> 02:29, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. Nice tough of silliness, nothing rude to be seen here. [[User:Pilatus|Pilatus]] 02:27, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' as per [[User:Lord Bob|Lord Bob]] and untill userbox poilcy is sorted out [[User:Brian New Zealand|Brian]] | [[User talk:Brian New Zealand|(Talk)]] 04:42, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion&diff=34555172&oldid=34554191 '''Delete'''. POV, this is not the place for it.] &mdash;[[User:Cryptic|Cryptic]] [[User talk:Cryptic|(talk)]] 04:52, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
**[[Wikipedia:Templates for deletion]] isn't, no. At least not rudely shoving your own comment right up at the top as though you think you're more important than everyone else. [[WP:UP]] and [[WP:NPOV]] give clearly the right to free speech on individual user pages: '''NPOV does not apply to user pages.''' --''[[User:Mistress Selina Kyle|<span style="color:#18186b;text-decoration:underline">Mistress Selina Kyle</span>]] <sup>'''<span style="color:#800080">(</span>'''[[User_talk:Mistress Selina Kyle|<span style="color:#18186b;cursor:help;">Α⇔Ω</span>]] ¦ [[Special:Emailuser/Mistress Selina Kyle|<span style="color:#18186b;cursor:help;">⇒✉</span>]]'''<span style="color:#800080">)</span>'''</sup>'' 06:35, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong Keep'''. How is this offensive? 1) He is entitled to his opinion. 2) It won't harm anyone by him always using British English instead of American English, and 3) It's not like it's going to be used outside of his user page. Saying this is biased and offensive is like saying somebody not liking a certain type of music is offensive. [[User:Bob rulz|bob rulz]] 04:55, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. Totally harmless. [[User talk:Adrian Buehlmann|Adrian Buehlmann]] 08:26, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''. Totally useless. --[[User:Doc glasgow|Doc]] [[User talk:Doc glasgow|<sup>ask?</sup>]] 11:27, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. Anyone heard of the word "humour"? That's "humour", not "humor" --[[User:Falcon9x5|Falcon9x5]] 11:54, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. I speak enough languages to know that this is a bit of harmeless fun over some minor differences in dialect. Also second what ''Bob rulz'' said. [[User:Tomothy|Tom]] 12:13, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' I guess - this looks an awful lot like [[irony]] to me, but some of the above comments show that we should at least give consideration to the idea that some find it genuinely offensive rather than funny. We have enough trouble with disputes around use of language caused by simple misunderstandings without fanning the flames. Plus, as any student of language should know, the British English spellings are often modern affectations, and the US versions are in many ways more correct (and are found in sources such as Chaucer). I'd almost make an honourable exception for aluminium (per IUPAC) but that means I'd have to accept sulfur, and I'm not going to have ''that''. So, away with it. [[User:JzG|Just zis <span style="border: 1px; border-style:solid">&nbsp;Guy,</span> you know?]] <sup>[[User_talk:JzG|[T]]]</sup>/<sub>[[Special:Contributions/JzG|[C]]]</sub> [[Image:Flag of the United Kingdom.svg|25px|<nowiki></nowiki>]] ''[[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/JzG|RfA!]]'' 14:09, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' People should be entitled to express their opinions on their user pages, whatever those opinions may be. Especially so considering the lightheartedness of this particular template. --[[User:TheCardinal|TheCardinal]] 15:33, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' - *sigh*, some of you obviously have no sense of humour. You may think I'm being biased, not being a user of American English, but I do not find Template:User AmE-5 offensive one bit. I put the template on my user page simply for a bit of a laugh - I was only more amused to see this TfD with people calling it "factionalising" and "elitist"! I am ''frightened'' at how seriously some of you are taking a stupid little userbox. I think people should be allowed to say what they like on their user pages - it's not their fault if it's taken the completely wrong way. --[[User:Zilog Jones|Zilog Jones]] 15:41, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Very weak delete''' Only because there is already a {{tl|user AmE-0}}, and the dash after "user" in the template name is against my bias toward userbox syntax. All the AmE templates are pointless jokes, but are not quite patent nonsense, so I have no reason to ban them. An attitude about a language is not a personal attack or group hate. &mdash; [[User:Eoghanacht|<font color="green">''Eoghanacht''</font>]] <sup>[[User_talk:Eoghanacht|<font color="gray">talk</font>]]</sup> 15:50, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong keep'''. I think that it is an important template, it's lighthearted and harmless. I also feel that the nomination could be construed as [[WP:POINT|disrupting Wikipedia to make a point]]. [[User:Stifle|Stifle]] 16:15, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' - stop being distracting. -- [[User:Nae'blis|nae'blis]] <i><sub>[[User_talk:Nae'blis|(talk)]]</sub></i> 16:20, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' A major vote was completed recently, reaching a concensus that POV userboxes ''should not'' be deleted. This is a POV userbox. All opinions are going to offend, you can't help or prevent that (unless you eliminate opinions, which is against freedom of speech). If you disagree with this, dont use it. I disagree with a lot of POV userboxes but i dont complain, and I certainly dont try to delete them. You call this bias, what ''I'' call bias is this being nominated and the AmE-5 template not. I call that deleting in favour of a particular language or nationality. Guess which one - American! So if this template gets deleted, and my numerous appeals dont work, I call for the AmE-5 template and any other language template with a shred of opinion in it be deleted ''immediately''. Wikipedia userpages will be more boring places, but if you people want to make it that way, don't do it in a biased way just because there are more of you from America than Britain. - [[Image:Union flag 1606 (Kings Colors).svg|20px|UK]] [[User:Bourbons3|'''«ßØÛ®ßÖѧ3»''']] <sup>[[User_talk:Bourbons3|Talk]] | [[special:contributions/Bourbons3|Contrib's]]</sup> 16:32, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
**I'm not the only one that also expressed a desire to see a counterpart template (one that insults Commonwealth English) deleted. Where is this "vote" that you speak of? [[WP:UBP]] isn't policy. [[User:Android79|<span style="color: green">android</span>]][[User talk:Android79|<span style="color: purple">79</span>]]
***You can find it [[Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/userbox templates concerning beliefs and convictions|here]] - [[Image:Union flag 1606 (Kings Colors).svg|20px|UK]] [[User:Bourbons3|'''«ßØÛ®ßÖѧ3»''']] <sup>[[User_talk:Bourbons3|Talk]] | [[special:contributions/Bourbons3|Contrib's]]</sup> 17:22, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
****There's a more detailed link [[Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/userbox templates concerning beliefs and convictions#Vote is 174 'Keep' to 24. Please get this proposal off my user page|here]] in case you find it difficult going through the archive, it is pretty long - [[Image:Union flag 1606 (Kings Colors).svg|20px|UK]] [[User:Bourbons3|'''«ßØÛ®ßÖѧ3»''']] <sup>[[User_talk:Bourbons3|Talk]] | [[special:contributions/Bourbons3|Contrib's]]</sup> 17:44, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Weak keep''' but only if it's actually made witty, like the anti-British one above. As it is, it's just mean. ~~ '''[[User:Nickptar|N]]''' ([[User talk:Nickptar|t]]/[[Special:Contributions/Nickptar|c]]) 17:27, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. Harmless userspace content. <TT>[[User:Crotalus horridus|Crotalus horridus]] <SMALL>([[User talk:Crotalus horridus|TALK]] • [[Special:Contributions/Crotalus horridus|CONTRIBS]])</SMALL></TT> 17:55, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong Keep''' - userboxes are free to be NPOV and act as a mechanism whereby people can express things they ''would be free to express anyway'' in a standardised format. Plus- it is true. [[Image:Anglo-Indian Indentity.svg|20px]] [[User:Djr xi|Deano]] <small>([[User talk:Djr_xi|Talk]])</small> 18:27, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong keep.''' I ''do'' think that American English is crap and I ''am'' rude, so having this on my user page is totally encyclopedic and NPOV. Besides, I don't feel like having the same discussion for all userboxes one by one. --[[User:Valmi|Valmi]][[User_talk:Valmi| &#10002;]] 18:49, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 
*'''Speedy Delete''' I don't know how many people are aware of this, but this encyclopedia was founded by american english speakers, and this mess is a disgrace--[[User:Nn-user|Nn-user]] 18:47, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
: '''Comment''' I don't think you are aware that American (English) is based on English, should that make a difference? - [[User:Keithgreer|<strong>Keith Greer </strong>]] [[Image:Flag of Northern Ireland2.svg|30px]] 18:53, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
:'''Comment''' And America was originally under British rule. Does it matter? No. If this is such a disgrace, then Jimbo Wales would be making comments. But as of yet he hasnt, so i think you're exagerrating a bit. Take a look at the discussion I linked to a few points up. For every person who voted ''delete'' on POV userboxes, over 6 people voted ''keep''. O and Valmi, '''you sum up my opinion completely'''. If there is any disgrace, it's American English (which '''is not''' an official language, it's a version - look up America on this encyclopedia if you want). '''NPOV does not apply to user pages''', which is why POV userboxes should stay. We dont need this discussion. Such a lareg amount of POV userboxes were voted on based upon the fact that they were POV, not their individual content - and the overwhelming result was '''Keep'''. I'll fight to keep as many as these POV userboxes as possible, but I'd appreciate it if you didnt nominate so many of them. - [[Image:Union flag 1606 (Kings Colors).svg|20px|UK]] [[User:Bourbons3|'''«ßØÛ®ßÖѧ3»''']] <sup>[[User_talk:Bourbons3|Talk]] | [[special:contributions/Bourbons3|Contrib's]]</sup> 19:51, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
::''If this is such a disgrace, then Jimbo Wales would be making comments. But as of yet he hasnt'' Actually, he -- tangentially -- has, leaving a comment at [[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Wikipedians_by_politics&diff=prev&oldid=33156588 Category:Wikipedians by politics]:
:::''''Just a comment from Jimbo:''' I would like to discourage the use of these and similar templates on user pages, instead encourage people to adopt an attitude of 'Here we are Wikipedians, out there we are advocates'. The point is, we don't act '''in Wikipedia''' as a Democrat, a Republican, a pro-Lifer, a pro-Choicer, or whatever. Here we are Wikipedians, which means: thoughtful, loving, neutral.--[[User:Jimbo Wales|Jimbo Wales]] 19:58, 29 December 2005 (UTC)'' --[[User:Calton|Calton]] | [[User talk:Calton|Talk]] 00:44, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' - more garbage templates. [[User:Djegan|Djegan]] 19:05, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' it's not very professional. [[User:Thumbelina|Thumbelina]] 21:25, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' Provincialist attack. Inferiority-complex issues ought to be acted out elsewhere. --[[User:Calton|Calton]] | [[User talk:Calton|Talk]] 00:44, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' - Whilst I would never advocate actually banning American English, the thought of it is quite entertaining, and people expressing that view on their talk pages is fine. --[[User:Newprogressive|New Progressive]] 04:01, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' I'm a huge USA patriot and I don't find this opinion offensive at all. [[User:Lawyer2b|Lawyer2b]] 04:12, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' a) because it is a light hearted piece of ''humour'' and b) because we need definite Wikipedia policy on userboxes before we start culling them. --[[User:Loopy|Loopy]] <sup>[[WP:EA|<font color="green">e</font>]]</sup> 04:28, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. You can mark me as another American who thinks you're all being far too touchy. [[User:Kairos|Kairos]] 06:12, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''Delete'''. Utterly offensive. -- [[User:JJay|JJay]] 07:44, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''Keep''' clearly the wikipedia userspace has gone beyond the boundaries of being "encylopedic" in nature. Besides, who cares. I rest easy at night knowing that I'm heeding the advice of my mother who said, "if you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all." But if some other jag-off (there's an Americanism for you, specifically western-Pennsylvania/Pittsburgh area dialect) wants to show how much of a jerk he or she can be, who am I to stop them? Here's another thing my mom used to say, "actions speak louder then words." Lucky for us here on the WP we have both at the same time. --[[User:Easter Monkey|Easter Monkey]] 08:34, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. To be insulted at something you have to have cared of their opinion. It shows to people that there is different types of the english language and its only a laugh. The userspace of WP is separate to rest of WP therefore IMO NPOV should not need to apply, if it does then there is no point to the userspace. --[[User:Neocal|Neocal]] 13:27, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong Keep'''. Harmless, amusing, etc etc. --<font color="green"><b>[[User:Garykirk|Gary Kirk]]</b></font> [[User_talk:Garykirk|(talk)]] 13:40, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' The general reason people are giving for deletion is the fact that is may be offensive. But you can't delete something based solely on the fact that it offends (except if it is completely immoral, which this isnt). In an ideal world, everyone would live in harmony, peace on earth, etc etc. But you have to '''wake up''' because that is '''never going to happen'''. We will ''never'' have world peace, and there will ''always'' be offense in one form or another. Its called reality. This template, as well as others, is going to offend someone somewhere. Im sorry that's true, but its not hugely contraversial. All other Babel templates have one that says '''This user does not like x language''', but i dont see those here for deletion. Do you? What i think is happening is everyone falling into this pro-America thing going on, creating different rules for anti-AmE templates. You can deny it as much as much as you like, like all the "official" opinions that exist, there is always some fabrication in there. Once again, i call for the deletion for any babel templates with opinion in them to be deleted if this template ''does'' get deleted. If we are going to have a NPOV thing going, it must apply to deletiong similar userboxes. Pro-USA bias just wont cut it. - [[Image:Union flag 1606 (Kings Colors).svg|20px|UK]] [[User:Bourbons3|'''«ßØÛ®ßÖѧ3»''']] <sup>[[User_talk:Bourbons3|Talk]] | [[special:contributions/Bourbons3|Contrib's]]</sup> 15:31, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. I find it quite useful in letting people know in a light-hearted way that I don't really want my articles "Americanising" where people change all the words/terms to American variations. Anyway it's just a bit of fun and it's an over the top reaction. I wouldn't care if it was the other way round. Rule Britainnia! [[User:Englishrose|Englishrose]] 17:51, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong Keep''' seriously get over it, it's just a bloody userbox. Our userpage is a place for our own personal opinions and information, and if i prefer to use UK english over US english then so be it. If i want other people to look at my page and see that i use UK english and not US english then they can. If you really have something against it then create your own userbox saying "US english is the ultimate english and all other forms are inferior and wrong".
:And if your Seriously taking offence to this, then think about this...
:Every other country in the world is getting your American crap beemed onto their TV's and movie screens. So think about all those people that have to hear your bloody annoying accents and pronouciations! e.g. "Skeduel" instead of "Schedule" and "Aluminum" instead of "Aluminium".
:So in conclusion i tell you... GET A LIFE! stop complaining about something that doesn't need complaining about. We put up with your crap everywhere everyday! and we don't file complaints or law suits or start bitching about it, we just sit back and say "bloody Americans". And being offended by the personal opinion of a userbox is just childish...
:[[User:Frexe|Frexe]] 19:10, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
::'''Comment''' Amen to that. People can show their POV on their userpages if they want to. If you dont like it, tough. Trying to get this deleted is totally over-reacting. - [[Image:Union flag 1606 (Kings Colors).svg|20px|UK]] [[User:Bourbons3|'''«ßØÛ®ßÖѧ3»''']] <sup>[[User_talk:Bourbons3|T]] | [[special:contributions/Bourbons3|C]]</sup> 19:52, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete.''' I retract my earlier vote. Jim suggests we toss it, I say we toss it. He's right. We're all Wikipedians here, not Americans, nor Britons, nor Germans... [[User:Cernen|Cernen]] [[User Talk:Cernen|Xanthine]] [[Special:Contributions/Cernen|Katrena]] 20:14, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
**'''Comment''' What happened to free thought? Just because Jim said delete, doesnt mean that the discussion automatically becomes a general delete. That's just a stupid way of voting - [[Image:Union flag 1606 (Kings Colors).svg|20px|UK]] [[User:Bourbons3|'''«ßØÛ®ßÖѧ3»''']] <sup>[[User_talk:Bourbons3|T]] | [[special:contributions/Bourbons3|C]]</sup> 20:32, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
::: I can't agree less with [[User:Cernen|Cernen]]. Jimbo is not the autocrat of Wikipedia, and I do not agree with his assessment. Anybody should be allowed to put whatever they want in terms of POV userboxes on their userpages, and this is no exception. [[User:Niffweed17|Niffweed17]] 20:55, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep.''' It's just a joke. - [[User:Cuivienen|Cuivienen]] 20:29, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep.''' Same as it's anti-american equivalent. It's a reasonable template expressing a POV, which should not be censored. [[User:Niffweed17|Niffweed17]] 20:50, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' neither funny nor useful. --[[User:Angelo.romano|Angelo]] 04:52, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. What is WP coming to? Has Zombie Stalin taken over Wikipedia? -- <font color="#FF0000">'''Миборовский'''</font> <sup>[[User:Miborovsky|U]]|[[User talk:Miborovsky|T]]|[[Special:Contributions/Miborovsky|C]]|[[Special:Emailuser/Miborovsky|M]]|[[Wikipedia:Esperanza|<font color="green">E</font>]]|[[User:Miborovsky#Wiki-not-so-fun|Chugoku Banzai]]!</sup> 04:57, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Weak delete'''. Sure it's probably a joke to most people but it's mean in tone, rather than funny. How about some more [[Wikilove]]? --[[User:Singkong2005|Singkong2005]] 05:45, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' If someone feels this way, I'd rather know about it; and if this is taken away from him, he'll find other, and more obnoxious, ways to say it. Wikipedia is not censored; and the proper use of Wikilove is in voluntarily taking this down, not having it forcibly removed.[[User:Pmanderson|Septentrionalis]] 06:00, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''', how silly. - [[User:Ulayiti|ulayiti]] [[User talk:Ulayiti|<font color="#226b22"><small>(talk)</small></font>]] 11:31, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''', its fine. --[[User:Terenceong1992|Terence Ong]] <sup>[[User talk:Terenceong1992|Talk]]</sup> 12:32, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' If you can be offended by something as minor as that then I laugh for England. Beside if you're going to delete that I suggest in the "interest of fairness" every single box regarding language be deleted otherwise there'll be the usual "american-favourism" and all the boring anti-americanism that will come with it. There's better things to debate a deletion over, this isn't one of them and if the majority of deletions are coming from Americans who believe they are being dissed there's a nice quote somewhere in that consistion of theirs which would reccommend allowing it to stay and not be deleted. =D Gotta love this stuff. --[[User:RBlowes|RBlowes]] 17:41, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' Userboxes are not required to be either useful or non-offensive, nor are they even required to be accurate. It's all in fun. "Humour". [[User:Peter T.S.|Peter T.S.]] 21:53, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''''Change''''' Connotes [[WP:POV|partiality]] that isn't necessarily based on best practise or consensus. Why not rephrase/rejig it to indicate preferred usage of American English, Commonwealth English, Australian English, et al.? All this may fly in the face of [[Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#National_varieties_of_English|Wp guidelines regarding varied English usage]]; if it can't or won't be changed (or opened up to include other dialects), '''''delete'''''. [[User:E Pluribus Anthony|E Pluribus Anthony]] | [[User talk:E Pluribus Anthony|''talk'']] | 22:00, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' Editors can say anything they want about themselves on their own user pages. The only thing deleting this template will do is reduce the transparency of Wikipedia. --[[User:Peace Inside|Peace Inside]] 23:19, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
**'''comment''' I agree, deleting this template will remove our "freedom of speech" and i know how much you Americans love your "freedom". So if your so patriotic towards you flag and country, then stop whinging about something that's so small and incignificant compared to whats going on all over world (that place beyond your waters).
:[[User:Frexe|Frexe]] 10:44, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
 
=== January 8 ===
====[[Template:Sp-sprotected]]====
This invents an extension to [[WP:SEMI]] by templatizing the notion of semi-permanent semi-protect. [[George W. Bush]] may be a special case, but it doesn't need a template for it, since that comes to imply that the template can be used elsewhere when there is no mandate in policy, or in the discussion surrounding that policy. Indeed, many of the supporters of [[WP:SEMI]] were clear that they did not want to see such semi-permanent protection. -[[User:Splash|Splash]]<small><sup>[[User talk:Splash|talk]]</sup></small> 05:36, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 
*'''Keep'''. I find this discreet note much less distracting and more suitable than [[Template:sprotected]]. And especially on articles expected to be semi-protected for long periods of time (like the GWB-article), this less dominating note should be more than suficcient. [[User:Shanes|Shanes]] 06:05, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' this template gives scope creep to [[:WP:SEMI]]. [[User:Xaosflux|<b><font color="#FF9933" face="monotype"><big>xaosflux</big></font></b>]] <sup>[[User_talk:Xaosflux|<font color="#00FF00">Talk</font>]]</sup><font color="#888888">/</font><sub>[[Wikipedia:Counter Vandalism Unit|<font color="#666666">CVU</font>]]</sub> 06:35, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', encourages scope creep, should be discussed at [[WP:SEMI]] first. [[User:Kappa|Kappa]] 06:47, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per Xaosflux, Kappa [[User:Lezek|Lezek]] 09:08, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per above. [[User:the wub|the wub]] [[User_talk:The wub|<font color="green">"?!"</font>]] <sup>[[Wikipedia:Requests for rollback privileges|RFR - a good idea?]]</sup> 13:49, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per above - [[Image:Union flag 1606 (Kings Colors).svg|20px|UK]] [[User:Bourbons3|'''«ßØÛ®ßÖѧ3»''']] <sup>[[User_talk:Bourbons3|Talk]] | [[special:contributions/Bourbons3|Contrib's]]</sup> 20:10, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. [[George W. Bush]] is not going to be un-semi-protected for more than a few hours at a time within the next couple years. Several other articles also face similar, albeit less extreme, long-term vandalism problems. —[[User:Guanaco|Guan]][[User talk:Guanaco|aco]] 21:24, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' Ugly, unnecessary as there is a far better alternative, and distinctly amateurish-looking. [[User:Jtdirl|<span style="color:#006666; background-color:orange">'''Fear''ÉIREANN'''''</span>]][[Image:Ireland-Capitals.PNG|15px]]\<sup><font color="blue">[[User talk:Jtdirl|(caint)]]</font></sup> 22:08, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*:It's meant to be small. If it's ugly or amateurish-looking, fix it. —[[User:Guanaco|Guan]][[User talk:Guanaco|aco]] 01:02, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. Thanks/[[User:Wangi|wangi]] 22:10, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' until (if ever) there is a change to [[WP:SEMI]] for long-term semi-protection. Even then, this template doesn't explain the reason for the protection and is '''too''' unobtrusive. When semi-protection is used it should be clearly stated and a reason given. This is even more true for highly visible pages that new people to wikipedia may hit (lest they think that protection is the normal behavior). [[User:Kenj0418|kenj0418]] 03:20, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''.It doesn't give enough info into why the page is semi-protected.--[[user:DakotaKahn|<font color="blue">''Dakota''</font>]] [[user talk:DakotaKahn|~]] [[WP:EA|<font color="green">ε</font>]] 17:51, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*:Fixed. —[[User:Guanaco|Guan]][[User talk:Guanaco|aco]] 01:02, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' as useful and less distracting. It could maybe be a bit bigger with a table box around it, but I think it's good as a smaller alternative. -[[User:Mysekurity|<font color="black">Mys</font>]][[WP:EA|'''''<font color="green">e</font>''''']][[User talk:Mysekurity|<font color="black">kurity</font>]] 12:18, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. Less distracting for pages that are unlikely to be un-semiprotected, such as Bush. --[[User:Blu Aardvark|Blu Aardvark]] | <sup>[[User_talk:Blu Aardvark|(talk)]] | [[special:contributions/Blu Aardvark|(contribs)]]</sup> 10:59, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
**No, because of its name that implies some mandate for semi-permanent sprotection. Instead, use the correctly named [[Template:Sprotected-small]] (without redirecting). -[[User:Splash|Splash]]<small><sup>[[User talk:Splash|talk]]</sup></small> 22:39, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', unnecessary. [[User:JYolkowski|JYolkowski]] // [[User talk:JYolkowski|talk]] 22:34, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' There is a need for the notice to be small for long term semi's. --[[User:Rogerd|rogerd]] 04:10, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
 
==== [[Template:Campaignbox Byzantine-Arab War]] ====
I've already merged it into [[Template:Campaignbox Muslim Conquest]]. [[User:Palm dogg|Palm_Dogg]] 03:53, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Comment:''' the [[Battle of Syllaeum]], mentioned in the "Byzantine-Arab War" template, isn't itself a "Muslim Conquest" per se, but a defeat that temporarily put a stop to further Islamic conquests in Europe. Possibly re-title "The Muslim Conquests" into something slightly different?&#160;— [[User:TheKMan|'''<font color="#0000FF">The</font><font color="#FF0000">KMan</font>''']][[User_talk:TheKMan|<font color="#000000"><sup><u>talk</u></sup></font>]] 04:52, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nom. I think the idea is that the series of wars as a whole is termed the "Muslim Conquests", not that each individual battle is necessarily one. &mdash;[[User:Kirill Lokshin|Kirill Lok]][[Wikipedia:Esperanza|<font color="green">s</font>]][[User:Kirill Lokshin|hin]] 14:11, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' as above. --[[User:Loopy|Loopy]] <sup>[[WP:EA|<font color="green">e</font>]]</sup> 04:29, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
 
==== [[Template:User de-5]] ====
{{tln|User de-5}}<br />
*'''Delete''' — Same reasons as for [[#Template:User en-5|User en-5]] below. Unused, created by [[User:Fenice|Fenice]] during the debate for en-5, possibly to make a [[WP:POINT]]. [[User:Ilmari Karonen|Ilmari Karonen]] <small>([[User talk:Ilmari Karonen|talk]])</small> 23:59, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
:*I wonder if your personal attacks are _necessary_ to put through these deletions? Much easier to try and discredit a person than discussing policies, Ilmari. --[[User:Fenice|Fenice]] 06:26, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
::*Referring to [[WP:POINT]] is not a personal attack. Also, in this case I think Ilmari Karonen's suspicion is quite valid. Creating a sister template for a template that is nominated for deletion before any consensus is reached, particularly when you yourself did not intend to use it, seems to me like a good reason to bring up [[WP:POINT]]. Generally speaking, I'd like to suggest that you calm down and [[WP:AGF|assume good faith]]. [[User:EldKatt|EldKatt]] <small>([[User talk:EldKatt|Talk]])</small> 16:22, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
:::*[[user:Rhobite]] tells me that I cannot be defended from your insults, EldKatt, because even repeated insulting comments cannot be deleted on this page. Claiming someone is trying to make a point is of course a personal attack. Have a look at [[WP:AGF]]. You know this policy. You are citing it right here. Are you never embarrassed? I have asked you and Ilmari several times to stop harrassing me. --[[User:Fenice|Fenice]] 17:11, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
::::*As far as I can see, continuing this discussion would not lead to anything positive for either you or me. Before I take a much-needed vacation from this whole conflict, I want to point out that I have not lied about anything here or anywhere else, and I have not insulted or attacked you or anyone else. I regret to say that I lack the energy to deal with this conflict (although honestly I doubt it can be dealt with at the time of writing), and this is the last you will hear from me regarding this issue. (I'm cross-posting this to relevant pages.) [[User:EldKatt|EldKatt]] <small>([[User talk:EldKatt|Talk]])</small> 18:27, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. Non-standard template, and per nominator.&#160;— [[User:TheKMan|'''<font color="#0000FF">The</font><font color="#FF0000">KMan</font>''']][[User_talk:TheKMan|<font color="#000000"><sup><u>talk</u></sup></font>]] 01:09, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' non-standard Babel template, for the same reasons as for {{tl|User en-5}}. &mdash; [[User:Knowledge Seeker|Knowledge Seeker]] [[User talk:Knowledge Seeker|&#2470;]] 01:52, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' and replace with category outside of babel heirarchy (eg. "Professional copy-editor (German)"). Again, I'm against the user-4 category as well but it's easier to create something on wikipedia than to remove it. A four-level system of beginner, intermediate, advanced, and "native or native-like" is plenty as far as i'm concerned. [[user:ntennis|ntennis]] 02:11, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', per en-5 discussion. [[User:Rhobite|Rhobite]] 06:13, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Speedy keep''', obviously. The proposed policy was not opposed by anyone. It should have been discussed first before putting it up on deletion.--[[User:Fenice|Fenice]] 06:23, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. Replace with professional writer category. -- [[User:Sneltrekker|Sneltrekker]] 12:12, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong Keep'''. A policy does not yet exist making these professional languages illegal. I have no problems with people that want to claim this.--'''[[User:God_of_War|God of]][[User Talk:God_of_War| War]]''' 15:00, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' or '''Move''' to a more appropriate ___location, not de-5. This has the same problems as en-5 and does seem to have been made to provide an argument against deletion in the en-5 debate. - [[User:Cuivienen|Cuivienen]] 15:10, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*I suppose the result of the debate for en-5 will, in a way, set a precedent for either deleting or keeping this template (although there's a lot more of a consensus here). I vote '''delete''', though, with the reasoning I have already explained at en-5. [[User:EldKatt|EldKatt]] <small>([[User talk:EldKatt|Talk]])</small> 16:22, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per en-5 discussion. --[[User:Fang Aili|Fang Aili]] 21:05, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per en-5 - [[Image:Union flag 1606 (Kings Colors).svg|20px|UK]] [[User:Bourbons3|'''«ßØÛ®ßÖѧ3»''']] <sup>[[User_talk:Bourbons3|Talk]] | [[special:contributions/Bourbons3|Contrib's]]</sup> 21:22, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' as per en-5, and as a possible [[WP:POINT]] violation. [[User:Lord Bob|Lord Bob]] 21:57, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''Strong delete'''. Changes likes these to the babel system should be discussed on meta and not on a single language version of Wikipedia. If we follow this course, the babel system would mean different things on each language version of Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects. --[[User:Maitch|Maitch]] 02:08, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
**Actually, it already does: the xx-4 levels are nonstandard extensions. They're not used on meta or commons, even though quite a few Wikipedias have adopted them. But I agree that we don't really need ''more'' nonstandard levels. —[[User:Ilmari Karonen|Ilmari Karonen]] <small>([[User talk:Ilmari Karonen|talk]])</small> 08:33, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
***I '''know''' and I don't agree to level 4 either, but I wasn't around at that point. If it is discussed at meta and they have found a consensus then it's fine, but I don't like you unilaterally changing things - and the fact that you didn't even have discussed a policy makes it even worse. --[[User:Maitch|Maitch]] 17:03, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' as it is not harmful to the purpose of WP. --[[User:Dschor|Dschor]] 11:21, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' as it is not useful to the purpose of WP. --[[User:Doc glasgow|Doc]] [[User talk:Doc glasgow|<sup>ask?</sup>]] 11:26, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per en-5. --[[User:Angelo.romano|Angelo]] 16:48, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' More nonsense templates for peoples personal pets. [[User:Djegan|Djegan]] 19:10, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nominator. -- [[User:Nae'blis|nae'blis]] <i><sub>[[User_talk:Nae'blis|(talk)]]</sub></i> 19:16, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 
==== [[Template:Holiday]] ====
{{tln|Holiday}}<br />
'''Delete''' — This template was only edited once, back in September 2004; I don't know if this template is even used on any pages. In addition, a better template ([[Template: Infobox Holiday]]) has been created and is being added to holiday articles (like [[Christmas]], [[Yom Kippur]]). [[User:Joturner|joturner]] 13:25, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''Delete''' Redundant because of Infobox Holiday. Not used on any pages. — [[User:Wackymacs|Wackymacs]] 17:13, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''Delete''' as per [[User:Wackymacs|Wackymacs]]. - [[User:Jokermage|Jokermage]] <sup>"[[User_talk:Jokermage|Timor Mentum Occidit]]"</sup> 19:14, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''Delete''' other template better <b><font style="background: lightblue"><font color="darkblue">[[User:DaGizza|D]]</font><font color="blue">[[User:DaGizza|a]]</font><font color="yellow">[[User:DaGizza|Gizza]]</font></font></b> ''<sup><font color="orange">[[User_talk:DaGizza|Chat]]</font></sup>'' 22:32, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. [[User:Preaky|Preaky]] 05:16, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Oh, just redirect''' to prevent someone else re-creating it. -- [[User:Netoholic|Netoholic]] [[User talk:Netoholic|@]] 06:50, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''delete''' Is redundant. [[User:Brian New Zealand|Brian]] | [[User talk:Brian New Zealand|(Talk)]] 04:51, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' Because it is not used - [[Image:Union flag 1606 (Kings Colors).svg|20px|UK]] [[User:Bourbons3|'''«ßØÛ®ßÖѧ3»''']] <sup>[[User_talk:Bourbons3|T]] | [[special:contributions/Bourbons3|C]]</sup> 15:42, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
 
==== [[Template:He]] ====
The template makes the Hebrew text look butt ugly. [[User:JB82|JB82]]<sup>[[User_talk:JB82|{ * }]]</sup> 03:25, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
*Doesn't look "butt ugly" to me (maybe check your installed fonts?), and adding the TfD notice seems to have broken the markup for every use of this template. [[User:Android79|<span style="color: green">android</span>]][[User talk:Android79|<span style="color: purple">79</span>]] 06:01, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' font can be easily changed. Improve don't delete. &larr;[[User:Humus sapiens|Humus sapiens]][[User talk:Humus sapiens|&larr;ну?]] 11:01, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep.''' I don't see how "butt ugly" would be a criterion for the deletion of anything on a wiki; if it is ugly, make it look pretty. [[User:EldKatt|EldKatt]] <small>([[User talk:EldKatt|Talk]])</small> 20:26, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
* The template is butt ugly you say? {{tl|sofixit}}. If "butt ugly" were a criterion for deletion in real life, I would have been deleted long ago. (sorry, no picture to prove my assertion will be provided... you'll just have to trust me!) Thank goodness it is not. It shouldn't be here, either. '''Keep''' unless technical reasons why it cannot ever be made to work (in a way that honors [[WP:AUM]]) are provided. ++[[User:Lar|Lar]]: [[User_talk:Lar|t]]/[[Special:Contributions/Lar|c]] 20:48, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Weak delete'''. The question is not whether it can be made to "work", but whether it can ever be useful for anything. Maybe this template does have a valid use, but I can't think of what it would be. Hebrew text on Wikipedia seems to work just fine without it. (By the way, [[Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:He|What links here]] (which admittedly has been buggy lately) shows in being used on four pages, on three of which it is ''mis''used (missing parameter)!) —[[User:Ilmari Karonen|Ilmari Karonen]] <small>([[User talk:Ilmari Karonen|talk]])</small> 00:07, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*keep '''but''' change it to correspond to {{tl|ar}} (minus the language link), and '''delete''' {{tl|Ivrit}} which is then redundant. [[User:Dbachmann|dab]] <small>[[User_talk:Dbachmann|('''&#5839;''')]]</small> 13:59, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 
==== [[Template:Cc-by-sa-any]] ====
 
This image copyright tag is equivalent to <nowiki>{{cc-by-sa-1.0}}{{cc-by-sa-2.0}}</nowiki>, and apparently it [[Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Cc-by-sa-any|isn't used anywhere]]. [[User:Dbenbenn|dbenbenn]] | [[User talk:Dbenbenn|talk]] 01:41, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' &mdash; Whatlinkshere has been acting strange lately. I have been seeing templates on pages that were absent from the lists. &mdash; [[User:Seven Days|<strong><font color="#666">Seven Days</font></strong>]] <strong>&raquo;</strong> [[User talk:Seven Days|<strong><font color="#666">talk</font></strong>]] 03:27, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
** Good point. I'll renominate it when the link lists are fixed. [[User:Dbenbenn|dbenbenn]] | [[User talk:Dbenbenn|talk]] 20:07, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 
====[[Template:flsr]]====
No longer in use, as I have replaced this with the more-useful {{tl|flsr box}} (see [[State Road 9336 (Florida)]] vs. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=State_Road_9336_%28Florida%29&oldid=34197652 its old state] for an example). --[[User:SPUI|SPUI]] ([[User talk:SPUI|talk]] - <small>[[User:SPUI/SFD|don't use sorted stub templates!]]</small>) 01:11, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' Per nom [[User:DaGizza|<b><font color="darkblue"> D</font><font color="teal">a</font><font color="lightblue">Gizza</font></b>]]''<sup><font color="orange">[[User_talk:DaGizza|Chat]]</font></sup>'' <sup><b><font color="gold">[[Special:Contributions/DaGizza|(c)]]</font></b></sup> 22:08, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nom --[[User:Loopy|Loopy]] <sup>[[WP:EA|<font color="green">e</font>]]</sup> 21:37, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 
===January 7===
 
==== Template:Infobox County/* ====
 
'''Delete''' — Please consider deleting the following templates:
 
{{tln|Infobox County/No flag}}<br />
{{tln|Infobox County/Map only}}
 
Both were created for use with places that were incompatable with [[:Template:Infobox County]], i.e. some places didn't have a flag or seal. Now that certain rows can be hidden, every U.S. County can use [[:Template:Infobox County]]. Thus, the above templetes are now obsolete. I have replaced every instance of them I knew of. Note that the nominations do '''''not''''' include [[:Template:Infobox County]]. See also my nomination for [[:Template:Infobox Community]] below. &mdash; [[User:Seven Days|<strong><font color="#666">Seven Days</font></strong>]] <strong>&raquo;</strong> [[User talk:Seven Days|<strong><font color="#666">talk</font></strong>]] 20:31, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
 
* As far as I'm concerned, anytime a sub-template is deprecated, it's a '''speedy deletion'''. -- [[User:Netoholic|Netoholic]] [[User talk:Netoholic|@]] 22:57, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Weak support''' I fundamentally agree with this. I wonder if this should instead be rolled into recent [[Template:Infobox Country]] efforts, for which some systemic updates/changes will be made shortly ... i.e., not to the actual template, but to ensure that countries use the same one? [[User:E Pluribus Anthony|E Pluribus Anthony]] 05:50, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 
==== [[Template:User Friendly]] ====
 
A noncommercial image tag. I've replaced it with a fair use tag for all the images at [[User Friendly characters]]. The only remaining image using this tag is on [[WP:IFD]]. If this template is deleted, please delete [[:Category:User friendly Images]], too. [[User:Dbenbenn|dbenbenn]] | [[User talk:Dbenbenn|talk]] 18:30, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' - Ok, rather than tweaking the template to work for all the images under a fairuse protocole, you just decide to delete it. How about you edit it, so that each image can have a uniform description. --[[User:ZeWrestler|<span style="color:green">ZeWrestler</span>]] [[user talk:ZeWrestler|<sup><span style="color:green">Talk</span></sup>]] 19:05, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. We don't make image-tagging templates that will only ever be used on a dozen images. &mdash;[[User:Cryptic|Cryptic]] [[User talk:Cryptic|(talk)]] 19:15, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per Cryptic --[[User:Wikiacc|Wikiacc]] [[User talk:Wikiacc|¶]] 20:34, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per Cryptic. [[User:Jkelly|Jkelly]] 21:20, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' non-free license tags. —[[User:Ilmari Karonen|Ilmari Karonen]] <small>([[User talk:Ilmari Karonen|talk]])</small> 21:50, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per Cryptic. [[User:Kenj0418|kenj0418]] 04:14, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 
==== [[Template:Qif]] ====
{{tln|Qif}}<br />
 
As some people might know I am a fan of that template, but I do not need that template I need its functionality. We have been told by developer Jamesday on [[WP:AUM]] that qif harms the servers and thus we should work to reduce the harm. It has thus been identified as violating [[WP:AUM]]. I had some hope that qif could be implemented in code and that we could wait a bit before tearing down its use, but that seems not to be the case as the developers do not answer requests in that direction, which is something I do not want to complain about because this is their right. As we know Netoholic is working his way through templates to remove qif and he is backed by [[WP:AUM]] which is in turn backed by Jamesday. Netoholic tries to keep functionality as far as possible but if he does not see a way to keep it he requests to downgrade requirements, again backed by [[WP:AUM]]. I know that by nominating qif I will be accused for trying to create a [[MeatBall:ForestFire]] as some prefer to tear down qif behind the scenes by doing [[divide et impera]], something which I think is not ok (others have qualified me for "stonewalling"). Moving qif to the holding cell until its uses have been removed would better reflect the actual situation. Please express below how we should proceed. [[User talk:Adrian Buehlmann|Adrian Buehlmann]] 10:25, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
 
*'''Comment''': Inclined to vote delete, but I would really appreciate it if someone showed me a vital usage of this template - it's nearly impossible to look through this (often very complex) pages that include this to find just how it is necessary. However, given that the template is effectively being orphaned at the moment, it makes sense to put it in the holding cell. [[User:Terrafire|Terrafire]] 16:27, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
:*For example [[template:book reference]], [[template:web reference]], [[template:journal reference]], [[template:language]]. Those will loose more or less function, at least they are hard to convert to something else. Netoholic already worked on [[Template:Conference reference]]. - [[User talk:Adrian Buehlmann|Adrian Buehlmann]] 17:11, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
:*[[Template:Note label]] also uses (though doesn't have many whatlinkshere and I don't know whether it's ''vital''...). - [[User:Marsian|Marsian]] / [[User talk:Marsian|talk]] 18:40, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
::*Ouch. Looking at just how integrated this is into our content model, I'm going to have to vote '''keep''' until a better solution is implemented. Some sort of a notice encouraging people not to use it unless completely necessary would be good though. [[User:Terrafire|Terrafire]] 23:29, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Speedy holding cell''' [[User:Snowspinner|Phil Sandifer]] 16:46, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''Keep''', of course. If you want this template deleted, why don't you submit a patch to MediaWiki implementing a more efficient solution. Until then, this template really is needed. [[User:Dbenbenn|dbenbenn]] | [[User talk:Dbenbenn|talk]] 18:25, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
**I'm sorry, what? Are you saying that the developers owe it to you to give you the functionality you want before they're allowed to fix the database load? [[User:Snowspinner|Phil Sandifer]] 18:27, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*** Is [[User:Adrian Buehlmann]] a developer? I'm just saying that there plenty of contributors to Wikipedia who know how to code, and it should be easy enough to implement a more efficient replacement before destroying lots of work by deleting this template. [[User:Dbenbenn|dbenbenn]] | [[User talk:Dbenbenn|talk]] 18:32, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
****Have a look at [[WP:AUM]] - the developers have specifically asked us to reduce usage of this template. [[User:Snowspinner|Phil Sandifer]] 18:41, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
***** "Reduce" is not the same as "eliminate". Would you destroy [[Template:Book reference]]? As far as I can see, that template ''really does'' need the functionality of Qif, or some equivalent MediaWiki functionality. [[User:Dbenbenn|dbenbenn]] | [[User talk:Dbenbenn|talk]] 19:01, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
******How about more than one template? Perhaps a tool for creating citations would be a good idea. That shouldn't be too difficult to program. Even I could probably do it. [[User:Sam Korn|<nowiki>[[Sam Korn]]</nowiki>]] 21:01, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*******Yes, please create that tool. [[User talk:Adrian Buehlmann|Adrian Buehlmann]] 21:31, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
********Right, I have created a tool that generates plain wikitext. I will post it for testing as soon as I get a Toolserver account, as I don't want to use my own server. Private information could be garnered from it. It'll be up soon, hopefully. [[User:Sam Korn|<nowiki>[[Sam Korn]]</nowiki>]] 21:37, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
********Thanks to [[User:Robchurch|Robchurch]], I have the citation tool available. [http://tools.wikimedia.de/~robchurch/bookref/bookref.php]. Feedback welcomed. [[User:Sam Korn|<nowiki>[[Sam Korn]]</nowiki>]] 22:30, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
*********[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Sam_Korn&oldid=34525856#Bug_1 bug1] [[User talk:Adrian Buehlmann|Adrian Buehlmann]] 22:07, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
**********Fixed at [http://tools.wikimedia.de/~samkorn/citation/bookref.php]. [[User:Sam Korn|<nowiki>[[Sam Korn]]</nowiki>]] 19:34, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''Delete (blank, remove uses, delete)''' - I have found ''no'' template that Qif can't be completely eliminated from by using other methods. I'd have eliminated it long ago if the templates using it weren't all/mostly protected. -- [[User:Netoholic|Netoholic]] [[User talk:Netoholic|@]] 18:44, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
**<s>Ok. '''Blank and then remove uses'''. As Netoholic proposes. [[User talk:Adrian Buehlmann|Adrian Buehlmann]] 20:56, 7 January 2006 (UTC)</s> struck out per CBD [[User talk:Adrian Buehlmann|Adrian Buehlmann]] 12:09, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' For two reasons. 1) AUM 2) Code that is excessively difficult to understand should be removed or simplified. [[User:Sam Korn|<nowiki>[[Sam Korn]]</nowiki>]] 18:47, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
**Then I would propose that you switch off your computer immediately. I'm shure there is some code inside it you do not understand :-). I also suppose you know how IC design works. [[User talk:Adrian Buehlmann|Adrian Buehlmann]] 19:10, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
***I'm not supposed to write my computer code. I am supposed to write Wikipedia code. Making the code more difficult than is ''absolutely necessary'' should not happen. I don't know what IC design ''is''. [[User:Sam Korn|<nowiki>[[Sam Korn]]</nowiki>]] 21:01, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
****If you do not understand [[template:book reference]] then leave it. That's what I wanted to say. There are enough people that understand how it works. The point is that you request that the requirements be lowered to make the code simpler. That's not the same. By the way nobody here objects anyone to make any code simpler if that can be done without breaking existing articles. Or do you really believe we stuff in code just for the sake of making it nedlessly complex? [[User talk:Adrian Buehlmann|Adrian Buehlmann]]
***** I pretty strongly think people tend to overthink templates over time. Maybe I'm getting to me a wiki-fogey, but templates really should be simple constructs to help mirror text for consistency, not do complex processing. -- [[User:Netoholic|Netoholic]] [[User talk:Netoholic|@]] 09:14, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
****** There is something in your statement. It's a slow creeping process. Somebody comes onto the talk page and asks: "I have an idea, couldn't we do feature XYZ. I need that in article OPXYVKLM". First reaction is usually "Oh, no. Not another request." Then someone comes up with an idea and demonstrates: "look, we can do it by doing trick QSW". Then the "group" around that templates sees that it works and that the "world is not tumbling down by doing it", and it gets implemented. It is damned hard to refuse such request to modify a template. And it is very hard for outstanders to understand why that template group went that way. Problem is also that everybody can finger around with templates, there is no "board" that controls it. For wiki articles, this model is fine, but on heavy use templates that wiki model just does not work. Reverting heavy use templates back and forth is the wrong way. [[User talk:Adrian Buehlmann|Adrian Buehlmann]] 09:33, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
*******Indeed - revert wars are the wrong way. That does not mean, however, that there is not a right side and a wrong side in a given revert war. [[User:Snowspinner|Phil Sandifer]] 19:58, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' almost orphaned; other methods can be used to get the same functionality. --[[User:Wikiacc|Wikiacc]] [[User talk:Wikiacc|¶]] 20:15, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' after orphaning is completed. Whatlinkshere shows at least 10,000 uses, so "almost orphaned" may be a little optimistic. &mdash;[[User:Kirill Lokshin|Kirill Lok]][[Wikipedia:Esperanza|<font color="green">s</font>]][[User:Kirill Lokshin|hin]] 20:56, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
**Many of those pages simply include a template using qif (as mentioned above, primarily the reference templates and &#123;{[[Template:language|language]]}}). --[[User:Wikiacc|Wikiacc]] [[User talk:Wikiacc|¶]] 17:07, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Weak keep''' until we have a replacement. I just talked with brion on IRC and he expressed some support for simple replacement syntax like <code><nowiki>{{ifdef:param|Whatever}}</nowiki></code>. There's also an existing [http://bugzilla.wikipedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2615 feature request] on Bugzilla. We just need someone to do the coding. —[[User:Ilmari Karonen|Ilmari Karonen]] <small>([[User talk:Ilmari Karonen|talk]])</small> 21:24, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
**That would be a good first step. The best thing would be if someone could look at book reference and help us implement that without using qif. I believe there are some more functions needed. For example there should also be something like <s><code><nowiki>{{ifnotdef:param|text to display if param is not defined}}</nowiki></code></s><code><nowiki>{{ifempty:param|text to display if param is empty}}</nowiki></code>. This could also be done while qif resides in the holding cell. [[User talk:Adrian Buehlmann|Adrian Buehlmann]] 21:43, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' once orphaned as per developers. [[User:Lord Bob|Lord Bob]] 23:35, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' until we have a replacement that does not rely on CSS hacks. --[[User:SPUI|SPUI]] ([[User talk:SPUI|talk]] - <small>[[User:SPUI/SFD|don't use sorted stub templates!]]</small>) 01:18, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
** If you don't like hacks, there is an alternative... use multiple alternative templates and run bots to convert articles to the appropriate ones. Can we have your delete vote now? -- [[User:Netoholic|Netoholic]] [[User talk:Netoholic|@]] 07:08, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
***Nope - that's not what I mean. --[[User:SPUI|SPUI]] ([[User talk:SPUI|talk]] - <small>[[User:SPUI/SFD|don't use sorted stub templates!]]</small>) 07:42, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' per SPUI, or until my proposed renaming (see talk page at [[WP:AUM]]) occurs. —[[User:Locke Cole|Locke Cole]] • [[User talk:Locke Cole|t]] • [[Special:Contributions/Locke Cole|c]] 07:54, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' (for now). Jamesday has requested that we "reduce" this template's use, and I applaud Netoholic's efforts. Jamesday has '''''not''''', however, requested that we eliminate the template entirely. I won't support its deletion until I'm confident that all of its current uses can be replaced with code that generates functionally equivalent (or reasonably similar) results. And no, Phil, this doesn't mean that I advocate "ignoring the devs." &mdash;[[User:David Levy|David Levy]] 22:15, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
:*Uses can also be removed while qif is in the holding cell (provided it is not blanked during that). It can even reside there for as long as we want (of course not forever). I see no point in using qif. It is designed to be used in templates, which is banned by [[WP:AUM]]. [[User talk:Adrian Buehlmann|Adrian Buehlmann]] 00:02, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
::*This template's use should be avoided whenever possible, but it has '''''not''''' been "banned." Placing it in the holding cell would imply that we definitely intend to delete it (and would mandate removal from all pages). As I said, I'm not comfortable supporting such a measure until '''after''' all instances have been replaced with code that generates functionally equivalent (or reasonably similar) results. &mdash;[[User:David Levy|David Levy]] 06:49, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
:::*Do you intend for "reasonable similar" to replace book reference calls by plain old non-template media wiki source? If not, how far do you intend to go cutting off features from template book reference? The actual version of book reference cannot be implemented without using qif. BTW you can remove every template call if needed. Jamesday requested to work reduce the harm of qif. So where does qif not harm? [[User talk:Adrian Buehlmann|Adrian Buehlmann]] 12:29, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
::::*I'm familiar with neither the book reference template nor the intricacies of such coding, and I'm not certain that the removal of {{tl|qif}} is feasible. That's why I've voted to keep it for the time being. Jamesday requested that we reduce the extent to which meta-templates are used, thereby reducing the amount of strain placed on Wikipedia's servers. He did '''''not''''' order us to eliminate meta-templates entirely. &mdash;[[User:David Levy|David Levy]] 16:25, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
:::::*You cannot have "a little bit of qif". Technically it would work, but you will never reach consensus where it shall be allowed and where not. And those that remove qif can always cite [[WP:AUM]]. So in the end, qif is removed anyway from every template due to [[WP:AUM]]. [[User talk:Adrian Buehlmann|Adrian Buehlmann]] 17:24, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
::::::*I disagree. Just as templates themselves should be used in moderation, there's no reason why we can't do the same with meta-templates (when no suitable alternatives exist). &mdash;[[User:David Levy|David Levy]] 21:48, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
:::::::*[[template:book reference]] is used in 2'000 articles. It ''was'' intended for mass use. [[User talk:Adrian Buehlmann|Adrian Buehlmann]] 21:58, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. This is widely used. A better testing method would be helpful, but this is working for now. [[User:Xaosflux|<b><font color="#FF9933" face="monotype"><big>xaosflux</big></font></b>]] <sup>[[User_talk:Xaosflux|<font color="#00FF00">Talk</font>]]</sup><font color="#888888">/</font><sub>[[Wikipedia:Counter Vandalism Unit|<font color="#666666">CVU</font>]]</sub> 06:39, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''Keep''' until an alternative which actually cuts the mustard can be found. The functionality in the reference templates '''cannot''' be duplicated by using ugly CSS hacks, which in any case break on certain browsers (not that that seems to deter some people). Reverting to the previous situation where there were umpteen forks for different cases is simply not acceptable. There seems to be an anti-template mentality growing—often expressed in intemperate attacks on those who dare to use templates for performing "simple tasks"—which I find distasteful and unhelpful: I am not particularly interested in having to run to someone else, cap in hand, asking if their bot can do something I am perfectly capable of doing myself. HTH HAND —[[User:Phil Boswell|Phil]] | [[User talk:Phil Boswell|Talk]] 08:01, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''Keep''' until orphaned by ''acceptable'' replacement templates. I have not seen a single instance where functionality provided by QIF '''cannot''' be replicated without using meta-templates. Only instances where those doing the conversion don't know how to do so, or ''do'' know how but for some reason refuse. --[[User:CBDunkerson|CBD]] <big><sub>[[User talk:CBDunkerson|&#x260E;]]</sub></big> <sup>[[Special:Emailuser/CBDunkerson|&#x2709;]]</sup> 12:30, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
:*If you make such a statement then the duty of prove is on your side. Show me how to implement the actual version of book reference without using qif and I will believe you. I bet you can't. I will test your implementation and bring up negative test cases. [[User talk:Adrian Buehlmann|Adrian Buehlmann]] 12:40, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
::*Ok. Take a look at [[User:CBDunkerson/Sandbox4]]. May not be 100% (I threw it together in an hour), but it exactly matches multiple test samples and I think it is certainly a 'proof of concept'. It ''would'' require '|if=' to be added to every existing book reference call. Let me know if you are interested in using it and I will iron out any bugs. --[[User:CBDunkerson|CBD]] <big><sub>[[User talk:CBDunkerson|&#x260E;]]</sub></big> <sup>[[Special:Emailuser/CBDunkerson|&#x2709;]]</sup> 19:44, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
:::*[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Adrian_Buehlmann/work/b-refCBD/1 bug1] [[User talk:Adrian Buehlmann|Adrian Buehlmann]] 21:41, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
::::*As noted elsewhere, the 'Date' parameter wasn't listed as an option on the talk page for this template. That and various small spacing/punctuation details which I uncovered myself have now been corrected. There are also now two different non-meta versions of 'Book reference' at [[User:CBDunkerson/Sandbox4]] and a discussion about which should be used on my talk page. Based on this and other templates I believe that '''everything''' which uses Qif can be converted to a non-meta version... and would like to take the time to do that ''before'' removing Qif. Breaking them all by removing Qif ''first'' and '''then''' cleaning up the mess seems needlessly disruptive. --[[User:CBDunkerson|CBD]] <big><sub>[[User talk:CBDunkerson|&#x260E;]]</sub></big> <sup>[[Special:Emailuser/CBDunkerson|&#x2709;]]</sup> 11:45, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
:::::*Conrad, I appreciate your tireless work. It's a good idea to do two implementations on an existing template so that we can compare. Nevertheless I still have the strong feeling that some functions of qif cannot be mapped to weeble or CSS. I agree with you that first killing qif and then cleaning up the mess is not good for the articles (have thus changed my vote above). I will test your new implementations.
:::::*CBD has successfully converted [[template:book reference]] to the CSS hiddenStructure trick. All [[User talk:Adrian Buehlmann/work/b-refCBD/CSS/1|test cases]] passed. Thanks and congratulations! Prove adduced for CSS. [[User talk:Adrian Buehlmann|Adrian Buehlmann]] 19:32, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
:::::*Same for weeble variant! See [[User talk:Adrian Buehlmann/work/b-refCBD/weeble/2|test cases]]. All tests are based on [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:CBDunkerson/Sandbox4&oldid=34634466 CBD's original implementations]. [[User talk:Adrian Buehlmann|Adrian Buehlmann]] 19:50, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
::::::*Just a clarification - the 'side by side comparison' and initial CSS version were added to that page by Netoholic [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User%3ACBDunkerson%2FSandbox4&diff=34545921&oldid=34544711 here]. I'd suggested CSS as an alternate possibility, but hadn't written it up. Since Netoholic built the majority of the CSS version I've just adjusted it to have the URL and Title 'merged', rather than as two separate items, adjusted the minutiae of spacing and punctuation which are so convoluted on this template, and made a few other small additions. Also, there were a couple of things which I wasn't sure how to do with CSS (I don't use it as much) so I implemented them in the CSS version with a variant of 'Weeble' which doesn't require the '|if=' parameter (but is 'uglier' and more limited in scope). Netoholic or someone else might want to convert those sections to CSS if there are ways to do so. And just for the record... after working on this template I am now convinced that nested curly braces were invented for the sole purpose of driving dyslexics insane. ;} --[[User:CBDunkerson|CBD]] <big><sub>[[User talk:CBDunkerson|&#x260E;]]</sub></big> <sup>[[Special:Emailuser/CBDunkerson|&#x2709;]]</sup> 20:00, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
::::::::*So then! Thanks to both of you for your joint effort in proving me wrong. [[User talk:Adrian Buehlmann|Adrian Buehlmann]] 20:11, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete (blank, remove uses, delete)'''. Unnecessary complication and a resource hog. There really shouldn't need to be any debate on this. It should be a speedy delete. [[User:BlankVerse|<sup><font color="green">''Blank''</font></sup>]][[User talk:BlankVerse|<sup><font color="#F88017">''Verse''</font></sup>]] 15:54, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''Keep''' because no replacement exists right now. I don't want to go back to the days when there were several different versions of a template that took different arguments. [[User:Rspeer|'''<span style="color: #63f; text-decoration: none;">r</span><span style="color: #333;">speer</span>''']] / [[User talk:Rspeer|<span style="color: #333;">ɹəəds</span><span style="color: #63f; text-decoration: none;">ɹ </span>]] 19:37, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' once all uses have been cleaned up, although I don't imagine that's going to be anytime soon. [[User:JYolkowski|JYolkowski]] // [[User talk:JYolkowski|talk]] 23:45, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' until replacement functionality is implemented (per CBD), then '''delete'''. -- [[User:Nae'blis|nae'blis]] <i><sub>[[User_talk:Nae'blis|(talk)]]</sub></i> 16:28, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' Once orphaned - [[Image:Union flag 1606 (Kings Colors).svg|20px|UK]] [[User:Bourbons3|'''«ßØÛ®ßÖѧ3»''']] <sup>[[User_talk:Bourbons3|T]] | [[special:contributions/Bourbons3|C]]</sup> 15:46, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' until fully replaced with functionally equilivant code, as per [[User:David Levy]]. [[User:DESiegel|DES]] [[User talk:DESiegel|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 16:11, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''', pending suitable replacement or update to Mediawiki. [[User:Avriette|Avriette]] 21:30, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 
==== [[Template:Succession incumbent]] ====
{{tln|Succession incumbent}}<br />
 
'''Delete''' — This template is sparsely used as it is almost identical to [[:Template:Incumbent succession box]]. [[User:Philip Stevens|Philip Stevens]] 10:17, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
 
'''Delete''' as per [[User:Philip Stevens|Philip Stevens]]. No articles in the article namespace use the template, many use [[:Template:Incumbent succession box]], so the decision has virtually been made already. [[User:Terrafire|Terrafire]] 16:38, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
 
*'''Delete''' [[User:Dustimagic|Dustimagic]] 18:12, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
 
==== [[Template:See2]] ====
{{tln|see2}}<br />
*'''Speedy delete''' — was deleted 2005 May, reappeared, deprecated tag since 2005 Dec 16; orphaned as of today. --[[User:William Allen Simpson|William Allen Simpson]] 09:07, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nom - [[Image:Union flag 1606 (Kings Colors).svg|20px|UK]] [[User:Bourbons3|'''«ßØÛ®ßÖѧ3»''']] <sup>[[User_talk:Bourbons3|Talk]] | [[special:contributions/Bourbons3|Contrib's]]</sup> 16:11, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''': The fact that it's been recreated suggests that there's a demand for it; perhaps some people avoid automagical syntax. Why insist that everyone do things the One True Way. [[User:Pmanderson|Septentrionalis]] 06:06, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 
==== [[Template:See3]] ====
{{tln|see3}}<br />
*'''Speedy delete''' — deprecated tag since 2005 Dec 16; orphaned as of yesterday. --[[User:William Allen Simpson|William Allen Simpson]] 09:07, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nom - [[Image:Union flag 1606 (Kings Colors).svg|20px|UK]] [[User:Bourbons3|'''«ßØÛ®ßÖѧ3»''']] <sup>[[User_talk:Bourbons3|Talk]] | [[special:contributions/Bourbons3|Contrib's]]</sup> 16:11, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Comment.''' This tag is ''not'' orphaned. It is used on [[Canadian federal election, 2004]] and possibly elsewhere. - [[User:Cuivienen|Cuivienen]] 04:45, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
 
==== [[Template:See4]] ====
{{tln|see4}}<br />
*'''Speedy delete''' — deprecated tag since 2005 Dec 16; orphan. --[[User:William Allen Simpson|William Allen Simpson]] 09:07, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nom - [[Image:Union flag 1606 (Kings Colors).svg|20px|UK]] [[User:Bourbons3|'''«ßØÛ®ßÖѧ3»''']] <sup>[[User_talk:Bourbons3|Talk]] | [[special:contributions/Bourbons3|Contrib's]]</sup> 16:11, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
 
==== [[Template:See5]] ====
{{tln|see5}}<br />
*'''Speedy delete''' — deprecated tag since 2005 Dec 16; orphan. --[[User:William Allen Simpson|William Allen Simpson]] 09:07, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nom - [[Image:Union flag 1606 (Kings Colors).svg|20px|UK]] [[User:Bourbons3|'''«ßØÛ®ßÖѧ3»''']] <sup>[[User_talk:Bourbons3|Talk]] | [[special:contributions/Bourbons3|Contrib's]]</sup> 16:11, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
 
==== [[Template:See6]] ====
{{tln|see6}}<br />
*'''Speedy delete''' — created '''with''' deprecated tag on 2005 Dec 28; orphan. --[[User:William Allen Simpson|William Allen Simpson]] 09:07, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nom - [[Image:Union flag 1606 (Kings Colors).svg|20px|UK]] [[User:Bourbons3|'''«ßØÛ®ßÖѧ3»''']] <sup>[[User_talk:Bourbons3|Talk]] | [[special:contributions/Bourbons3|Contrib's]]</sup> 16:11, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
 
 
==== [[Template:Bigspace]] ====
All this template does is create a big space, as in '''&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;'''. Silliness. -- [[User:Netoholic|Netoholic]] [[User talk:Netoholic|@]] 08:55, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''Delete''' -- [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] | [[User talk:Jmabel|Talk]] 09:03, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''Delete'''. Should be in the creator's user namespace if needed. Also, it takes more characters to use that template than it does to type "&amp;nbsp;" twice. — [[User:TheKMan|'''<font color="#0000FF">The</font><font color="#FF0000">KMan</font>''']][[User_talk:TheKMan|<font color="#000000"><sup><u>talk</u></sup></font>]] 10:55, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''Delete''' - needless. --<font color="2B7A2B">[[User:Cactus.man|Cactus<b>.</b>man]]</font> <font size="4">[[User talk:Cactus.man|&#9997;]]</font> 11:37, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''Userfy''' not needed. [[User:Xaosflux|<b><font color="#FF9933" face="monotype"><big>xaosflux</big></font></b>]] <sup>[[User_talk:Xaosflux|<font color="#00FF00">Talk</font>]]</sup><font color="#888888">/</font><sub>[[Wikipedia:Counter Vandalism Unit|<font color="#666666">CVU</font>]]</sub> 17:48, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''Delete''', completely and utterly useless. —[[User:Ilmari Karonen|Ilmari Karonen]] <small>([[User talk:Ilmari Karonen|talk]])</small> 05:44, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. [[User:Preaky|Preaky]] 05:18, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong delete''' No use - [[Image:Union flag 1606 (Kings Colors).svg|20px|UK]] [[User:Bourbons3|'''«ßØÛ®ßÖѧ3»''']] <sup>[[User_talk:Bourbons3|Talk]] | [[special:contributions/Bourbons3|Contrib's]]</sup> 21:27, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''Delete'''. Useless, even in the user's namespace. Why not to use ''&amp;nbps;&amp;nbsp;''? [[User:Matveims|fragmer]] 05:18, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 
==== [[Template:Big Brother USA season 6 background]] ====
{{tln|Big Brother USA season 6 background}}<br />
'''Delete''' — A template that consists solely of two other templates and a bunch of text is not partially useful. Also, people can't easily edit the text of the article without having to go through the template. [[User:Ricky81682|Ricky81682]] ([[User talk:Ricky81682|talk]]) 07:36, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. --[[User:Golbez|Golbez]] 07:45, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' - A number of bio articles for Big Brother contestants failed to give the most basic of explanation of what the show is. They talked of things like "HoH" and "secret partner" without explaining their meaning. This template simply repeats standard text, to give context to an article, for those less familiar with Big Brother, or who haven't watched it in a long time (or never watched regularly). The nominator has not explained any problem with it. If it needs to be improved, please do so. The inclusion of two templates is not critical, and if that's a problem, they can be taken out. --[[User:Thivierr|Rob]] 07:56, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''', per Rob, provides valuable context to readers. [[User:Can't sleep, clown will eat me|Can&#39;t sleep, clown will eat me]] 08:07, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' - this content should be written into articles, not templates. [[User:Snowspinner|Phil Sandifer]] 09:31, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
**It should be written in all ten (more later)? I don't understand how this is different then {{tl|United States}} which avoids retyping stuff 50 times, and eases maintenance? For an "in body" example, look at [[Hamilton Township, Atlantic County, New Jersey]] which has {{tl|NJ Congress 02}}, {{tl|NJ Senate}}, {{tl|NJ Legislative 02}}, etc... This seems like a common and efficient approach, that will help us keep information in articles up-to-date, while also providing proper context for individual sub-topic/detail articles. --[[User:Thivierr|Rob]] 11:00, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
***Apples and oranges. One is a paragraph of text, the others are tabular information. Based on that, you think that if this template doesn't exist, ''no'' template should. There are very, very few templates that only insert text. Most are either infoboxes, navigation aids (like the example footers you gave) or procedural ones, not text. Straw man: Crumpled. --[[User:Golbez|Golbez]]
****What do you mean "''...the others are tabular information...''". Only one of the templates I used as an example uses a table. The others were in sentence form, to be blended into various article bodies. I'm not sure how many of these there are, but {{tl|NJ Legislative 40}} makes me think there must be at least 40. --[[User:Thivierr|Rob]] 22:17, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*****Yeah, sorry, as you can see I switched midway through my comment from "tabular" to "navigational", and didn't go back to change it. And I'm guilty of my own crime, I didn't look at the NJ templates. However, the United States template has nothing to do with this. --[[User:Golbez|Golbez]] 21:33, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
***These are all terrible ideas, and should all be deleted. Article text should ALWAYS be in the article namespace. [[User:Snowspinner|Phil Sandifer]] 16:18, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
****Did you.. actually look at them, Snowspinner? --[[User:Golbez|Golbez]] 17:23, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
****If these are *all* terrible ideas, as you say, shouldn't there be some sort of central place where we tell people of a convention against them, rather than randomly deleting selected ones. --[[User:Thivierr|Rob]] 17:10, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*****[[WP:BEANS]] - until someone was stupid enough to create them, there was no reason to ban them. [[User:Snowspinner|Phil Sandifer]] 17:17, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
******Please read [[WP:CIVIL]] and [[WP:NPA]]. --[[User:Thivierr|Rob]] 18:18, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*******Were you the template creator? I hadn't checked. Regardless, my point stands - these templates are stupid, and stupid in a way that had not previously been thought of. [[User:Snowspinner|Phil Sandifer]] 18:25, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
********It appears the entire extent of your reasoning is the word "stupid". You haven't given one reason for your opinion, other than to make a [[WP:NPA|personal attack]], which you have now repeated (knowing full well how it's being taken). Please consider explaining your position, and let's try to raise the standard for discussion around here. --[[User:Thivierr|Rob]] 20:59, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' per Rob. --[[User:Thorri|Thorri]] 11:50, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' -- what a badly written template, with grammar and spelling errors! I've moved the text into the article (and done some work on the badly written article as well). The correct template is {{tl|background}}. Now orphaned. --[[User:William Allen Simpson|William Allen Simpson]] 15:45, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
**When did bad spelling and grammar become deletion criteria? --[[User:Thivierr|Rob]] 17:12, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nomination - [[Image:Union flag 1606 (Kings Colors).svg|20px|UK]] [[User:Bourbons3|'''«ßØÛ®ßÖѧ3»''']] <sup>[[User_talk:Bourbons3|Talk]] | [[special:contributions/Bourbons3|Contrib's]]</sup> 16:14, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nom et al, meta templates are evil and this one is not sensible - content in article is appropriate. [[User:KillerChihuahua|KillerChihuahua]]<sup>[[User talk:KillerChihuahua|?!?]]</sup> 16:27, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. Why do we even have articles on seasons of a television show? --[[User:Improv|Improv]] 17:24, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
**Because [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Big_Brother_%28USA_TV_series%29&oldid=34026363 this] article was getting way to big, and needed to be broke up. I suppose it's a similiar concept to why we have articles for each sequel to a serial movie series that follows a standard format, but has variations worth noting. It's also better than the numerous cases, of individual articles for 30-minute episodes of certain shows. --[[User:Thivierr|Rob]] 17:54, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''as per nom. [[User:Dustimagic|Dustimagic]] 18:15, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*Comment: Prior to today I hadn't read [[Wikipedia:Avoid using meta-templates]], which says we shouldn't include templates in templates. So, I used "subst", to avoid this. Perhaps another option is to put the included templates {{tl|background}} and {{tl|spoiler}} in the individual bios (regardless of whether {{tl|Big Brother USA season 6 background}} is kept). I think the issue here is only if we want to give standard background/context information, or if we want to compell all/most readers to read a separate article. --[[User:Thivierr|Rob]] 18:55, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. If this information is necessary in multiple articles, make a [[Big Brother USA season 6 background]] article and link to it. Or, better yet, implant this information into each article, as necessary. This is really an abuse of template system. [[User:Matveims|fragmer]] 00:21, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong Delete'''. Article text should always be in the article, not hidden in a template. --[[User:Bky1701|Bky1701]] 01:19, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. So just copy-paste the info into each article. What's so difficult about that? Then at least the info can be customized or edited as appropriate for each individual article, allowing for much better flow and more diverse wording.
*'''Delete''' per above (which is, incidentally, one of the best arguments I've heard in ages for merging all of these <s>anonymous nobodies</s> "reality" TV contestants into a single article per series. And not starting any article on a TV series until at least twelve months after it's aired, this being an encyclopaedia and not a tabloid newspaper and all.- [[User:JzG|Just zis <span style="border: 1px; border-style:solid">&nbsp;Guy,</span> you know?]] <sup>[[User_talk:JzG|[T]]]</sup>/<sub>[[Special:Contributions/JzG|[C]]]</sub> [[Image:Flag of the United Kingdom.svg|25px|<nowiki></nowiki>]] ''[[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/JzG|RfA!]]'' 14:19, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' - abuse. Templates do not serve this purpose. [[User:Renata3|Renata]] 16:45, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
{{Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Template:Infobox biography}}
*'''Strong Keep''' - this is just getting silly - I don't like your template so I'll recommend it for deletion. We need creativity to add to the blandness of text, we need templates to give a common look and feel to articles of similar subject matter. Ok if this is not a good style or content improv it provide or something better. Oh let's not do that when we can get the current one deleted for no good reason and we'll just get on each other nerves. :: [[User:Kevinalewis|Kevinalewis]] : please contact me on my [[User talk:Kevinalewis|Talk Page]] : 17:16, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong Keep''' Arguments to remove entirely subjective. [[User:CaptainCarrot|CaptainCarrot]] 18:02, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Conditional Keep''' The Template has some potential, but if only applied in few areas it makes the website look mistmatched and unorganized. If this template is kept it should be applied to a majority of articles, and simular templates should be made for articles not about people [[User:PlasticMan|PlasticMan]] 22:50, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong Delete''' the foul infobox that clatters the articles' space per reasons stated by Giano. --[[User:Ghirlandajo|Ghirla]] | [[User talk:Ghirlandajo|talk]] 07:07, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong Delete''' generally useless, distracting and adds nothing. [[User:JackO'Lantern|JackO&#39;Lantern]] 08:23, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
 
==== Template:Infobox Community ====
'''Delete''' — Please consider deleting the following templates:
 
{{tln|Infobox Community}}<br />
{{tln|Infobox Community/No seal}}<br />
{{tln|Infobox Community/Unincorporated}}<br />
 
All were created for use with places that were incompatable with [[:Template:Infobox City]], i.e. some places didn't have a nickname or flag. Now that certain rows can be hidden, every place defined by the [[U.S. Census]] can use [[:Template:Infobox City]]. Thus, the above templetes are now obsolete. I have replaced every instance of them I knew of. &mdash; [[User:Seven Days|<strong><font color="#666">Seven Days</font></strong>]] <strong>&raquo;</strong> [[User talk:Seven Days|<strong><font color="#666">talk</font></strong>]] 02:03, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''Delete''' I'm with you. Only 4 total left using it (go to the template and hit "what links here" [[User:Jwy|John (Jwy)]] 02:20, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
 
==== [[Template:Bahamas TV]] ====
{{tln|Bahamas TV}}<br />
'''Delete''' — Only linked by {{tl|Miami TV}} as a see also, and whatlinkshere therefore shows several other "usages" of the template (really the Miami TV link) (it is also linked to by an article that I don't know how), and only serves to navigate between one redlink -- which practically eliminates the need for such templates!. '''[[User:Wcquidditch|<font color="red">WC</font>''<font color="#999933">Quidditch</font>'']]''' <big>[[User talk:Wcquidditch|<font color="red">&#9742;</font>]] [[Special:Contributions/Wcquidditch|<font color="#999933">&#9998;</font>]]</big> 00:23, 7 January 2006 (UTC) --'''[[User:Wcquidditch|<font color="red">WC</font>''<font color="#999933">Quidditch</font>'']]''' <big>[[User talk:Wcquidditch|<font color="red">&#9742;</font>]] [[Special:Contributions/Wcquidditch|<font color="#999933">&#9998;</font>]]</big> 00:23, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per WCQuidditch --[[User:Qirex|Qirex]] 04:28, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete unless improved''' &mdash; For the moment, it has no real purpose. However, if other links are added, this could become useful. &mdash; [[User:Seven Days|<strong><font color="#666">Seven Days</font></strong>]] <strong>&raquo;</strong> [[User talk:Seven Days|<strong><font color="#666">talk</font></strong>]] 05:37, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
 
*'''Keep and improve on it''': Apparently, every template i edit reverts. Every template i CREATE is nominated for deletion, or is simply deleted without notice. It's nice to see wikipedia follows its own rules. Or not.
 
I think i'm moving on to greener pastures from this desolate wasteland. Wikipedia is supposed to be a site where you can share information and not have to worry about cliques and abuse by senior members and Administration. I guess it's gone that way already. What a pity. Wikipedia had so much potential...
 
[[User:Raccoon Fox|Raccoon Fox]] 17:12, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 
===January 6===
==== [[Template:Frown]] ====
{{tln|Frown}}<br />
*'''Delete''' — POV. Non-encyclopedic. Created in response to the failed AfD of [[Saugeen Stripper]]. [[User:Wrathchild-K|Wrathchild]] 21:51, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' - uncivil. --[[User:Thivierr|Rob]] 21:57, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. No problem with it. [[User:Jtdirl|<span style="color:#006666; background-color:orange">'''Fear''ÉIREANN'''''</span>]][[Image:Ireland-Capitals.PNG|15px]]\<sup><font color="blue">[[User talk:Jtdirl|(caint)]]</font></sup> 22:06, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' - sour grapes. -- [[User:Nae'blis|nae'blis]] <i><sub>[[User_talk:Nae'blis|(talk)]]</sub></i> 23:20, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' - there is no business deleting it. [[User:Niffweed17|Niffweed17]] 01:18, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''-POV [[User:Dustimagic|Dustimagic]]
*'''Delete''' &mdash; Uncivil, POV, and unencyclopedic. &mdash; [[User:Seven Days|<strong><font color="#666">Seven Days</font></strong>]] <strong>&raquo;</strong> [[User talk:Seven Days|<strong><font color="#666">talk</font></strong>]] 02:08, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' Valid POV for a userpage [[User:Keithgreer|Keith Greer]] [[Image:Flag of Northern Ireland2.svg|30px]] 02:12, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' - just being mean, if it's userpage material move it there. [[User:Ashibaka|Ashibaka]] <small>[[User talk:Ashibaka|tock]]</small> 02:13, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. Created and intended to be used as a "useful thing" (quote from [[User:Adam_Bishop|creator's userpage]]) to be used in an uncivil manner (see [[Talk:Saugeen Stripper#WTF?]]); isn't intended for use on userpage itself. --[[User:Qirex|Qirex]] 04:22, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', only appropriately used in one person's userspace, no need for it to be a template. [[User:Christopher Parham|Christopher Parham]] [[User talk:Christopher Parham|(talk)]] 04:23, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''', I softned it, now it could be almost cute if used correctly.--'''[[User:God_of_War|God of]][[User Talk:God_of_War| War]]''' 06:47, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. No civil purpose I can see. Definitely no purpose that might help the encyclopedia. -- [[User:SCZenz|SCZenz]] 07:04, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong keep''', per other supporters. --[[User:Cjmarsicano|CJ Marsicano]] 07:20, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. POV, plain stupid, waste of space, not encyclopedic. — [[User:Wackymacs|Wackymacs]] 08:07, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. It's a userbox that's fine on a user page, but not in the context that it was created for, as a commemoration of a failed AfD, and used on its talk page.&#160;— [[User:TheKMan|'''<font color="#0000FF">The</font><font color="#FF0000">KMan</font>''']][[User_talk:TheKMan|<font color="#000000"><sup><u>talk</u></sup></font>]] 08:44, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' - per TheKMan. --<font color="2B7A2B">[[User:Cactus.man|Cactus<b>.</b>man]]</font> <font size="4">[[User talk:Cactus.man|&#9997;]]</font> 11:57, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Userfy''' If someone wants it for suerpages, etc let them, but calling things stupid borders on [[WP:CIVIL|civility]] so remove it from the main spaces. [[User:Xaosflux|<b><font color="#FF9933" face="monotype"><big>xaosflux</big></font></b>]] <sup>[[User_talk:Xaosflux|<font color="#00FF00">Talk</font>]]</sup><font color="#888888">/</font><sub>[[Wikipedia:Counter Vandalism Unit|<font color="#666666">CVU</font>]]</sub> 17:50, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*Ah, you guys are no fun. It's outlived its amusingness anyway, so I've put the code my sandbox. I'll remove it from the Saugeen Stripper page. [[User:Adam Bishop|Adam Bishop]] 19:47, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' or move to user space. &mdash; [[User:Knowledge Seeker|Knowledge Seeker]] [[User talk:Knowledge Seeker|&#2470;]] 10:33, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. Frown. This is stupid. [[User:Lord Bob|Lord Bob]] 22:03, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' Useless --[[User:Ryan Delaney|Ryan Delaney]] [[User talk:Ryan Delaney|<sup><b>talk</b></sup>]] 07:20, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' Not problems with it, any user should be allowed to use it [[User:DaGizza|<b><font color="darkblue"> D</font><font color="teal">a</font><font color="lightblue">Gizza</font></b>]]''<sup><font color="orange">[[User_talk:DaGizza|Chat]]</font></sup>'' <sup><b><font color="gold">[[Special:Contributions/DaGizza|(c)]]</font></b></sup> 12:00, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 
====[[Template:Dmoz]]====
Do we really need that? [[User talk:Adrian Buehlmann|Adrian Buehlmann]] 15:08, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. I think it's a very handy template to have around. Is there something wrong with it? - [[User:EurekaLott|EurekaLott]] 15:39, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. Ummm...yeah, what's the problem? It's just as useful as [[Template:GameFAQs]] or any of the IMDb templates.[[User:Aeverett|Wrathchild]] 15:46, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
:* Just thought it does not that much save on typing: example [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_UML_tools&diff=34108721&oldid=34105157]. At least it should be subst'ed when used, but this usually gets forgotten. [[User talk:Adrian Buehlmann|Adrian Buehlmann]] 17:22, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. As far as I can tell, it's just one of a number of handy external link templates. Handy is good. [[User:Lord Bob|Lord Bob]] 15:48, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*<strike>Weak delete</strike>. I disagree that this is particularly handy; it saves perhaps a few seconds worth of key-strokes. Like Adrian, I don't think we need this. This kind of thing just needs a quick style guideline somewhere, not a template. <strike>Having said this, I am qualifying my vote with weak since it doesn't seem harmful or much of a drain of resources; it wouldn't bother me much if it's kept.</strike> I just noticed that there is a near identical template at [[Template:ODP]], so this is just a template fork which was made instead of just modifying the existing template --[[User:Qirex|Qirex]] 15:58, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
**[[Template:ODP]] redirects to [[Template:Dmoz]] and isn't used in any articles. [[User:Aeverett|Wrathchild]] 16:43, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
***As of about 15 minutes ago. Prior to that, it was in use. - [[User:EurekaLott|EurekaLott]] 16:47, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
****In light of this and after having thought about it some more, I'm changing my vote to '''keep'''. --[[User:Qirex|Qirex]] 04:07, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''keep''' I think that in general such templates are a good way of standardizing external links to large and often-linked sites like the [[IMDB]] or the [[ISFDB]] (both of which have such link templates). There is an argument not to subst such tempaltes, since if the site in question changes its ___location or internal format, all links can be repaired by simply editing the template. But if frequently used, perhaps such tempaltes should be protected or semi-protected to avoid possible DOS vandalism. [[User:DESiegel|DES]] [[User talk:DESiegel|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 20:48, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
:*I wasn't shure myself about nominating this here and I see now it has enough fans. I have executed the outcome of [[Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/Deleted/December_2005#Template:Language link; also equivalent Template:Ll|this nomination]] and I must say I was astonished that this over there had an outcome of "subst and delete". See for example what I had to do [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sepik-Ramu_languages&diff=34108693&oldid=26602873 here] to implement that consensus (the revision before my change there was clearly the better one for my taste). I feel there is something wrong with the treatment of these kind of templates. It would be much better to eventually implement something like an auto-subst in the MediaWiki software instead of this constant lookout for "subst and delete"-able templates. [[User talk:Adrian Buehlmann|Adrian Buehlmann]] 22:11, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' especially as I have seen users edit warring over it for no reason. [[User:Quaque|Quaque]] ([[User talk:Quaque|talk]]&nbsp;&bull;&nbsp;[[Special:Contributions/Quaque|contribs]]) 21:13, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''', per DES and others. [[User:Can't sleep, clown will eat me|Can&#39;t sleep, clown will eat me]] 07:38, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''': don't see a convincing reason to delete. [[User:Jonathunder|Jonathunder]] 20:29, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' --[[User:Terenceong1992|Terence Ong]] <sup>[[User talk:Terenceong1992|Talk]]</sup> 12:21, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 
==== [[Template:afd3]] ====
This template is instruction creep. I don't know, maybe it was useful at one point, but now it just makes it harder to nominate an article for AFD. I removed reference to it from the instructions on AFD, and replaced it with the much simpler <nowiki>{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/whatever}}</nowiki>. --[[User:Phroziac|Phroziac]] <sub>.</sub> <small>o</small> º<sup> O ([[User talk:Phroziac|♥♥♥♥ chocolate!]])</sup> 21:11, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. I personally find it easier to type <nowiki>{{subst:afd3|pg=</nowiki> then Ctrl-V (paste) the article name that I copied beforehand (I also pasted the article name into afd2). I've tried both, and using afd2 and afd3 is just a lot quicker. Both these templates were originally brought about to ''reduce'' instruction creep. It's a lot easier to remember <nowiki>{{subst:afd2|pg=Ctrl-V</nowiki> and the same with afd3. That's just me, but I just found it easier in terms of cutting and pasting. --[[User:Deathphoenix|D]][[Wikipedia:Esperanza|'''e''']][[User:Deathphoenix|ath]][[User_talk:Deathphoenix|'''phoenix''']] 21:26, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. This template has been around for a long long time and most people who are familiar with the AfD process are used to using it. Removing it is just to make things more difficult. Your reason for deletion is essentially, "I don't like it." You don't have to use it, but a lot of us I think find it far more convenient. <span style="font-family:Verdana;">'''[[User:Howcheng|<span style="color: #33C;">howch</span>]][[WP:EA|<span style="color:#0F0">''e''</span>]][[User:Howcheng|<span style="color:#33C">ng</span>]]''' <small>{[[User talk:Howcheng|chat]]}</small></span> 21:53, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' per Deathphoenix and Howcheng. [[User:FreplySpang|FreplySpang]] [[User talk:FreplySpang|(talk)]] 22:22, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' Persoanlly i never use this. I would support editing the instrucvtions to make it celar this is a tool, not a required step in the procedure. But It can be a suefual tool, and it does no harm that I can see. [[User:DESiegel|DES]] [[User talk:DESiegel|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 22:45, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
**'''Comment''' I disagree with your suggestion to "make it clear this is a tool". Instructions are clearer and simpler (especially for newer users) if they simply prescribe a fixed set of steps that can be performed without understanding the mechanics underneath them. The first time I AfD'ed a page, I had no idea about subpages or how to transclude them. I don't think I even knew how to use templates. The instructions were straightforward, though: cut and paste this text here, that text there, the third text another place, and you're done. A simple page of instructions with templates that can be cut and pasted into place is the best way to make AfD accessible to everyone. Users who are interested in how the templates work can of course explore them on their own, but keep the details out of sight of everyone else.--[[User:Srleffler|Srleffler]] 23:03, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong keep'''. This template ''simplifies'' the AfD process by giving each step a similar form. The text needed is shorter and simpler with the template. I can't imagine how the nominator sees his version as simpler. --[[User:Srleffler|Srleffler]] 22:50, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*I run the [[User:Crypticbot|bot]] that, every day, finds all the articles that people tried to AFD, but screwed up the process. There are very, very many of them, usually between fifteen and thirty, though I've seen as many as eighty in a single day. While a lot of these don't actually make it to AFD - I speedy keep the obvious bad faith nominations and those without any rationale for deletion, move others to [[WP:RFD]] or [[WP:CP]], and speedy others - we're still looking at between 10% and 20% of ''all afd nominations, every day'' not getting completely through the process on their own. (That's not counting the people who fail to subst afd3 on the daily afd subpages, but my bot takes care of them automatically and I don't even see them.)<p>I don't know whether {{tl|afd2}} and {{tl|afd3}} help or hurt more here. As someone who intuitively understood what was going on when I first saw <nowiki>{{msg:stub}}</nowiki> start showing up back in - early 2004, was it? - I'm inclined to guess that they hurt more. However, I think the right way to proceed is to '''keep''' afd3 for those who are used to it, but to try deprecating it, using Phroziac's wording on the instructions, and give that a week or two to see what the real-world effect is. &mdash;[[User:Cryptic|Cryptic]] [[User talk:Cryptic|(talk)]] 23:51, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
:*I have seen quite a few bad AfD's, which begin with putting {{tl|afd}} or {{tl|vfd}} rather than {{tls|afd1}} at the top of the article. Clearly, these are people who never ''saw'' the instructions, but who got the tag from somewhere else.--[[User:Srleffler|Srleffler]] 07:21, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' Helpful to those that like it, harmless to others. Also, I like the standard of using a template, as it makes it easier in the future to change how we list stuff, without re-changing instructions, if we ever wish to. --[[User:Thivierr|Rob]] 08:48, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' As the person who originally came up with this concept, it was created to help people from screwing up nominations. We could easily go back to the 7 or 9 step process that we had prior to 12th of February of last year, if we wanted... but I don't see how that helps at all. Frankly, the idea for afd3 was to keep consistancy with the instructions. It's a lot easier to do so when all you need to remember is {{tl|afd}}, {{tl|afd2}}, {{tl|afd3}}. --[[User:AllyUnion|AllyUnion]] [[User talk:AllyUnion|(talk)]] 09:45, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' Useful template --[[User:Ryan Delaney|Ryan Delaney]] [[User talk:Ryan Delaney|<sup><b>talk</b></sup>]] 17:09, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' Useful template, I've had no problems following the directions for it's use. [[User:Xaosflux|<b><font color="#FF9933" face="monotype"><big>xaosflux</big></font></b>]] <sup>[[User_talk:Xaosflux|<font color="#00FF00">Talk</font>]]</sup><font color="#888888">/</font><sub>[[Wikipedia:Counter Vandalism Unit|<font color="#666666">CVU</font>]]</sub> 17:53, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Weak delete'''. As I had already said on [[Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion]], there is a simpler way to do it, which I described in length. It is harmless, so I wouldn't mind if it stayed, but it should definitely be deprecated. [[User:Titoxd|Tito]][[Wikipedia:Esperanza|<span style="color:#008000;">xd</span>]]<sup>([[User_talk:Titoxd|?!?]] - [[User:Titoxd/Flcelloguy's Tool|help us]])</sup> 00:57, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' for usefulness. -- [[User:Nae'blis|nae'blis]] <i><sub>[[User_talk:Nae'blis|(talk)]]</sub></i> 02:42, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 
===January 5===
 
==== [[Template:Sq 300]] et al.====
'''Delete all''' — This is actually a TfD for 14 incomplete, obsolete, unused and long-dormant templates on Polish squadrons. [[User:BDAbramson|<font style="background:gold">'''''BDAbramson'''''</font>]] [[User talk:BDAbramson|'''T''']] 18:34, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*The templates are:
*[[Template:Sq 300]]
*[[Template:Sq_301]]
*[[Template:Sq_302]]
*[[Template:Sq_304]]
*[[Template:Sq_305]]
*[[Template:Sq_306]]
*[[Template:Sq_307]]
*[[Template:Sq_308]]
*[[Template:Sq_309]]
*[[Template:Sq_315]]
*[[Template:Sq_316]]
*[[Template:Sq_317]]
*[[Template:Sq_318]]
*[[Template:Sq_663]]
 
*'''Delete all''', absolutely no reason to have a separate template (that looks just the same) for each of these. - [[User:Bobet|Bobet]] 01:00, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete all'''. Unfinished and unused templates, which were created by a user that has not contributed since Feb. 2005. Don't really see a future for them.&#160;— [[User:TheKMan|'''<font color="#0000FF">The</font><font color="#FF0000">KMan</font>''']][[User_talk:TheKMan|<font color="#000000"><sup><u>talk</u></sup></font>]] 07:53, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete all'''. Not only are they unfinished, unused, and unlikely to be finished, to the extent that they are finished they don't seem to fill a role best served by templates; it would be better to just put the code on the squadron's page itself. [[User:Lord Bob|Lord Bob]] 15:51, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete all'''--[[User:BirgitteSB|<font color="#f4a460 ">Birgitte§β</font>]] ʈ [[User talk:BirgitteSB|<small><font color="#778899">Talk</font></small>]] 19:01, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete all'''. Totally unnecessary. [[User:Dustimagic|Dustimagic]] 01:28, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
 
==== [[Template:PA-KingCountyGOV]] ====
{{tln|PA-KingCountyGOV}}<br />
'''Delete''' — [[WP:ICT|image copyright tag]] that is not compatible with the [[GFDL]] as it precludes the sale of the material. Discussed at [[Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags#PA-KingCountyGOV]]. Non-free license. Possibly [[WP:CSD]] reason I3. --[[User:ChrisRuvolo|ChrisRuvolo]] ([[User talk:ChrisRuvolo|t]]) 17:08, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''Delete''', incompatible with the restriction on "no comerical use" image tags. &mdash; [[User:EagleOne|EagleOne]]\<sup>[[User_talk:EagleOne|Talk]]</sup> 18:03, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''--[[User:BirgitteSB|<font color="#f4a460 ">Birgitte§β</font>]] ʈ [[User talk:BirgitteSB|<small><font color="#778899">Talk</font></small>]] 19:01, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nom. It is a non-commercial use template created after the date where new non-commercial or permission images would be speedies. To that extent, I've added {{tl|noncommercial}} so that images tagged with this will be easy to deal with. --'''[[User:Wcquidditch|<font color="red">WC</font>''<font color="#999933">Quidditch</font>'']]''' <big>[[User talk:Wcquidditch|<font color="red">&#9742;</font>]] [[Special:Contributions/Wcquidditch|<font color="#999933">&#9998;</font>]]</big> 14:20, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Important Comment:''' Please go through and '''delete the images''' that use this template '''before''' you delete the template itself. &mdash;[[User:Gorgan almighty|gorgan_almighty]] 15:39, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 
Makes sense sort of - The people here probably should make the county to change it's policy, as it was created by a 'government' it should be fully PD and not only partally PD
 
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page. ''
<!--
Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links in order to create a new discussion page using the name format of [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PAGENAME (2nd nomination)]]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. -->
 
The result of the debate was '''speedied''' at creator's request --[[User:Doc glasgow|Doc]] [[User talk:Doc glasgow|<sup>ask?</sup>]] 15:45, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
 
==== [[Template:User support Kelly Martin]] ====
I think it was pretty obvious from [[Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Kelly Martin]] that she doesn't like boxes like these. Let's do her a favor and go through proper process to remove this insult to her beliefs from Wikipedia. [[User:Karmafist|karmafist]] 15:48, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. Since a user page doesn't have to be NPOV and this message of endorsement cannot be regarded as insulting. (<s>+Comment somehow two templates got mixed up, can somebody please fix that, because I do not want to modify it</s>). [[User:KittenKlub|KittenKlub]] 16:07, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Speedy keep''' as bad faith nomination. [[User:Dbiv|David]] | [[User talk:Dbiv|Talk]] 16:28, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
**'''Comment''' Can you please explain your reasoning? I'm just saving her the trouble of nominating this. [[User:Karmafist|karmafist]] 17:15, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
***See [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Userboxes&diff=prev&oldid=33452102 this edit] from Kelly Martin. She includes as an unacceptable class of box "Any userbox which tends to serve the purpose of organizing Wikipedians along political, ideological ('''other than Wikipedia-specific ideologies'''...)" (my emphasis). Support for a particular Wikipedian in an internal election is clearly a Wikipedia-specific stance. Therefore Kelly has not identified this as an unacceptable type of userbox (it was created by one who has in general supported her reasoning on the userbox issue) and you are exhibiting bad faith in suggesting that she does. [[User:Dbiv|David]] | [[User talk:Dbiv|Talk]] 17:37, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. I think that the nomination could perhaps have been phrased differently, but this isn't an appropriate use of Wikipedia resources, and promotes factionalism. [[User:Jkelly|Jkelly]] 16:57, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. Hey, I think there's an encyclopedia around here somewhere, and it ain't finished yet. [[User:Android79|<span style="color: green">android</span>]][[User talk:Android79|<span style="color: purple">79</span>]] 17:02, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' pending a more complete userbox policy. I believe that one is now under discussion. Once it is accepted, then delete any uservoxes which are unacceptable under that policy, and only those. [[User:DESiegel|DES]] [[User talk:DESiegel|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 17:04, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' - Does anyone realise how HARD it is ''not'' to post the photoshopped image I have of "her" with a Stalinesque moustache and eating a baby? :| I know people have no sense of humour. --''[[User:Mistress Selina Kyle|<span style="color:#18186b;text-decoration:underline">Mistress Selina Kyle</span>]] <sup>'''<span style="color:#800080">(</span>'''[[User_talk:Mistress Selina Kyle|<span style="color:#18186b;cursor:help;">Α⇔Ω</span>]] ¦ [[Special:Emailuser/Mistress Selina Kyle|<span style="color:#18186b;cursor:help;">⇒✉</span>]]'''<span style="color:#800080">)</span>'''</sup>'' 17:05, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*:I'd be damn careful if I were you. Joke or not, such an image could lead to legal action. That's something the dear "community" can't protect you from. [[User:Robchurch|Rob Church]] <sup>''[[User_talk:Robchurch|Talk]]''</sup> 17:47, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. Seeing as Ms. Martin hates these things so much, we'd probably be doing her a service. [[User:Morgan695|Morgan695]] 17:07, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' Can it get any more ironic than this? My eyes almost popped out when I saw this on my watchlist. BJAODn-fy or Delete. --[[User:Gurubrahma|Gurubrahma]] 17:16, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
**How did it get on your watchlist if you hadn't already seen it? ~Confused~ --''[[User:Mistress Selina Kyle|<span style="color:#18186b;text-decoration:underline">Mistress Selina Kyle</span>]] <sup>'''<span style="color:#800080">(</span>'''[[User_talk:Mistress Selina Kyle|<span style="color:#18186b;cursor:help;">Α⇔Ω</span>]] ¦ [[Special:Emailuser/Mistress Selina Kyle|<span style="color:#18186b;cursor:help;">⇒✉</span>]]'''<span style="color:#800080">)</span>'''</sup>'' 17:29, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
***I also saw this on my watchlist, because I have TFD on it, and the edit summary is telling enough. --<span style="font-family:monospace">&nbsp;[[User:Grm_wnr|grm_wnr]] </span>[[User_talk:Grm_wnr|<span style="border:1px solid;color:black;font-size:9px;padding:2px 1px 0px 1px">Esc</span>]] 17:34, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' - as a superb parody of the whole saga. Also, per all your arguments that I can do what I like with my user space. [[User:Robchurch|Rob Church]] <sup>''[[User_talk:Robchurch|Talk]]''</sup> 17:42, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
**You forgot the "Nyaa-nyaa :P". Great, are we now down to the "lol [[m:Bash|PWNED YOURSSLF N00B]]" level of discussion (that goes for many people here, but I'm replying to you because I thought you'd be above this)? Oh, and '''keep''' plus stop listing stuff here just to make some point. --<span style="font-family:monospace">&nbsp;[[User:Grm_wnr|grm_wnr]] </span>[[User_talk:Grm_wnr|<span style="border:1px solid;color:black;font-size:9px;padding:2px 1px 0px 1px">Esc</span>]] 18:23, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Stronger Than Dirt Keep''' - and I'm no fan of Ms. Martin's actions, either. How's that for NPOV? [[wink|;)]] --[[User:Cjmarsicano|CJ Marsicano]] 17:57, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''No vote'''. But I wanted to state that [[User:Dbiv|David]] hit the nail on the head. Contrary to popular belief, I have no objection to userboxes generally, and even have seven of them on my user page. Furthermore, I'm touched that there are people who feel strongly enough about my competency and committment to go so far as to create such a template. I do think that many of the people involved in this particular discussion are exhibiting a great deal of hypocrisy, however ("userboxes are fine, except when they support that woman we don't like, then they need to be deleted" is a good summary of some of the arguments for deletion above). I encourage the administrator who closes this discussion to give due weight to the arguments of editors who are recommending deletion based on personal animosity instead of reasoned principle. I'd also suggest that the people who insist that I "hate these things so much" need to (a) go back and reread my comments on the matter of userboxes and (b) go reread [[WP:CIVIL]]. I also think that nominating this template for deletion was a very poor move on the part of whoever did it (I didn't notice) since it was virtually certain to create strife in the community. [[User:Kelly Martin|Kelly Martin]] ([[User talk:Kelly Martin|talk]]) 18:12, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' an eye on people using it. [[User:TCorp|<span style="font:1.1em Courier New, Serif;background:#000;color:#0f0;padding:0 3px;">TCorp</span>]] 18:28, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete.''' If templates that are attacking Kelly have to be deleted, then these should be deleted too. [[User:Zscout370|Zach]] <small><sup>[[User_talk:Zscout370|(Smack Back)]] [[WP:FU|Fair use policy]] </sup></small> 18:53, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
:*'''Comment:''' Templates that attack Kelly go against WP policy of no personal attacks. As far as I know, there is no policy against "defending" another's actions. [[User:Pepsidrinka|Pepsidrinka]] 21:21, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
::*Couldn't it go against [[WP:NPOV]], since for some reason people insist on applying that to userboxes too?[[User:Tommstein|Tommstein]] 09:56, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Disagree but keep''' - I totally disagree with the template and its contents, but I'll defend to the death its right to exist. [[Image:Anglo-Indian Indentity.svg|20px]] [[User:Djr xi|Deano]] <small>([[User talk:Djr_xi|Talk]])</small> 19:03, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*[[Keep]] As above. I'm in favor of keeping userboxes I don't agree with as well. [[User:Larix|Larix]] 19:07, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''', naturally. Hurts noone IMO. &mdash;[[User:Nightstallion|<span style="font-variant:small-caps">Nightstallion</span>]] [[User talk:Nightstallion|''(?)'']] 19:23, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' Wikipolitical userboxes are no good. Divisive and factionalizing. (Note: my original vote here was deleted in an edit conflict. Everyone, please watch out for this.) [[User:FreplySpang|FreplySpang]] [[User talk:FreplySpang|(talk)]] 19:28, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. Haha very funny. [[User:the wub|the wub]] [[User_talk:The wub|<font color="green">"?!"</font>]] 20:12, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' Kelly hates userboxes.[[User:Gateman1997|Gateman1997]] 20:52, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. People should be able to express their views on userpages, within reason. Templates like this are part of that process. <TT>[[User:Crotalus horridus|Crotalus horridus]] <SMALL>([[User talk:Crotalus horridus|TALK]] • [[Special:Contributions/Crotalus horridus|CONTRIBS]])</SMALL></TT> 21:00, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' per Deano. [[User:D-Day|D-Day]] 21:08, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' per norm.--'''[[User:God_of_War|God of]][[User Talk:God_of_War| War]]''' 21:11, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' [[User:Keithgreer|Keith Greer]] [[Image:Flag of Northern Ireland2.svg|30px]] 21:31, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Speedy keep''', bad faith, [[WP:POINT]], attack. [[User:Zoe]]|[[User talk:Zoe|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 21:32, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' bad faith nom. [[User:Sarahe|Sarah Ewart]] 23:23, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' this box as well as all others. It was created for the purposes of being nominated for deletion anyway. I think it is funny, myself - but it should be part of a set. How about this for a partner?
<div style="float: right; border: dotted #CC0000 1px; margin: 1px;">
{| cellspacing="0" style="width: 238px; background: #eeeeee;"
| style="width: 45px; height: 45px; background: #990000; text-align: center; font-size: 14pt; color: #FFFFFF;"|'''KM'''
|style="font-size: 8pt; text-align: center; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.5em; color: #000000;"|This user '''opposes [[User:Kelly Martin|Kelly Martin]]''' for [[WP:ArbCom|ArbCom]]. Beware the cabal!
|}
</div>
:--[[User:Dschor|Dschor]] 23:34, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*I suspect, regrettably, that there are some here that might say ''Keep'' if Kelly said ''Delete'' and ''Delete'' if Kelly said ''Keep''... so what does her "no vote" mean under that logic? If I vote keep does that mean we are going to get 43 other boxes showing who is supporting whom? Blech. If I vote Delete do I get accused of hypocrisy because I'm a supporter of boxes, even ones that show POV? Blech again. Whoever nominated this really ought to ask him or herself why exactly they did it! So, dear readers, after reading all that, you probably are hoping I'll finally express my opinion!. Well here you go: '''[[Mu (negative)|Mu]]''' ++[[User:Lar|Lar]]: [[User_talk:Lar|t]]/[[Special:Contributions/Lar|c]] 00:38, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*:Why do you think I offered "no vote"? I'm not totally stupid. :) [[User:Kelly Martin|Kelly Martin]] ([[User talk:Kelly Martin|talk]]) 15:32, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', I'm fine with people expressing support for Kelly or anyone else, but there's no need to have a template for it. This sort of thing could get silly. [[User:JYolkowski|JYolkowski]] // [[User talk:JYolkowski|talk]] 02:53, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. By the logic espoused by kelly martin in her recent purge on boxes, this would be a very strong contender for deletion, since its entire aim is to further factions on wiki. However, i do not see this as such a bad thing. She has become a real issue which needs to be debated and faced. Declarations of peoples positions on this should not be discouraged.
*'''<font color="green">Strong Keep</font>''' &mdash; <font color="green">And also any userboxes saying the opposite, for example: "''this user thinks Kelly Martin should no way be an arbitrator or hold any position of power whatsoever''": Both are just as much valid points of view.</font> --''[[User:Mistress Selina Kyle|<span style="color:#18186b;text-decoration:underline">Mistress Selina Kyle</span>]] <sup>'''<span style="color:#800080">(</span>'''[[User_talk:Mistress Selina Kyle|<span style="color:#18186b;cursor:help;">Α⇔Ω</span>]] ¦ [[Special:Emailuser/Mistress Selina Kyle|<span style="color:#18186b;cursor:help;">⇒✉</span>]]'''<span style="color:#800080">)</span>'''</sup>'' 10:43, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*''''''
*'''Delete'''. as per reasoning in TfD above. [[User:Dysprosia|Dysprosia]] 11:59, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' campaign buttons. [[User:KillerChihuahua|KillerChihuahua]]<sup>[[User talk:KillerChihuahua|?!?]]</sup> 12:29, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Treat same as [[Template:User oppose Kelly Martin]]'''. My preference would be the removal of both, but I'm ok with both being kept. I'd be concerned with the fairness of allowing support OR opposition, but not both. [[User:Kenj0418|kenj0418]] 15:05, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' was originally parody and humour by Rob Church, but is now being used as grounds for nastiness by Kelly's detractors. Perhaps BJAODN. --[[User:Doc glasgow|Doc]] [[User talk:Doc glasgow|<sup>ask?</sup>]] 15:36, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
 
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.</div>
 
==== [[Template:User allow fairuse]] ====
I don't think this needs a massive amount of explanation. Suffice it to say, that this template may be used to convey the opinion that our users don't like US copyright law. Sorry, but you can't vote that away. [[User:Robchurch|Rob Church]] <sup>''[[User_talk:Robchurch|Talk]]''</sup> 12:21, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
 
*'''Delete''' Whoever created and whoever uses this template needs to have the difference between the law and Wikipedia policy explained to them. [[User:Sam Korn|<nowiki>[[Sam Korn]]</nowiki>]] 12:27, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' Just another attempt at censorship in the user space. This template has not hurt anybody - leave it be. --[[User:Dschor|Dschor]] 12:30, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
:*That is nonsense. [[User:MarkGallagher|fuddlemark]] ([[User talk:MarkGallagher|fuddle me!]]) 15:37, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep for now''' Fair use provision in the US copyright law does not (and will not) specifically target the use of copyrighted image within a particularly defined (in the law) namespace in a particularly defined website. The statement "it's the law" in [[Template talk:User allow fairuse]] <sup>[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template_talk:User_allow_fairuse&oldid=33966462 immutable version]</sup> implies such a misleading statement, that, the action of which, is explicitly and/or specifically prohibited and/or targeted by law. Keep until relevant discussions in [[WP:FU]] '''and''' [[Wikipedia:Proposed policy on userboxes]] have reached a consensus regarding the issue. -- [[User:Carlsmith|Carlsmith]] 13:07, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' speedily as disruption. --[[User:Pjacobi|Pjacobi]] 13:12, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' per [[User:Carlsmith|Carlsmith]]. [[User:Larix|Larix]] 13:18, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', for two reasons. First, that whole law thing. Second, it says "vote". Users who don't know how "voting" works on Wikipedia should not be displaying templates encouraging misuse of policy discussions. [[User:MarkGallagher|fuddlemark]] ([[User talk:MarkGallagher|fuddle me!]]) 15:37, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong Keep''' per Dschor. It's ironic that those who want to delete this invoke dislike of [[George W. Bush]] since they've invoked his mindset over the past week: i.e "the ends justify the means". [[User:Karmafist|karmafist]] 15:42, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*Images which qualify as fair use in an article might not qualify as fair use in a userbox, and this is not the fault of any Wikipedia policy. [[Fair use]] is a complicated concept, and it's not Wikipedia's idea. To me, usage of this templates suggests misunderstanding of the concept of fair use. <s>However, deleting the template won't do anything about that, and keeping it will not do further harm. So I lean towards '''weak keep'''.</s> [[User:EldKatt|EldKatt]] <small>([[User talk:EldKatt|Talk]])</small> 16:26, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
**After some further thought, I realize that this template ''can'' indeed do further harm, by increasing the number of copyvios that have to be dealt with. Ignorance of legal issues can't be deleted, but it can be at least slightly prevented from spreading via templates. I change my mind to '''delete'''. [[User:EldKatt|EldKatt]] <small>([[User talk:EldKatt|Talk]])</small> 17:41, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong delete'''. Opinions may vary but copyright law is law and no vote on Wikipedia will change it. [[User:Dbiv|David]] | [[User talk:Dbiv|Talk]] 16:30, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong delete''' - the creator and users of this template obviously have a weak grasp on copyright law. The use of this template advocates actions that would be copyright infringement - illegal under [[U.S. Copyright law]]. --[[User:ChrisRuvolo|ChrisRuvolo]] ([[User talk:ChrisRuvolo|t]]) 16:50, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' - As I understand it, the rational behind this is inspired by Wikipedia's own rules on fair use images appearing in userboxes being somewhat over-the-top, as is explored in the Firefox template discussions. A logo or such that the creator and/or company allows to be used to support that product and/or company is currently not allowed in userboxes, per WP's rules - not US copyright laws. If I misunderstand this, I'm sure someone will correct me. - [[User:Hayter|Hayter]] 16:53, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
**Thats not my understanding. Wikipedia contributions are licensed under the [[GFDL]] or a compatible license (cc-by-sa, public ___domain, etc.). Logos and such are not licensed under the GFDL and so must be used under the [[fair use]] provision of [[U.S. copyright law]], or not be used at all. So there are two options for image use: [[free content]] or [[fair use]]. Any use that falls outside of that is copyright or license infringement. So even if the license says that you can do X, but the image is not under a GFDL-compatible license, the only way that image is usable in Wikipedia is under fair use. Even if you are doing X, if X falls outside of fair use, you can't do it in Wikipedia. --[[User:ChrisRuvolo|ChrisRuvolo]] ([[User talk:ChrisRuvolo|t]]) 17:27, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
**But that's it - even when an image falls under fair use, WP does not allow it to be used in a userbox - only on a relevant article. As [[User:DESiegel|DES]] says below, this is a stricter application than US law. - [[User:Hayter|Hayter]] 17:31, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
***No, "fair use" is a defence for a use in a particular context. If you want to write up a detailed rationale for the use of an image in a userbox template, do so. Use {{tl2|fairusein|Template:foo}}. The generic {{tl|logo}} fair use rationale is that the image is used for identification purposes in an article. Use of a {{tl|logo}} image in a userbox is what is against policy. If you can write up a reasonable rationale and use {{tl|fairusein}} that would pass {{tl|fairusereview}}, then by all means, do so. --[[User:ChrisRuvolo|ChrisRuvolo]] ([[User talk:ChrisRuvolo|t]]) 18:08, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per [[User:MarkGallagher|fuddlemark]]. [[User:Jkelly|Jkelly]] 16:54, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per law of the United States of America. Stupid United States of America. Why can't your copyright law allow encyclopaedias to use whatever the heck we want? Someday, we will have an encyclopaedic wikistate of our own...perhaps we should buy [[Sealand]] with that $336,539.23 we just raised. [[User:Lord Bob|Lord Bob]] 17:06, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong keep''' Wikipedia policy is currently significantly strictler than U.S. copyright law. Some uses of fair uses images which are pretty clearly legel, and others which are at least arguably legal, are prohibited by Wikipedia policy. This template advocates changing Wikipedia policy, not copyright law. There is at least a good argument that the changes it advocates would be legal under U.S. copyright law, at least in many specific cases. Whether this is a good idwa for Wikipedia is debatable, but this template is precisely an attempt to join that debate. There is no valid reason to delete this. [[User:DESiegel|DES]] [[User talk:DESiegel|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 17:09, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Stronger Than Dirt Keep''' as per all other supporters, especially [[User:DESiegel|DESiegel]]. --[[User:Cjmarsicano|CJ Marsicano]] 17:50, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' Copyright law is complex and this just perpetuates the muddled lack of clarity regarding this. There is no such thing as a "Fair use image". There are images for which "Fair use" can be claimed. It is relatively straightforward to make a strong case for such use on articles directly pertaining to a topic. Making a case for legitimate fair use in the user namespace is much more tenuous (not impossible, but likely far less likely than many proponents seem to think). Better to err on the side of caution with this one, IMO. [[User:Bkonrad|older]]&ne;[[User talk:Bkonrad|wiser]] 17:56, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Comment:''' The people voting delete here seem to be arguing against the ideology behind this template rather than the template itself. As I have explained above, I also disagree with the view expressed by the template, but that does not provide me with a reason to vote delete for the very template, as far as I can see: if people feel a desire to say, in effect, (my free interpretation) "I don't know what fair use means and intend to vote on the basis of a misunderstanding", so be it. I'd sooner delete all the meaningless templates about what beverages you prefer, but there doesn't seem to be much consensus towards that either. [[User:EldKatt|EldKatt]] <small>([[User talk:EldKatt|Talk]])</small> 18:06, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
**Not sure if your comment was directed at me, but my vote was not only about the ideology of the template. The template as written perpetuates a fundamental misunderstaning that there is a category of things such as "Fair use images". There is not. There is only specific uses of specific images that can claimed to be "fair use". Beyond that however, this template is not directly helpful in building an encyclopedia. I have no objection if people were to write the equivalent text on their User pages; but there is no need for a template. [[User:Bkonrad|older]]&ne;[[User talk:Bkonrad|wiser]] 19:05, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
***IMO "Fair use image" in this context meas eaither a) "An image tagfed with one of the fair use licese tags" or b) "an image not available under a free license, and so usable only under fair use if at all" or c) both of the above. Given that understanding I find the phrase useful, although some people may misunderstand it. But then some people may misunderestand almost anything to do with copyright. [[User:DESiegel|DES]] [[User talk:DESiegel|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 20:33, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
**[[User:Bkonrad]] makes a case for not changing wikipedia policy on this issue -- but not a case for suippresing arguments or views on Wikipedia policy, and so no case for deleting this template. Remember that this template does not itself contain any images of any sort -- it merely advocates a change in Wikipedia policy on how and where such images are acceptable. [[User:DESiegel|DES]] [[User talk:DESiegel|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 20:33, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
***I'm not sure I understand what you are talking about. My objections are twofold. First, the template perpetuates an incorrect undetanding of fair use. While you might know better, this template is simply wrong about how it characterizes fair use. Second, it serves no useful purpose for building an encylopedia. Now, people are perfectly free to display their ignorance of fair use on their user pages, but we don't need to keep a template around to make it easy to do so. [[User:Bkonrad|older]]&ne;[[User talk:Bkonrad|wiser]] 03:40, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
****I dunno, a template that said "this user knows nothing of fair use, but feels free to hold forth anyway" could be useful, especially if they're about to get in trouble for uploading dodgy images. However a template that helps ''spread'' ignorance about both the law and policy is an unqualified Bad Thing. [[User:MarkGallagher|fuddlemark]] ([[User talk:MarkGallagher|fuddle me!]]) 11:01, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''Delete''' - Wikipolitical userboxes must go. Created to be divisive and factionalizing. (Deleteing them is also divisive and factionalizing, but seems the lesser evil.) Also, I agree with fuddlemark's second reason. [[User:FreplySpang|FreplySpang]] [[User talk:FreplySpang|(talk)]] 18:22, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
**'''comment''' I see no policy authorizing such deltions. Such deletions should wait on settling the policy issue.
***You "see no policy authorizing such deltions"? Perhaps you should refrain from holding forth on this issue until you understand the deletion process better. [[User:MarkGallagher|fuddlemark]] ([[User talk:MarkGallagher|fuddle me!]]) 11:01, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. Harmless and futile. US law is miniimal to Wikipedia policy on fair use images (now a '''policy'''). Wikipedia strives to serve beyong US borders. [[User:TCorp|<span style="font:1.1em Courier New, Serif;background:#000;color:#0f0;padding:0 3px;">TCorp</span>]] 18:23, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. Sorry, but you can't vote away US copyright law. --[[User:Carnildo|Carnildo]] 18:26, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
**Actually you can, but not here. US Law is writtne and can be changed by US legislatiors, who are chosen by vote. however that is irrelevant, because this tempalte expresses an opnion not on US law, but on places where Wikipedia policy is at least arguably more strict than US law requires. [[User:DESiegel|DES]] [[User talk:DESiegel|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 20:38, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
::'''Comment''' This userbox is not about US copyright law, but about Wikipedia policy [[User:TCorp|<span style="font:1.1em Courier New, Serif;background:#000;color:#0f0;padding:0 3px;">TCorp</span>]] 18:27, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''', wasn't this up for TFD yesterday and was kept.?[[User:Gateman1997|Gateman1997]] 18:29, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Ultra-ultra-super-duper-hyper-strong Keep''' The principal that we can have a userbox saying people want fair-use images in userboxes says that we keep it. [[User:Tomothy|Tom]] 18:50, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
**Um, what? Seriously, that was ultra-ultra-super-duper-hyper-strong unclear. Do you mean you'd like for there to be a template that says "this user wishes fair use images were allowed in userboxen, but recognises that it's not really fair use to do so?" 'Cos that would possibly be acceptable. [[User:MarkGallagher|fuddlemark]] ([[User talk:MarkGallagher|fuddle me!]]) 11:01, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''', clearly. &mdash;[[User:Nightstallion|<span style="font-variant:small-caps">Nightstallion</span>]] [[User talk:Nightstallion|''(?)'']] 19:22, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''', I see no problem with people making clear their views on Wiki policy. [[User:the wub|the wub]] [[User_talk:The wub|<font color="green">"?!"</font>]] 20:07, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. You want to change policy, go to the relavant policy page and discuss. [[User:Garion1000|Garion1000]] [[User_talk:Garion1000|(talk)]] 20:15, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. [[User:Ian13|Ian]]<sup>[[User_talk:Ian13|13]]</sup><sub>ID:540053</sub> 20:37, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. First of all, deleting policy proposals because of disagreement with them is usually considered ill-advised. Secondly, since userspace is not part of the encyclopedia proper, I see no reason why we shouldn't use a more lenient standard (like "whatever won't get Wikipedia in trouble"). I understand why we want to try to avoid fair use images in article space whenever possible, due to distributional issues and preserving the GFDL, but user space is different. Much of the concern here is an example of [[m:Copyright paranoia]]. The fact is that a corporation is not going to sue us because a user has a box on his page saying "I support X product". <TT>[[User:Crotalus horridus|Crotalus horridus]] <SMALL>([[User talk:Crotalus horridus|TALK]] • [[Special:Contributions/Crotalus horridus|CONTRIBS]])</SMALL></TT> 20:56, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Super Strong Keep''' - I wrote this box. The law may be the law and policy may be policy- but in a free country you are allowed to dislike the law and speak out against the law so long as you follow the law. All this box is saying is that the user wishes policy to change, not that they are breaking policy.--'''[[User:God_of_War|God of]][[User Talk:God_of_War| War]]''' 20:58, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
**Wikipedia is not a free country. The userbox urges a change to policy, yes. But that change is probably stupid, and the mechanism you want to use to force that change is ''definitely'' stupid. Stupid userboxen I can live with; stupid userboxen urging stupid changes to policy I cannot. [[User:MarkGallagher|fuddlemark]] ([[User talk:MarkGallagher|fuddle me!]]) 11:01, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
**So maybe you can use this box to find all the "stupid" users. :) --'''[[User:God_of_War|God of]][[User Talk:God_of_War| War]]''' 05:39, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' - the nom's reason for proposed deletion is not very good - damn right I don't respect US copyright law - why would I? Not everyone here is American, so why should we give a rats about US copyright law? The fact that it influences Wiki is the issue that I presume you're concerned with, but that does not stop people's right to an opinion, does it? Or does US law prohibit the right to disagree with the law? [[Image:Anglo-Indian Indentity.svg|20px]] [[User:Djr xi|Deano]] <small>([[User talk:Djr_xi|Talk]])</small> 21:16, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong Keep'''. I'm fed up of seeing user boxes up for deletion! Everyone has their own point of view and their right to express this on user pages wether it be with text, images or userboxes. Why should we take that right away from our very own loyal Wikipedians!? — [[User:Wackymacs|Wackymacs]] 21:26, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
**Wikipedia is not an experiment in free speech. If you want a web page where you can express whatever you want, there's plenty of hosts out there. -- [[User:Cyrius|Cyrius]]|[[User talk:Cyrius|&#9998;]] 03:20, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Speedy delete'''. If there were any such vote it would not be binding, as we can't vote to override law. [[User:Zoe]]|[[User talk:Zoe|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 21:31, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Detele''', but feel free to create boxes declaring your support or otherwise of US copyright policy. Regardless of how you feel about a law, Wikipedia must obey all laws that apply to the State of Florida in the United States. [[User:Thryduulf|Thryduulf]] 23:29, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong delete'''. This user wants Wikipedia to violate copyright law for the sake of his precious userboxes, ''and'' doesn't realize that [[WP:NOT#Wikipedia is not a democracy|Wikipedia is not a democracy]]. Much more of this and I'm gonna start speedy-deleting userboxes myself. -- [[User:SCZenz|SCZenz]] 23:35, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' per DES. —[[User:Locke Cole|Locke Cole]] • [[User talk:Locke Cole|t]] • [[Special:Contributions/Locke Cole|c]] 00:31, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' this userbox is clearly advocating votestacking and nothing else. It is a textbook example of the sort of box that userbox detractors drag out as an example to bring all boxes down. Further, it may (possibly) actually be advocating breaking the law, which is an advocacy I oppose. ++[[User:Lar|Lar]]: [[User_talk:Lar|t]]/[[Special:Contributions/Lar|c]] 00:42, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. The only positive use I can imagine for this template is similar to [[Template:User vand]], a way to identify users who need to be informed that Wikipedia policy (and indeed the law) are in conflict with their position and who need to be watched in case they violate it. [[User:Bryan Derksen|Bryan]] 00:48, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', copyright laws and their interpretation in Wikipedia isn't going to change through voting (at least, not through voting in Wikipedia). And whoever is making these, please concentrate on something else. Having or not having a logo in a userbox is totally inconsequential. - [[User:Bobet|Bobet]] 01:08, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Speedy Delete''' per Zoe. We can't disobey policy and US copyright law, which the Wikimedia Foundation is incorporated and located in. [[User:Bratsche|<font color="#006666">Bratsche</font>]]<sup>[[User_talk:Bratsche|<font color="#FF6600">talk</font>]] | [[Wikipedia:Esperanza|<font color="#339900">Esperanza</font>]]</sup> 01:42, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per [[User:Bryan Derksen]] and everyone else. Oh, and there are no votes on Wikipedia, so the template's creator seems to show even further unfamiliarity with Wikipedia policies and guidelines. [[User:JYolkowski|JYolkowski]] // [[User talk:JYolkowski|talk]] 02:52, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
**Give him a break, that is a recent development. We had [[WP:VFD]] mere months ago.[[User:Gateman1997|Gateman1997]] 03:41, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
***Which was renamed for precisely that reason - "VFD" was never a vote, always a determination of community consensus. The process was misnamed from the beginning, and quite properly renamed. [[User:FCYTravis|FCYTravis]] 04:07, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
****And determining community consensus involves polling the community on what to do about an issue, i.e. a vote. You might not want to call it that, but it's the textbook definition. [[User:Rogue 9|Rogue 9]] 01:45, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' and preemptively ban anyone including it for copyright violation. -- [[User:Cyrius|Cyrius]]|[[User talk:Cyrius|&#9998;]] 03:17, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
**If you're going to call for that then I '''DEMAND''' that you show how this userbox is itself a copyright violation NOW or retract your statement. [[User:Rogue 9|Rogue 9]] 01:50, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
***Please see [[wikt:preemptive|preemptive]]. &mdash;[[User:Cryptic|Cryptic]] [[User talk:Cryptic|(talk)]] 02:35, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
****I'm aware of what it means. So you admit to having absolutely no basis besides being ban-happy. [[User:Rogue 9|Rogue 9]] 05:10, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*****I'm not admitting anything, merely pointing out your strawman. &mdash;[[User:Cryptic|Cryptic]] [[User talk:Cryptic|(talk)]] 06:47, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
******You're admitting that you want to permanently ban people who haven't done anything wrong. Am I the only one who sees a problem with that? [[User:Rogue 9|Rogue 9]] 06:55, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' as per Bratsche. [[User:Zscout370|Zach]] <small><sup>[[User_talk:Zscout370|(Smack Back)]] [[WP:FU|Fair use policy]] </sup></small> 04:12, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' It's a sad state of affairs indeed when we won't even let people express an opinion. What's next? Sending out duct tape brigades to silence people you disagree with? —[[User:Locke Cole|Locke Cole]] • [[User talk:Locke Cole|t]] • [[Special:Contributions/Locke Cole|c]] 04:16, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
** This is an encyclopedia, and there are certain views that indicate a clear desire to undermine the project, and that's bad. If people want to fully exercize their free speech rights, they can make their own website; this one is Jimbo's. -- [[User:SCZenz|SCZenz]] 04:18, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
***I'm well aware it's an encyclopedia, and I'm also aware that free speech doesn't apply here (but thanks for the [[strawman]] response). I don't consider wanting to revise Wikipedia's views on fair-use to be an attempt at undermining the project. I consider it an opinion, and as we usually encourage discussion, I don't see the harm in this template. Shutting people down because they hold a minority opinion is so anti-wiki and anti-consensus as to be reprehensible. I could see the problem if the userbox said something like "this user ignores guidelines and policy on fair-use images and uses them everywhere they want", but it doesn't say that. —[[User:Locke Cole|Locke Cole]] • [[User talk:Locke Cole|t]] • [[Special:Contributions/Locke Cole|c]] 04:36, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''Delete''' per Fuddlemark. [[User:Sarahe|Sarah Ewart]] 04:45, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''Delete''' though allowing users to advertise that they are not just willing but eager to cause Wikipedia financial harm has its uses [[User:The Epopt|➥the Epopt]] 05:55, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
:* '''Comment'''. I was planning to make a donation to Wikipedia in the next few days. It was going to be a pretty good one too, but given the attitude of some people, I chose to find something else to do with the money for the time being. --[[User:Cjmarsicano|CJ Marsicano]] 06:03, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
::* Oh, dearie me, I'm so upset now, I'll hasten to retract my so-thoughtless comment if you'll just please resume planning to make that imaginary donation &mdash; '''not'''. [[User:The Epopt|➥the Epopt]] 21:11, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*Depends on whether I'm allowed to block anyone who displays it. If I am, keep. If not, delete. My guess is delete. [[User:Snowspinner|Phil Sandifer]] 08:22, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
:*You are welcome to refrain from displaying the template on your user page, Phil - please leave it available for those who disagree. Your silly name change doesn't fool anyone, Snowspinner - we all recognize you. --[[User:Dschor|Dschor]] 10:29, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
::*What on Earth? [[User:MarkGallagher|fuddlemark]] ([[User talk:MarkGallagher|fuddle me!]]) 11:01, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
::*Phil Sandifer is Snowspinner?! Someone do a CheckUser, quick! [[User:Carbonite|Carbonite]] | [[User talk:Carbonite|Talk]] 13:28, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
::*Dammit, I knew I should have worn Clark Kent glasses too. [[User:Snowspinner|Phil Sandifer]] 20:31, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
::*And not have your signature link to [[User:Snowspinner]]. And not still use that account to edit. You didn't do a very good job covering your tracks&mdash;it's amazing that no one figured out you were the same user until now! &mdash; [[User:Knowledge Seeker|Knowledge Seeker]] [[User talk:Knowledge Seeker|&#2470;]] 10:25, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', 'this user wants Wikipedia to break laws as policy'. - [[User:Ulayiti|ulayiti]] [[User talk:Ulayiti|<font color="#226b22"><small>(talk)</small></font>]] 13:09, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Extreme delete'''. This template is pretty useless considering that the ArbComm has clearly come down against the use of [[fair use]] images on talk pages. Everybody who has boted keep should read what United States copyright law says about fair use. The section isn't very long, and the criteria for fair use is very simple. [[User:BlankVerse|<sup><font color="green">''Blank''</font></sup>]][[User talk:BlankVerse|<sup><font color="#F88017">''Verse''</font></sup>]] 13:32, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
:: '''Comment''' I could quote US copyright law, but that doesn't mean I can't express my disapproval too. [[User:Tomothy|Tom]] 14:10, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' per DES. I might vote delete if U.S. copyright law was clear, but the voters here certainly don't agree (and I myself cannot understand why an image that's called "fair use" can be used on one internet page and not another). Meanwhile this userbox is not hurting anything. --[[User:Fang Aili|Fang Aili]] 19:22, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
**Actually it is a viatal aspec of "fair use" that where and how you use it matters a great deal, and so what is reasoanble fair use on one internet page may well be nothign of the sort when used for a differen purpose in a different context on a different page. That is the main reason behind the current policy, as I understand it. Most of our usuall justifications for fair use would not apply, or not nearly as strongly, on user pages, and when an image is on a temple it is all too easy for it to be added to pages where the stated rationale does not apply. There are cases, however (like the image on the [[SEPTA]] template, and other logo cases) where IMO a plausisible rationale for fair use on templates could apply, and other cases where a valid rationale could apply for user pages. But current policy seems to forbid this, even if copyright law does not. [[User:DESiegel|DES]] [[User talk:DESiegel|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 20:42, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Comment: '''Jimbo has voiced opinion on this template [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&diff=34149461&oldid=34148582], stating "''I think it should be deleted, and I think it's silly for users to think that they can vote on copyright policy. That's a matter for our legal team.''" [[User:Carbonite|Carbonite]] | [[User talk:Carbonite|Talk]] 20:09, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''Delete''' &mdash; [[User:Rdsmith4|Dan]] | [[User talk:Rdsmith4|talk]] 20:23, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''Strong delete'''. It's just stupid to think we can simply vote about this. [[User:Jhs|Jon]] [[User talk:Jhs|Harald]] [[:no:Bruker:Jhs|Søby]] 20:26, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''Delete''' and get on with building the damn encyclopaedia. --[[User:Ngb|Nick Boalch]]<sup> [[User_talk:Ngb|?!?]]</sup> 20:44, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per Jimbo, I agree. --[[User:Wgfinley|Wgfinley]] 20:52, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Stronger than a silly diamond keep''' This vote is about the userbox, not the idea behind the userbox. I have seen plenty of other userboxes for people supporting proposed policies and policy changes, no reason this one has to go. Remember, we're voting on the userbox, not the idea behind it. [[Image: Pentacle-circumscribed.png|20px]][[User:Search4Lancer|<font color="#33ff00" face="Courier New" style="background: black;">Search</font>]][[Special:Contributions/Search4Lancer|<font color="red" face="Courier New" style="background: black;"><b>4</b></font>]][[User_talk:Search4Lancer|<font color="#33ff00" face="Courier New" style="background: black;">Lancer</font>]][[Image: Pennsylvania state flag.png|26px]] 22:24, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. As said elsewhere, Wikipedia fairuse policy is more restrictive than necessary according to U.S. copyright law. If a user wishes to express their interest toward changing policy, a userbox should be allowed as one of those methods of expression. [[User:Silensor|Silensor]] 22:34, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' - this template is useful as a n00b marker if nothing more. In any case, free speech. ~~ '''[[User:Nickptar|N]]''' ([[User talk:Nickptar|t]]/[[Special:Contributions/Nickptar|c]]) 22:42, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong Delete''' - note that [[User:Jimbo Wales|Jimbo]] actually deleted this template himself before someone informed him about this TfD debate. (See [http://mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2006-January/036627.html] and [http://mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2006-January/036629.html]). Thanks! [[User:Flcelloguy|Flcelloguy]] <small>([[User talk:Flcelloguy|A <font color="brown">note?</font>]])</small> 22:46, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. This userbox shows peoples support for a change of policy. Don't delete a person's right to free speech. [[User:Mdmanser|mdmanser]] 00:08, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' A surprising number of people seem to think that this is America, and that we have a right to free speech on here. I am baffled as to why they think that. That being, Nickptar and Mdmanser, that I can see right now without scrolling. You two (and anyone else who might have said it) are horribly wrong - there is no such right here in Wikipedialand. [[Image: Pentacle-circumscribed.png|20px]][[User:Search4Lancer|<font color="#33ff00" face="Courier New" style="background: black;">Search</font>]][[Special:Contributions/Search4Lancer|<font color="red" face="Courier New" style="background: black;"><b>4</b></font>]][[User_talk:Search4Lancer|<font color="#33ff00" face="Courier New" style="background: black;">Lancer</font>]][[Image: Pennsylvania state flag.png|26px]] 00:46, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
**True, but I think free speech ''ought'' to be respected except under clearly defined circumstances (i.e. [[WP:NPA]], [[WP:CIVIL]], [[WP:NLT]]). ~~ '''[[User:Nickptar|N]]''' ([[User talk:Nickptar|t]]/[[Special:Contributions/Nickptar|c]]) 01:00, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' - any speech is only tolerated here in so far as it furthers the end of creating an [[WP:NPOV]] encyclopedia. --[[User:Doc glasgow|Doc]] [[User talk:Doc glasgow|<sup>ask?</sup>]] 01:05, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Comment''': Removed misleading "vote" reference to clarify that this is about users' opinions regarding Wikipedia's interpretation of copyright law, not about some fictitious "vote". -[[User:Silence|Silence]] 01:12, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*Not again. '''Keep''', and a curse upon the head of whoever is incapable of figuring out that userpages are protected under fair use and that the only thing preventing the use of fair use images in user namespace is extralegal Wikipedia policy, not the law. [[User:Rogue 9|Rogue 9]] 01:34, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
**I find this rather surprising as well. Look at any personal webpage outside of Wikipedia and you are very likely to see various fair-use images. Some Wikipedians - who I'm sure are well-meaning and sincere, but who I think are engaging in [[m:Copyright paranoia]] - think all of this is illegal. How many hundreds of [[New York Yankees]] and [[Boston Red Sox]] fan pages have team logos boosting their support for the team (and often denigrating the other one)? How many of these people have ever even been asked to take them down? What evidence do we have that the copyright holders care about such trivial and incidental uses at all? We're not talking about users hosting copyrighted [[MP3]]s on their user pages. We're talking about instances where there is a reasonable claim of fair use and where the rights holders have not even attempted to tell people that they can't use the materials in this manner. Three of the primary criteria for fair use are that the use is not for profit (and obviously this applies to user pages), that the amount used is minimal (again the case - in many cases, we are talking about single screenshots from movies or TV shows, or individual logos), and that the use does not affect the rights holder's ability to make a profit (and how are any of the uses on user pages possibly going to affect that?) In short, I think we have reasonable fair use claims for most of the instances involved here. It's fine if Wikipedia wants to adopt a more restrictive policy. In article space, I completely agree with trying to minimize fair use whenever a free alternative is possible. I see no reason to do this in userspace, but it's not really a big deal one way or the other. But these over-the-top claims that people are "breaking the law" must go - they border on violating [[Wikipedia:No legal threats]]. These individuals are acting in good faith and with reasonable claims. <TT>[[User:Crotalus horridus|Crotalus horridus]] <SMALL>([[User talk:Crotalus horridus|TALK]] • [[Special:Contributions/Crotalus horridus|CONTRIBS]])</SMALL></TT> 03:26, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*** Most personal webpages on the internet ''do'' violate copyright; outside of Wikipedia, reuse of images from other websites is quite common. But without a license, that ''is'' generally illegal. The issue is not whether the copyright holders care, but what's legal, because the Wikimedia Foundation might be held responsible for deliberate misuse of copyrighted material. Your user page is not your personal page, it's part of the project, and fair use is least likely to apply there because it's not an article about something that requires a picture. Jimbo says (see above) that the current policy on fair use images was adopted on the advice of the project's lawyers&mdash;if you think they're wrong, you can copy all of Wikipedia to your own servers, start your own encyclopedia, and get your own lawyers. -- [[User:SCZenz|SCZenz]] 06:25, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
****To say that "''most'' personal webpages on the internet violate copyright" is a rather sweeping claim, with little evidence to back it up. I have pointed out how the ''de minimis'' use of copyrighted materials generally under discussion here (usually individual screenshots, or logos for the purpose of showing fan support) meet three of the legal criteria for fair use: not for profit, minimal portion of the original work, and no adverse impact on the company's business. If the Foundation wants to have more restrictive rules on fair use images than copyright law requres, that's fine; I don't really care. (I don't even ''have'' a user page of my own, just a redirect to [[User talk:Crotalus horridus|my Talk page]].) My objection is specifically to the over-the-top claims of "lawbreaking", which I think are unreasonable given that these are good-faith claims of fair use, and with the more general attitude of [[m:Copyright paranoia|copyright paranoia]] that seems to be running rampant. This is my last comment on this particular issue, since I've wasted enough time here that I should have been using to write actual articles. <TT>[[User:Crotalus horridus|Crotalus horridus]] <SMALL>([[User talk:Crotalus horridus|TALK]] • [[Special:Contributions/Crotalus horridus|CONTRIBS]])</SMALL></TT> 21:34, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''' [[User:Keithgreer|<strong><font color="#0000cc">Keith Greer</font></strong>]] [[Image:Flag of Northern Ireland2.svg|30px]] 02:27, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' Wishful thinking versus reality. Why does this remind me of "Loretta" from ''Monty Python's Life of Brian''? Perhaps I can create the "User allow free beer" template, to match. --[[User:Calton|Calton]] | [[User talk:Calton|Talk]] 02:46, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Perm-ban all users with this template''' then '''Delete'''. Users with this template are expressing a desire to expose the Wikimedia Foundation to additional legal liability and create greatly increased workload for those cleaning up fair use abuse. Wikipedia is not geocities. If you want a home page, go some place else. Wikipedia is for building an encyclopedia, and you can't vote to change that. Not here, not in some silly userbox, and not anywhere else. --[[User:Gmaxwell|Gmaxwell]] 06:06, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
:'''Comment, with a rebuttal:''' ''Users with this template are expressing a desire to expose the Wikimedia Foundation to additional legal liability and create greatly increased workload for those cleaning up fair use abuse.'' Should we file that line under B.S. or a strawman argument? Let's be realistic: The real "fair use abuse" here is coming from those wishing to discourage policy change by consensus. You scream "Don't rock the boat!" but it's those that are being falsely accused of rocking the boat that are trying to steady the ship. Those of you who repeat the obvious "Wikipedia is an encyclopedia" mantra along with "Wikipedia is not a free speech zone" seem to forget that English Wikipedia would not EXIST without free speech. We now return you to the WikiRevolution already in progress. --[[User:Cjmarsicano|CJ Marsicano]] 06:25, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
:'''Comment''' - Users with this template are expressing an opinion. Something we are all allowed to do on talk pages and such. They are not getting wikipedia into trouble by actually using hundreds of fair use images. All they are doing is saying what they think about things.--'''[[User:God_of_War|God of]][[User Talk:God_of_War| War]]''' 07:12, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*Copylefting our content is a [[m:foundation issue|foundation issue]], and such cannot be changed by a vote or local consensus. This template falsely implies otherwise. '''Delete'''. &mdash;[[User:Cryptic|Cryptic]] [[User talk:Cryptic|(talk)]] 06:47, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. Who cares, it doesn't change anything. There's no reason someone can't sport this if they feel that's necessary. [[User:Cookiecaper|Cookiecaper]] 10:29, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' violates policy, period.--[[User:MONGO|MONGO]] 14:01, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' As free speech, and is POV so it cannot be deleted on the basis that it promoted an opinion - [[Image:Union flag 1606 (Kings Colors).svg|20px|UK]] [[User:Bourbons3|'''«ßØÛ®ßÖѧ3»''']] <sup>[[User_talk:Bourbons3|Talk]] | [[special:contributions/Bourbons3|Contrib's]]</sup> 15:01, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*This template advocates that we change policy to disregard the law. '''Delete''' per [http://mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2006-January/036627.html Jimbo]. [[User:Kelly Martin|Kelly Martin]] ([[User talk:Kelly Martin|talk]]) 17:09, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''[[User:Dustimagic|Dustimagic]] 18:14, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. &mdash;[[User:Nightstallion|<span style="font-variant:small-caps">Nightstallion</span>]] [[User talk:Nightstallion|''(?)'']] 19:49, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Hyper-Strength Keep''' - Userboxes should only be deleted when they consist of personal attacks against fellow members. Promotion of a change to Wikimedia's policies is not something that makes a userbox worthy of deletion. Remember, the debate here is about the ''userbox,'' not the merits of the idea proposed by the userbox. - [[User:Cuivienen|Cuivienen]] 20:33, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. Free speech arguments are specious because people donate huge sums of money for the advancement of the encyclopedia, not of userpages. If people want an ad-supported homepage, log in to MySpace. --[[User:Interiot|Interiot]] 20:59, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong delete''' and watch the supporters. --[[User:Pjacobi|Pjacobi]] 23:10, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*If the image is part of "[http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#107 criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching..., scholarship, or research]" then it can be used on userspace. USA/Florida law supercedes proposed WP policy. If the law is changed, policy can reflect the changes; until then '''delete''' the template. -- [[User:Jeandré|Jeandré]], 2006-01-08[[User talk:Jeandré|t]]00:14z
**But a user may engage in criticism or comment on a user page, nor is the above list an exhastuive list of the legitimate purposes for which fair use images can be used. In any case, deleting this tempalte is not only saying that wikipedia policy on this issue should not be changed, it is saying that people should not be allowed to '''advocate''' making such changes. [[User:DESiegel|DES]] [[User talk:DESiegel|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 22:24, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*:Re [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jeandr%C3%A9&diff=34338909&oldid=33511234]: I don't see userbox use of non-free images as covered by fair use law. We can't have a policy that supports doing something which is illegal where the servers and foundation is. -- [[User:Jeandré|Jeandré]], 2006-01-08[[User talk:Jeandré|t]]10:18z
*'''Strong delete''', speedy even. [[User:Trödel|Trödel]]&#149;<font color="#F0F">[[User_talk:Trödel|talk]]</font> 08:14, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
**In at least some cases, there is a strong case that such image use is lageal under copyright law. Curent wikipedia policy appears to prohibit such use even in such cases. Example, images intended and relased by their creators for individual identification, such as political party logos. [[User:DESiegel|DES]] [[User talk:DESiegel|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 22:24, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', destructive -- advocates placing the encyclopedia into needless legal risk. [[User:Christopher Parham|Christopher Parham]] [[User talk:Christopher Parham|(talk)]] 08:37, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' this destructive template for reasons specified above. &mdash; [[User:Knowledge Seeker|Knowledge Seeker]] [[User talk:Knowledge Seeker|&#2470;]] 10:25, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. Plain and simple... copyright law. [[User:Gflores|Gflores]] <sup>[[User Talk:Gflores|Talk]]</sup> 18:28, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. Can serve no purpose except to attempt to hinder the smooth implementation of the copyright policy, which safeguards Wikipedia from liability. As long as users don't indemnify Wikipedia against third party liability, they're not entitled to use Wikipedia facilities to break the copyright law or to obstruct its application. --[[User:Tony Sidaway|Tony Sidaway]]|[[User talk:Tony Sidaway|Talk]] 22:09, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*Patent '''keep'''. Next we'll be trying to delete anarchy userboxes... <code>// '''[[User:Paroxysm|paroxysm]]''' [[User talk:Paroxysm|(n)]]</code> 22:16, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Comment''': For the really good userboxes, we should try to get "permission on behalf of all wikipedians" for those considered fair use (eg. the [[Camino]] icon, etc). [[User:KelvSYC|kelvSYC]] 00:23, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep.''' The arguments for deletion seem to be based entirely on the details of U.S. copyright law, while the actual question is whether or not one should be allow to list an opinion concerning such law on a Wikipedia user page. The expression of this opinion does not open Wikipedia or any of its users to legal action - nor, of course, does the expression of this opinion render Wikipedia or its users immune from prosecution under the law. - [[User:Scooter|Scooter]] 03:09, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*:'''Comment''' In that case, should the template not be protesting the law? If and until that's changed it's frankly foolhardy to advocate a change in Wikipolicy that breaks it. ''[[User:Csernica|TCC]]'' <small>[[User_talk:Csernica|(talk)]] [[Special:Contributions/Csernica|(contribs)]]</small> 00:35, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong delete'''. It's harmful to encourage people to think that this is an issue on which community opinion matters. If you don't like the fair use policy, talk to the legal team, talk to the Foundation, but for the current time this is not a community issue but rather one for the Foundation and its decision to remain the ''free'' encyclopedia, and to minimize legal risk. [[User:Mindspillage|Mindspillage]] [[User talk:Mindspillage|(spill yours?)]] 04:38, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*''Delete''' and salt the earth. Legal issues trump community opinion in some cases. -- [[User:Nae'blis|nae'blis]] <i><sub>[[User_talk:Nae'blis|(talk)]]</sub></i> 02:45, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' legal issues, policy issues, and and unnessary for building an encyclopedia. -- '''<font color="navy">[[User:Dalbury|Dalbury]]</font><sup><font color="green">([[User talk:Dalbury|<font color="green">Talk]])</font></font></sup>''' 02:59, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strongest Possible Keep'''. Deletion of templates that are used exclusively on user pages and merely express an opinion is chillingly paternalistic. All the supposed "problems" with this template are merely proxies for an attempt to stamp out dissent. The existence of this template and its inclusion on user pages causes no harm or risk to anyone. Knowingly allowing the template to exist doesn't mean anyone tacitly agrees with it: it just means that we tolerate dissent. If there were any harm or risk here (and I am highly dubious that there is), it would be from the people who hold the opinion expressed by this template, not from the template itself. And I would have expected it to be obvious that deleting this template doesn't actually delete the opinion expressed therein. [[User:Nohat|Nohat]] 18:01, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' That said, I have nothing against users expressing their opinions about what the law "should be." This does not mean they're going to break the present laws or policies. -- [[User:Pakaran|Pak]][[User talk:Pakaran|aran]] 21:25, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' Editors can say anything they want about themselves on their own user pages. The only thing deleting this template will do is reduce the transparency of Wikipedia. I visualize two people having tea in the garden and one of them saying, "I think fair-use law would apply to personal user pages." Suddenly Rob Church, Sam Korn and Carbonite drop from helicopters, dressed in black Ninja suits. They duct-tape the mouths of the friends having tea and charge them with heresy based on [[Wikipedia:Ignore all rules|Wikipedia:Make up whatever rule we want]] policy. --[[User:Peace Inside|Peace Inside]] 23:39, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
**Hello, [[User:Peace Inside|Peace Inside]], and [[Wikipedia:Welcome, newcomers|welcome]] to Wikipedia! Please allow me to state how impressed I am at [[Special:Contributions/Peace Inside|how quickly]] you managed to find [[WP:TFD]], one of our most obscure backwaters. That you've managed to acclimate yourself to Wikipedia so well that you immediately recognize three of the most outspoken proponents of our fair use policy [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Log/newusers?user=Peace_Inside not even a day and half after registering] is doubly impressive. Again, welcome! &mdash;[[User:Cryptic|Cryptic]] [[User talk:Cryptic|(talk)]] 02:41, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' as per Peace Inside.&mdash;[[User:Sixteen Left|thegreentrilby]] 03:03, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
 
==== [[Template:Measurement]] ====
{{tln|Measurement}}<br />
'''Delete''' — This is an unfinished template that does not seem to be currently in use. The material covered is dealt with well elsewhere and I see no need for this table. [[User:Srleffler|Srleffler]] 03:04, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nomination. [[User:Gene Nygaard|Gene Nygaard]] 03:58, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nom. [[User:Cedar-Guardian|CG]] 10:27, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nom. - [[User:Hayter|Hayter]] 16:55, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''Delete''' per nominator. [[User:Sarahe|Sarah Ewart]] 04:48, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nom. [[User:Kenj0418|kenj0418]] 14:56, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''--[[User:BirgitteSB|<font color="#f4a460 ">Birgitte§β</font>]] ʈ [[User talk:BirgitteSB|<small><font color="#778899">Talk</font></small>]] 18:59, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''detele''' [[User:Niffweed17|Niffweed17]] 01:23, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nom - [[Image:Union flag 1606 (Kings Colors).svg|20px|UK]] [[User:Bourbons3|'''«ßØÛ®ßÖѧ3»''']] <sup>[[User_talk:Bourbons3|Talk]] | [[special:contributions/Bourbons3|Contrib's]]</sup> 16:01, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nom --[[User:Loopy|Loopy]] <sup>[[WP:EA|<font color="green">e</font>]]</sup> 00:49, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 
===January 4===
 
 
 
==== [[Template:User soup nazi]] and [[Template:User-grammar nazi]] ====
Whatever your view on userboxes, these should go. 1) Not funny. 2) Comparisons to Nazis are always in poor taste. 3) We will have users who suffered, directly or indirectly, under Hitler. 4) [[Godwin's law]]. 5) And least important - there are some issues surrounding the use of the Swastika in some European countries. --[[User:Doc glasgow|Doc]] [[User talk:Doc glasgow|<sup>ask?</sup>]] 22:06, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
 
:'''Comment'''. Hm. None of those reasons sound very convincing. We don't censor Wikipedia articles, so why should we censor Wikipedia userpages? As long as it's someone identifying ''himself'' as a soup nazi or a grammar nazi, rather than accusing anyone else of being such, it's not likely to offend, since both terms are heavily ingrained in the popular culture (though the swastika in "user soup nazi" is a bit unexpected; I'd have expected an image of a bowl of soup or something). Not being funny and not being in good taste are matters of taste, and not really grounds for deletion, even though I agree; nor do Godwin's Law or censorship laws in various European countries make any difference in this matter. And if the "I hate GWB" templates are appropriate, I don't see how this one, which doesn't even express an opinion (it's not like it says "the Holocaust wasn't real" or "I <3 Hitler" on it or anything), could be considered unacceptably inappropriate.
:As for people who have suffered due to Hitler: although I think for the most part these terms are used just for shock value and humor (although they can sometimes be offensive when applied to other people rather than to oneself, e.g. calling someone a "grammar nazi" for correcting your spelling), not really anything attempted to offend anyone, if anything, I'd say that such jokes as "soup nazi" trivialize naziism, they don't trivialize the Holocaust. Mocking Hitler and demeaning and degrading the term "nazi" with silly, amusing phrases "soup nazi" and "grammar nazi" is not mocking or attacking victims of nazis, but mocking nazis themselves. The needless suffering it's caused and continues to cause is bad, but the concept of naziism itself, really, isolated from its historical context, isn't scary so much as incredibly silly. If racism and religious bigotry wasn't so dangerous, destructive, and widespread in modern society, I'd almost consider racists and bigots adorable. Like crazy people on the subway. -[[User:Silence|Silence]] 22:45, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
 
::We don't censor wikipedia, because censorship damages content. We should remove sources of offence where to do so is content-neutral (else why not have an erect penis on the Mainpage). If people want to self-describe by comparison to mass-murderers, they are free to do so. The question is whether there should be a general template to facilitate this. --[[User:Doc glasgow|Doc]] [[User talk:Doc glasgow|<sup>ask?</sup>]] 22:51, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
 
:::Except that we ''do'' censor wikipedia. Confer [[autofellatio]]. Silence argues at great length that people shouldn't find this offensive (by invoking highly semantic arguments like: it's not a "description" but only an "allusion"), but maybe Silence should stop and consider whether any people ''do'' find this offensive, which is the more germaine point here, according to our practices. By the way, I'm a staunch freedom of expression advocate, who thinks that takes precedent over people's sensitivities, so I vote '''keep''', but I find Silence's counterarguments unconvincing, and expect the senstivity consideration to carry the day. -[[User:Lethe|lethe]] [[User talk:Lethe|<sup>talk</sup>]] 19:57, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
 
Consider adding any templates you nominate to your watchlist. This will help ensure that your nomination notice is not mistakenly or deliberately removed.
::*But the problem is that it's ''not'' self-describing by comparison to mass-murderers, it's using a term that very vaguely ''alludes'' to a mass murderer. Is even mentioning a term that is ''related'' to someone hateful off-limits, even when the actual template is certainly not supportive of that individual or his movement, and is in fact a ''parody'' of it? I think it's a tad excessive to say that we can't even use the ''word'' "nazi" in any template on Wikipedia, no matter what the context, intent, or meaning is. And if that's not what you're saying, then read [[Soup Nazi]] and [[grammar nazi]], as they're references, respectively, to a ''very'' popular ''[[Seinfeld]]'' episode and to a ''very'' common colloquial term for people who are overly concerned with grammar, certainly not the direct references to Hitler you seem to think they are. My recommendation: '''keep''' both templates, and replace the swastika on the "Soup Nazi" with a more topic-appropriate image (like a bowl of [[soup]] or a clipped version of [[:Image:Sein soup nazi.jpg]]) so it fits the joke properly. -[[User:Silence|Silence]] 01:07, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
:::*Putting that image in such a template would go beyond [[fair use]] and violate the copyright. [[User:BDAbramson|<font style="background:gold">'''''BDAbramson'''''</font>]] [[User talk:BDAbramson|'''T''']] 04:14, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' as per nom - [[User:Guettarda|Guettarda]] 23:40, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', per nom.--[[User:Sean Black|Sean]]|[[User talk:Sean Black|Bla]]<font color="green">[[Wikipedia:Esperanza|ck]]</font> 23:55, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' I'm all in favour of humourous templates for user pages, but this crosses the line and is merely offensive and in extremely bad taste. [[User:Jtdirl|<span style="color:#006666; background-color:orange">'''Fear''ÉIREANN'''''</span>]][[Image:Ireland-Capitals.PNG|15px]]\<sup><font color="blue">[[User talk:Jtdirl|(caint)]]</font></sup> 23:59, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. Both [[soup nazi]] and [[grammar nazi]] are widely recognizable terms and while I won't self-identify that way, I think deleting these amounts to taking political correctness a step too far. For what its worth, I thought the Soup Nazi character on [[Seinfeld]] was funny, and do find humor in making fun of Nazis. More than that though I think knowing that someone is a self-avowed grammar nazi would actually be useful as it describes one of the things that person cares about when editting. While some people may find these to be offensive, I believe that when it comes to userspace and things that belong in user space, we ought to favor freedom of expression over attempts to avoid all possible offense. I wouldn't object to removing the swastika however, as that is a bit over the top. [[User:Dragons flight|Dragons flight]] 00:37, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete per nom'''. I suspect that if the swastika is removed, someone else will put it back. [[User:BDAbramson|<font style="background:gold">'''''BDAbramson'''''</font>]] [[User talk:BDAbramson|'''T''']] 00:41, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep both''', especially the soup nazi one. It's in reference to "Seinfeld" (see [[Seinfeld#The_Soup_Nazi]]). The grammar nazi is a fairly well-known saying in the United States (and I suspect on the internet in general, especially on message boards, etc). —[[User:Locke Cole|Locke Cole]] • [[User talk:Locke Cole|t]] • [[Special:Contributions/Locke Cole|c]] 01:00, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''No vote''', but note that I've changed the swastika. ~~ '''[[User:Nickptar|N]]''' ([[User talk:Nickptar|t]]/[[Special:Contributions/Nickptar|c]]) 01:30, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete both''' --[[User:Khoikhoi|Khoikhoi]] 04:07, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. No opinion on the soup nazi one though. --[[User:Marudubshinki|maru]] [[User talk:Marudubshinki|(talk)]] [[Special:Contributions/Marudubshinki|Contribs]] 04:07, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep both''', American humor being considered. [[User:Iffer|Iffer]] 06:27, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Weak keep''' &ndash; In poor taste, but that's not a crime. &ndash; [[User:ClockworkSoul|Clockwork]][[User_talk:ClockworkSoul|<b>Soul</b>]] 06:35, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong delete'''. Both of them. They may be funny to some Americans, but are actually ''very'' offensive towards many European users. And since I don't believe that Wikipedia should favour someone's pleasure over other people their feelings, I want them gone.[[Image:Weather rain.png]]'''[[User:SoothingR|<span style="color:#AAAAAA;">Soothing</span>]][[User talk:SoothingR|<span style="color:#9AB9EB;">''R''</span>]]''' 06:38, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' now that the swastikas are removed; these are harmless. [[User:Christopher Parham|Christopher Parham]] [[User talk:Christopher Parham|(talk)]] 06:42, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''KEEP''' Hmmm. another tfd away from the official policy page on userboxes - but this one is more hidden so only you deletionist will find it and not the general populus of wikipedia that votes to keep these boxes.--'''[[User:God_of_War|God of]][[User Talk:God_of_War| War]]''' 06:47, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
:There is no official policy on userboxes, but there is on [[WP:AGF]], [[WP:CIVIL]] and [[WP:NPA]] with which you might like to refamilliarise yourself! --[[User:Doc glasgow|Doc]] [[User talk:Doc glasgow|<sup>ask?</sup>]] 11:28, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong Keep''' They may be offensive to you, but you know what? A lot of what the rest of the world says about my president is offensive to me. Lighten up. [[Image: Pentacle-circumscribed.png|20px]][[User:Search4Lancer|<font color="#33ff00" face="Courier New" style="background: black;">Search</font>]][[Special:Contributions/Search4Lancer|<font color="red" face="Courier New" style="background: black;"><b>4</b></font>]][[User_talk:Search4Lancer|<font color="#33ff00" face="Courier New" style="background: black;">Lancer</font>]][[Image: Pennsylvania state flag.png|26px]] 08:41, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' and it's not often that I find myself in the deletionist camp. As a serious ''grammar nazi'' I would however much prefer something along the lines of a ''Template: Orthographically Rigorous''.... [[User:Sjc|Sjc]] 09:38, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
:*Then make that template too, and use it instead. I too am what many could describe as a "grammar nazi", being very concerned with grammatical consistency, yet I have no plans to ever use that template on my page because it doesn't fit my style of humor. Those who prefer that particular self-depracating way to state their grammar fixation should be permitted to do so, and those who don't prefer it, like you and I, can easily make ''other'' templates with a similar meaning for our own use. Deletion due to being needlessly offensive ''may'' be a valid justification (even though it doesn't apply well enough here), but deletion just because "As a serious grammar nazi I would however much prefer something along the lines of..." is purely a matter of personal preference and taste. -[[User:Silence|Silence]] 19:30, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. Maybe - just maybe - this bad joke was funny once. But perpetrating what is obviously offensive to many in our community is against [[WP:CIV]]. &larr;[[User:Humus sapiens|Humus sapiens]][[User talk:Humus sapiens|&larr;ну?]] 09:56, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' Someone get those deletionists a life, so they don't have to start up discussions everywhere. Is this a tactic to make it hard to track your attacks? [[User:Larix|Larix]] 10:58, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
:Please [[WP:AGF|assume good faith]].
::It's getting difficult to assume good faith when the minority is repeatedly nominating large numbers of userboxes for deletion and then claiming that they are the true defenders of Wikipedia. - [[User:Cuivienen|Cuivienen]] 15:08, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong Keep''' The reasons for deleting them are too week. --[[User:Bky1701|Bky1701]] 11:19, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong Keep''' I am not seeing a compelling argument for deletion - these are for use in the User: space. All in good fun. --[[User:Dschor|Dschor]] 11:25, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. I don't think that either one is very funny or in very good taste, but so what? Since when do my prerogatives as an editor extend to verifying the humor or good taste of someone's fracking user page? Does anyone seriously think that people with these userboxes are Nazis? [[User:Benami|Benami]] 11:34, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' for offensiveness. --[[User:Pjacobi|Pjacobi]] 13:13, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. [[User:Matt Crypto|&mdash; Matt <small>Crypto</small>]] 13:18, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' [[User:Bolak77|Bolak77]] 13:22, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nom. [[User:Pepsidrinka|Pepsidrinka]] 13:23, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' grammar nazi, SS reference is highly offensive. '''Keep''' soup nazi; now that the swastika is gone it seems relatively harmless and clearly references a US TV show rather than the NSDP. [[User:Palmiro|Palmiro]] | [[User talk:Palmiro|Talk]] 13:27, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
:*I would agree with you if it was someone calling someone ''else'' a grammar nazi. Saying "You are such a grammar nazi" is potentially (though not necessarily) offensive; saying "You are such a soup nazi" will rarely be offensive, because it's so darned silly. However, saying "I am such a grammar nazi" or "I am such a soup nazi", which is exactly what the above templates do, is more goofy and humor-at-one's-own-expense than genuinely offensive. This really isn't that big of a deal. -[[User:Silence|Silence]] 19:30, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
::I don't mind the Nazi bit half as much as I mind the joke about being a member of the SS, which is in the poorest possible taste. That was the basis of my vote and comment. [[User:Palmiro|Palmiro]] | [[User talk:Palmiro|Talk]] 00:08, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
 
=== After nominating: Notify interested projects and editors ===
*'''Keep Soup''' but '''Delete (or Rewrite) Grammar'''. The soup reference is too common an joke reference for any claims of offensiveness, and should be kept (at least until there is a consensus general policy on all joke-boxes). As much as I champion box-rights, even I find the grammar box (in its current form) to be in poor taste (If it had been funnier, I may have voted to keep, but it is not. ''There is a fine line between clever and stupid'' --Spinal Tap.) &mdash; [[User:Eoghanacht|<font color="green">''Eoghanacht''</font>]] <sup>[[User_talk:Eoghanacht|<font color="gray">talk</font>]]</sup> 14:17, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
While it is sufficient to list a template for discussion at TfD, nominators and others sometimes want to attract more attention from and participation by informed editors. All such efforts must comply with [[WP:CANVASS|Wikipedia's guideline against biased canvassing]].
:People keep claiming that 'Soup Nazi' is common cultural reference. Well, it is not one I have ever heard - and so all I saw was some poor-taste comparision between soup and Nazism. I wonder that voters may be guitly of US-popular-culture imperialism. In most of the world, when people see the word Nazi, they do ''not'' think about US sitcoms. --[[User:Doc glasgow|Doc]] [[User talk:Doc glasgow|<sup>ask?</sup>]] 14:24, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
:: The [[Soup Nazi]] is worse than American-pop-culture imperialism, it is New-York-City-pop-culture imperialism. However, given that it is instantly identifiable to hundreds of millions of English speakers I think it qualifies as a common knowledge joke. Everyone who does not understand the reference (even if that means ''most'' other English speakers) can simply click on the link in the userbox to read about it. &mdash; [[User:Eoghanacht|<font color="green">''Eoghanacht''</font>]] <sup>[[User_talk:Eoghanacht|<font color="gray">talk</font>]]</sup> 14:46, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
:::Wow, 'New-York-City-pop-culture imperialism' = 'common knowledge'. I suddenly feel like an ignorant foreigner. --[[User:Doc glasgow|Doc]] [[User talk:Doc glasgow|<sup>ask?</sup>]] 14:54, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
::::Actually I should have typed: "Manhattan-pop-cultural-imperialism", but one of the joys of Wikipedia is the opportunity to expand your knowledge, such as the fundamental truth: ''Nothing important happens east of the [[East River]], nor west of the [[Hudson River|Hudson]]''. I don't believe it myself, but American media and advertisers keeps trying. &mdash; [[User:Eoghanacht|<font color="green">''Eoghanacht''</font>]] <sup>[[User_talk:Eoghanacht|<font color="gray">talk</font>]]</sup> 19:05, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
 
To encourage participation by less experienced editors, avoid Wikipedia-specific abbreviations in the messages you leave about the discussion, link to any relevant policies or guidelines, and link to the TfD discussion page itself. If you are recommending that a template be speedily deleted, please give the [[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion|criterion]] that it meets.
*'''Very Strong Keep''' - Stop the deletionism. Delete only the templates that are actually useless and stop wasting space on this page and the time of Wikipedia users. - [[User:Cuivienen|Cuivienen]] 14:51, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
:Only templates that are 'actually useless' - OK, what 'use' are these to the goals of wikipedia? --[[User:Doc glasgow|Doc]] [[User talk:Doc glasgow|<sup>ask?</sup>]] 14:54, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
::Useless templates are redundant templates or templates not being used as templates (see [[Template:Cemetery]] for one such example). This template is for humor on userpages, a valid use. - [[User:Cuivienen|Cuivienen]] 15:04, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
:'''Keep'''. Nothing offensive about it. --[[User:SPUI|SPUI]] ([[User talk:SPUI|talk]] - <small>[[User:SPUI/SFD|don't use sorted stub templates!]]</small>) 15:40, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''', by the precedent set by all the other meaningless userboxes here that nobody minds. If I may address the points of the nominator: 1) is not a valid criterion for deletion, and it is highly objective. I think most of the userboxes advertised as [[Wikipedia:Userboxes/Funny|funny]] qualify as "not funny" to a greater or lesser extent by my standards, but I wouldn't think of trying to get them deleted based on this argument. 2) is also quite objective. I for one would disagree. 3) is technically correct, but I disagree with it as an argument for deletion here. While it is an interesting topic of discussion how offensive jokes should be allowed to be, this doesn't even come close to offensive enough to warrant such discussion, I think. 4) Godwin's law cannot be taken too seriously, and certainly is not a valid criterion for deletion here. 5) is obviously moot now that there is no swastika. [[User:EldKatt|EldKatt]] <small>([[User talk:EldKatt|Talk]])</small> 16:19, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Very weak I'm going to hate myself in the morning keep'''- Tasteless yes, but it was Seinfeld, not Wikipedia, who came up with it, the terms are recognizable. Keep both. [[User:CanadianCaesar|CanadianCaesar]] <small>[[User_talk:CanadianCaesar|The Republic Restored]]</small> 16:37, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' Simply not funny but rather offensive. [[User:Cyberevil|Cyberevil]] 16:48, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Weak delete''' on grounds of offence. Grammar nazi is an internal Wikipedia thing so the concept is acceptable as a box, Soup nazi obviously refers to a joke I have not yet heard, but both are expressed in terms that I think go beyond what is acceptable. [[User:Dbiv|David]] | [[User talk:Dbiv|Talk]] 16:52, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
:*Grammar nazi is not even close to being "an internal Wikipedia thing". In fact, I'd say it's just about the most common usage of the word "nazi" in the modern English-speaking world that doesn't refer to literal nazis. It's practically ubiquitous as a pejorative, amusingly over-the-top term for obsessive grammarians. And voting to delete "Soup Nazi" just because you haven't heard the joke before is rather biased. Why should the arbitrary and random number of things you've happened to run into before in your life determine how you vote? My vote would be the same whether I'd happened to hear of Soup Nazi before or not, because my personal experience in this area is not what this vote is about. If "Soup Nazi" wasn't noteworthy, it wouldn't have an article! -[[User:Silence|Silence]] 19:30, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong Keep''' - the use of the word 'nazi' should not frighten people. I'm more familiar with 'spelling nazi' but 'grammar nazi' is a common term that I've heard both in Rl and on the Internet and 'soup nazi' - well, lots of people found Seinfeld funny. - [[User:Hayter|Hayter]] 16:59, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', espousing your knowledge of languages or political beliefs or even your web browser is one thing, but this is pretty well boxcruft. Yes, we know. You like ''[[Seinfeld]]''. You think capital letters are good. That's swell, but we don't need userboxes for everything somebody somewhere thinks is good. Especially when the templates are about as funny as a swift kick to the groin. [[User:Lord Bob|Lord Bob]] 17:03, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
**Yet political beliefs or web browsers--also irrelevant to the functionality of Wikipedia, unlike Babel--are okay? Out of curiosity, where exactly do you draw the line? Speaking for myself, I'd rather see ''all'' the genuinely useless humorous templates gone, not just the ones I dislike more. [[User:EldKatt|EldKatt]] <small>([[User talk:EldKatt|Talk]])</small> 18:14, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
***The same place I draw the line on notability of articles: I don't, and take it on a case-by-case basis. [[User:Lord Bob|Lord Bob]] 18:21, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' pending a more complete userbox policy. I believe that one is now under discussion. Once it is accepted, then delete any uservoxes which are unacceptable under that policy, and only those. I might add that the "X-Nazi" form in sich versions as "Safety-Nazi", "PC_Nazi" ect, often to deride an opposing viewpoint, but soemtimes to deprecatingly describe one's own views (as apparently in this case) is considerably wider than ''Seinfeld'', and the intended meanign should be clear to msot people. I personally wouldn't use such a designation, but if people want to so '''self'''-label, why not. I speak as a person who had relatives, albiet rather distant ones, who were Holocaust victims. [[User:DESiegel|DES]] [[User talk:DESiegel|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 17:19, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. [[User:Bkonrad|older]]&ne;[[User talk:Bkonrad|wiser]]
*'''Very Strong Keep''' for The Soup Nazi and '''Rewrite before Keeping''' (the wording I just saw has me iffy) for the Grammar Nazi. I'd also like to remind everone of [[Mel Brooks]]' words on why he always made fun of Nazis in his films: "When you're made a mockery of your enemy, then you've won." --[[User:Cjmarsicano|CJ Marsicano]] 18:11, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' &mdash; Nazi here does not reference to national socialism, but more as a reference to the setereotype.<sub>→<font style="color:#975612">[[User:AzaToth|Aza]]</font><font style="color:#325596">[[User_talk:AzaToth|Toth]]</font></sub> 18:28, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' Soup Nazi, '''Keep''' Grammar Nazi.[[User:Gateman1997|Gateman1997]] 18:33, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per [[WP:CIVIL]]. [[User:FreplySpang|FreplySpang]] [[User talk:FreplySpang|(talk)]] 18:37, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' Soup Nazi, on the grounds that it is hilarious and not really offensive. '''Rewrite''' Grammar Nazi on the grounds that it is in extremely poor taste. [[User:Jamyskis|Jamyskis]] <font size="-3">[[User_talk:Jamyskis|Whisper]], [[Special:Contributions/Jamyskis|Contribs]]</font> [[Image:Flag_of_Germany.svg|25px|Germany]] 18:44, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong Keep''' - none of the nom's reasons for deletion are convincing, especially for the Soup Nazi. The grammar nazi thing is a bit wierd, but neither are offensive and both are users' choices to use or not use. No one is forcing anyone to use them, but if you want to then it is your right to do so. [[Image:Anglo-Indian Indentity.svg|20px]] [[User:Djr xi|Deano]] <small>([[User talk:Djr_xi|Talk]])</small> 19:09, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*Strongly in favour of userboxes, but '''delete''' these. Inappropriate in my opinion. &mdash;[[User:Nightstallion|<span style="font-variant:small-caps">Nightstallion</span>]] [[User talk:Nightstallion|''(?)'']] 19:22, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' No Soup For You! - ''anon''
*'''Keep'''. No delete for you. --[[User:Stbalbach|Stbalbach]] 19:43, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''', Offensiveness is subjective, there's no need to impose personal tastes on someone else's userpage. There are a significant number of people on this planet who find all pictures of people to be genuinely offensive (because allegedly idolatrous). We can't regulate for the vast variety of personal aversions out there. Craft your own userpage in whatever way suits yours. [[User:Babajobu|Babajobu]] 19:52, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''Delete'''; these don't belong in the template namespace. &mdash; [[User:Rdsmith4|Dan]] | [[User talk:Rdsmith4|talk]] 20:07, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''Delete'''. With or without Swastika, still bad taste. [[User:Garion1000|Garion1000]] [[User_talk:Garion1000|(talk)]] 20:19, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''', although I think that any [[swastika]] imagery should be gotten rid of. Self-deprecating humor is acceptable in userspace. <TT>[[User:Crotalus horridus|Crotalus horridus]] <SMALL>([[User talk:Crotalus horridus|TALK]] • [[Special:Contributions/Crotalus horridus|CONTRIBS]])</SMALL></TT> 20:58, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' Don't censor. Stop the deletion inquisition. People have different senses of humor... Get over it. Don't be humor nazis [[User:Zachomis|Zachomis]] 23:37, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''', and my extend the following two userboxes: {{tl|userbox:wiki-nazi-0}} {{tl|userbox:wiki-nazi-1}} [[User:Robert Paveza|Robert Paveza]] 00:00, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
**This whole userbox debate is rapidly falling into a 'let's see how much we can degenerate the level of discussion' contest. [[User:Lord Bob|Lord Bob]] 00:13, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Very Strong Delete''' I would have started this process if I knew how. I made comments on a couple of pages. Essentially, I particularly object to the term nazi, and pointed out how
it wouldn't be fun to have a "kkk-grammar" or substitute other hateful symbols. Dialogue is important, but comparing grammar usage to a genocidal regime is in poor taste, even if it was part of a major sitcom. Many people here claim its not offensive, but many people i know were stunned to here about it, especially after i was bragging so much about how great wikipedia is. It hurts and marginalizes some. Not allowing the use of a symbol that is oppressive is a tolerable curtail of freedom of speech, as it reminds some of hatred, murder and genocide. And we want those people contributing to wikipedia. I think the term for someone who is intense about grammar should remain, but i feel the use of the term nazi, both on wikipedia and in common day lexicon, is inappropriate.
 
* '''Notifying related WikiProjects:''' [[WP:WikiProject|WikiProjects]] are groups of editors that are interested in a particular subject or type of editing. If the article is within the scope of one or more WikiProjects, they may welcome a brief, neutral note on their project's talk page(s) about the TfD. You can use {{Tls|Tfd notice}} for this. Tagging the nominated template's talk page with a relevant Wikiproject's banner will result in the template being listed in that project's ''[[WP:AALERTS|Article Alerts]]'' automatically, if they are [[Wikipedia:Article_alerts/Subscription_list|subscribed to the system]]. For instance, tagging a template with {{tl|WikiProject Physics}} will list the discussion in [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Physics/Article alerts]].
I'll read the process here now that i found it, but for sure i am for deleting it. As a side note, as a new user to wikipedia i'm delighted by all the talk. Certainly a vibrant and interesting community, where so many users debate this issue. I'm impressed. Cool stuff! [[User:JamieJones|JamieJones]] 00:22, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''Notifying main contributors:''' While not required, it is generally considered courteous to notify the creator and any main contributors of the template and its talk page that you are nominating for discussion. To find the creator and main contributors, look in the [[Help:Page history|page history]] or [[Help:Talk page|talk page]].
*'''Keep'''. I have heard of [[Soup Nazi]] (even have the userbox on my userpage) and "grammar nazi", and don't consider them offensive. [[User:Dralwik|Dralwik]] 01:39, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
 
At this point, no further action is necessary on your part. Sometime after seven days have passed, someone other than you will either close the discussion or, if needed, "[[WP:RELIST|relist]]" it for another seven days of discussion. If the nomination is successful, it will be moved to the [[WP:TFDH|Holding Cell]] until the change is implemented. There is no requirement for nominators to be part of the implementation process, but they are allowed to if they so wish.
*'''Comment:''' Let me start off by saying that I am very close to the Jewish community, and that I am considering the possability in becoming a Jew myself through cleansing in the mitvah. I would also like to point out that I just came home from a day at the Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington D.C and that I have spent many personal hours on the study of WW2 and the Holocaust. I don't find these templates offensive, and I don't find them to be in bad taste. Even if I would find them to be offensive, or in bad taste, I would still oppose the deletion of them. It is not my job (or yours) to define what is and what is not funny. Are these templates advocating the harm of people? No, they're not. The mere mention of the word "nazi" does not make these templates the rallying cry for ignorant activity. '''Everyone has their little sick jokes-''' It is not our job to police that. [[User:Zachomis|Zachomis]] 02:10, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' This userbox isn't exactly promoting racism or anything. [[User:Ashibaka|Ashibaka]] <small>[[User talk:Ashibaka|tock]]</small> 02:18, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong keep''' - "grammar nazi" is a commonly accepted term. "nazi" is synonymous with "fascist" in this case. no offense should be taken to this. [[User:DrIdiot|DrIdiot]] 05:28, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
**While I don't believe in the offensive reasons myself, I don't think that "fascist" is a much nicer term than "Nazi". They're both used as fairly over-the-top insults, after all. [[User:Lord Bob|Lord Bob]] 15:47, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*** I mostly meant they were by no means references to mass murder. Or politics at all. I'd like to add (this is irrelevant to your comment) that the Japanese raped/killed thousands of Chinese in WW2, but as a Chinese I hold no grudge and I'm not offended by mentions of Tojo or Japan. And even if I was offended, I would respect freedom of speech and would live with it. [[User:DrIdiot|DrIdiot]] 21:29, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong keep''' Are a bit wierd but not overly offensive. If we delete everything that causes offence, then we'd have hardly any userboxes left! We got to stop being to cowardly with these sort of things, and not delete something at the first sight of offence! - [[Image:Union flag 1606 (Kings Colors).svg|20px|UK]] [[User:Bourbons3|'''«ßØÛ®ßÖѧ3»''']] <sup>[[User_talk:Bourbons3|Talk]] | [[special:contributions/Bourbons3|Contrib's]]</sup> 15:19, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong delete'''. Offensive, bad taste, unhelpful. [[User:Jayjg|Jayjg ]]<sup><small><font color="DarkGreen">[[User_talk:Jayjg|(talk)]]</font></small></sup> 15:43, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong keep''' Smells like censorship. [[User:Bastique|Bastique]] 20:05, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong keep''' --[[User:Valmi|Valmi]][[User_talk:Valmi| &#10002;]] 04:23, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Extremely strong keep'''. Something should not be deleted simply for having the word "Nazi" in it. "Nazi" has become a popular term to denote someone or something very strict. A comparison to Hitler or Nazism should not automatically make something offensive, and indeed, the world may be better if people remembered Nazism more carefully than they do now. [[User:Cookiecaper|Cookiecaper]] 10:25, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''Ugly word, ugly reality we needn't relive--[[User:MONGO|MONGO]] 14:05, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Exceedingly strong keep''' If we're going to delete this, then we need to purge Wikipedia of ''all'' Nazi references so as not to offend any delicate sensibilities. This is a ridiculous suggestion. --[[User:Brossow|BRossow]] 17:45, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''No delete for you!'''. Keep, the nominator violates [[Godwin's Law]] attempting to invoke it to remove these. I would be offended by someone mislabling me as a nazi, but if they mislabled me as a [[Soup_Nazi|soup nazi]] I would not be offended, it's humorous. [[User:Xaosflux|<b><font color="#FF9933" face="monotype"><big>xaosflux</big></font></b>]] <sup>[[User_talk:Xaosflux|<font color="#00FF00">Talk</font>]]</sup><font color="#888888">/</font><sub>[[Wikipedia:Counter Vandalism Unit|<font color="#666666">CVU</font>]]</sub> 18:00, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Weak Keep'''' Humorous inside joke. Slightly offensive to those who don't understand it. [[User:Dustimagic|Dustimagic]] 18:09, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' echoing sentiments above passim. Grounds for deletion are unconvincing. [[User:Eusebeus|Eusebeus]] 00:51, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', but this really needs to be part of the ongoing discussion of the purpose/appropriateness of userboxes. These sentiments can be expressed without offending anyone. -- [[User:Nae'blis|nae'blis]] <i><sub>[[User_talk:Nae'blis|(talk)]]</sub></i> 02:36, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' – In poor taste, but that's not a crime. While they use the word nazi they do not refer directly to nazism. Thus I don't consider them an attack on anyone. -- [[User:Sneltrekker|Sneltrekker]] 14:25, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' - Poor taste is not a crime. [[User:helohe|helohe]] [[User talk:helohe|<small>(talk)</small>]] 22:24, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' - for silliness and triviality - I don't suppose they are seriously offensive, but why risk putting anyone off with something so fatuous and peripheral to what the site is actually about? [[User:Staffelde|Staffelde]] 01:00, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''Strong Keep'''. It has already been decided through TfD that censorship of someones view is not acceptable. Even if someone created a userbox identfying themselves as a ''real'' Nazi we should not object. That is their view and they have a right to express it on their user page, with a userbox if they wish. There's another important point here &mdash; if some user was a ''real'' Nazi i'd rather be warned about that before hand by their user page, wouldn't you? &mdash;[[User:Gorgan almighty|gorgan_almighty]] 10:19, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''Strong Keep''' 1) Something simply cannot be censored because someone else doesn't think it's funny. 2) Something simply cannot be censored because someone else doesn't think it's in good taste. 3) Something simply cannot be censored because someone else may think it's offensive. 4) Godwin's Law has nothing to do with this. 5) The swastikas are now gone. There are no viable arguments here for censoring this userbox. [[User:Elrith|Elrith]] 15:27, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''Weak Keep'''. Like Dustimagic. [[User:Gflores|Gflores]] <sup>[[User Talk:Gflores|Talk]]</sup> 18:31, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' Like Elrith and others. [[User:Boddah|Boddah]] 18:54, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' Completely harmless. [[User:Deville|Deville]] 00:39, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong keep''' for all (well, most) of the reasons listed above. <font face="futura">[[User:Snurks|Snurks]] <small><sup>[[User_talk:Snurks|T]] [[Special:Contributions/Snurks|C]]</sup></small></font> 01:27, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep.''' The current icon for "soup nazi" is a bowl of soup. The offensiveness problem has been solved. - [[User:Scooter|Scooter]] 03:28, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep.''' No delete for you! [[User:Swamp Ig|Swamp Ig]] 06:13, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' soup nazi (established American cultural icon). '''Delete''' grammar nazi, or delete references to the S.S. "Grammar nazi" is a common, though crude and IMO vaguely offensive term, but S.S. references are entirely uncalled for. --[[User:Fang Aili|Fang Aili]] 15:36, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Unbelievably Strong Keep''' That the nom is unfamiliar with a well-known cultural reference, and unfamiliar with a common colloquialism, are nowhere near being valid reasons for deletion. And if anyone is going to be offended by ''that'', we just can't be bothered to cater to people like that who are offended by everything (especially considering that any offensiveness is founded in unfamiliarity with these terms). I hope that citing Godwin's law was a joke on the nom's part. [[User:Yeltensic42.618|Yeltensic42.618]] <small>[[User talk:Yeltensic42.618|don't]] [[Special:Contributions/Yeltensic42.618|panic]]</small> 16:29, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
:I also am pretty amused/disgusted that deletionists chide us to assume good faith when we observe that starting all of these TFDs left and right while policy discussions are still going on seems like a diversionary tactic, but they think nothing of banning userboxes and cats just because they assume that their only use is to rig votes. But I suppose such should be expected of a loud minority arrogantly claiming to be the "true Wikipedians". [[User:Yeltensic42.618|Yeltensic42.618]] <small>[[User talk:Yeltensic42.618|don't]] [[Special:Contributions/Yeltensic42.618|panic]]</small> 16:29, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' NSDAP's flag/Swastica from the user template, I did, twice. And I'll do it again. [[User:El C|El_C]] 16:34, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' There is no problem with the Soup Nazi template (clean up the soup image maybe, it looks ugly) and as long as the Swastika is removed from the Grammar Nazi template there isn't anything wrong with it, it is a commonly used phrase and [[Grammar Nazi]] has it's own WikiPage. Though, the SS-Division in bad taste, maybe that should go too. [[User:AyAn4m1|AyAn4m1]] 22:07, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' Soup Nazi because it is a ''joke''. Not everyone is supposed to get jokes, and not everyone will, but that doesn't mean we need to delete this one. I'm sure that at least a fraction of the millions (76 million Americans watched the finale, after all) of people that watched ''[[Seinfeld]]'' like me use Wikipedia and will get it. Those that don't should, IMO, go rent ''Seinfeld'' on the lovely new DVD release, read the Wikipedia blurb on the Soup Nazi or just ignore it all together. As for Grammar Nazi - a recognised and popular term, no Swastika, no reason to delete in my eyes. --[[User:Loopy|Loopy]] <sup>[[WP:EA|<font color="green">e</font>]]</sup> 04:37, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' divisive, ugly, ditract from the mission of building an encyclopedia -- '''<font color="navy">[[User:Dalbury|Dalbury]]</font><sup><font color="green">([[User talk:Dalbury|<font color="green">Talk]])</font></font></sup>''' 03:03, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' jokes about Nazism have a very very bad taste --[[User:Angelo.romano|Angelo]] 04:56, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strongest possible keep'''. Content of userpages should not be censored. [[User:Nohat|Nohat]] 19:59, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Weak Delete'''. In bad taste. [[User:Musical Linguist|AnnH]] [[User talk:Musical Linguist|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 20:22, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. These templates have nothing to do with making an encyclopedia. --[[User:JWSchmidt|JWSchmidt]] 20:31, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong Keep''' for all the similar reasons listed above, plus I like 'em. What are you looking like that at me for? I do!--[[User:Gillespee|Gillespee]] 23:03, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' How many people stopped watching Seinfeld because of the "Soup Nazi" episode? --[[User:Peace Inside|Peace Inside]] 23:43, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' I mean really... --[[User:Falcorian|Falcorian]] | [[User talk:Falcorian|Talk]] 07:43, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
 
==Discussion==
==== [[Template:User en-5]] ====
Anyone can join the discussion, but please understand the [[WP:deletion policy|deletion policy]] and explain your reasoning.
Arrogant, non standard, horrible. The en-4 -> en-N should be adequate. --<small>[[User:Cool Cat|Cool Cat]]<sup>[[User talk:Cool Cat|Talk]]|[[Special:Emailuser/Cool Cat|@]]</sup></small> 17:03, 4 January 2006 (UTC)<br>
-->Since this is an '''important policy decision''', and policies are frequently not decided by TfD because that makes no sense, I have asked Cool Cat to draw up the corresponding policy proposal. --[[User:Fenice|Fenice]] 08:36, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
: Why didn't the people who made up en-5 draw up a policy proposal first? Why don't we delete this and let the policy be made?
**Because of course this decision is final. I don't know how long you have been here, but any attempt to recreate template en-5 will be speedied within a few days. There are numerous precedents where it was decided to not delete because a proposal should be discussed first. What Cool Cat did is in bad faith and against the policy on top of this page. Obviously nobody cares. Cool Cat avoided a discussion with people who know something about the subject by bypassing the usual policy discussion and bringing it up here. It is much more likely for it to be destroyed by a bunch of regulars on TfD who enjoy destruction rather than having a serious discussion on the sensibility of this action with people who are actually using this template.--[[User:Fenice|Fenice]] 14:42, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
**Your POV judgement that you find it horrible is a fairly weak argument for starting to delete a project that is as successful as Babel. If we delete level five what argument is there for keeping level 1?? No language evaluation system in the world has only four levels. The American Standard is 5 levels [[ILR scale]] (excluding natives) the European Standard is at 6 levels (TELC). As Babel currently stands (4 levels) it is pretty useless. The language skills of people within one of these levels differ enourmously. It is hard to categorize yourself in one of only four levels. For your information, and I think you should have done some research before just suggesting a user template for deletion: we have hundreds of these templates [[Wikipedia:Babel|here]], which deserve deletion according to your reasoning. The template you are so keen on deleting facilitates work and life on Wikipedia for about forty users who are in that category. This deletion request is obviously in bad faith.--[[User:Fenice|Fenice]] 22:12, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
***Nice [[straw man]] argument, there.--[[User:Srleffler|Srleffler]] 23:18, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
****Nice [[straw man]] argument, there, Srleffler. (?) --[[User:Fenice|Fenice]] 23:28, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
***First place, en-5 doesn't help make it any easier to categorize yourself; if en-5 is deleted, en-4 or en-N should be used. For a system that can't use testing, I found it fairly simple to categorize myself; much easier than to decide whether I speak English at a "professional" level. And whatever happened to assume good faith?--[[User:Prosfilaes|Prosfilaes]] 23:27, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
****Your argument lacks logic: '...For a system that can't use testing...' - why shouldn't it be possible to use standard test results to categorize yourself - don't you want it to be comparable to standard tests or are you trying to claim that WP's Babel should be set in stone... or? I don't understand your argument. Or are you trying to argue that if we had levels comparable to standard test this will make people act in bad faith and make false statements about their skills. That would not be possible. Other users would notice anyway. --[[User:Fenice|Fenice]] 23:39, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*****You can disagree with someone without claiming their arguments is illogical, and claiming such does nothing to encourage calm discussion. We can't use test results, because serious testing is expensive and complex. I fail to see how it's relevant; en-5 has nothing to do with standardized testing anyway.--[[User:Prosfilaes|Prosfilaes]] 23:52, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
******Maybe I did not express myself clearly: many people already have some kind of test result, and can judge their skills on the 5-part ILR-scale or the 6-step TELC scale. Some people may have taken a TOEFL (Test of English as a foreign language), which ranks participants on a scale from 330 to 660 points. These scales give a realistic possibility of categorization. en-5 does have something to do with language skills and language skills can be measured by standardized testing. The wording is another issue (it is as of yet unclear whether 'professional level' means native or not.) And the wording can easily be changed, that's no reason to delete a Babel template.--[[User:Fenice|Fenice]] 07:50, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
******* The wording is not another issue. We aren't arguing over whether we should go to a five or six step scale equivalent to a standard test. We're arguing over whether this template that refers to a professional level of knowledge should stand. Whatever it means, it doesn't have anything to do with the standard test scales. And I seriously doubt that even 25% of our non-native English speakers at Wikipedia have recently taken one of those three tests, nor do those tests extend across anywhere near all the languages Wikipedians speak.--[[User:Prosfilaes|Prosfilaes]] 09:26, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
********Again I have problems following your logic if there is any in what you are saying. People want this box deleted because they believe the following: this box is being used by other native speakers to claim that they are better at English than other native speakers. (Which is of course not true, the box is being used by natives and non-natives.) If what people call 'offensive' as a reason for deletion is not in the ''wording'' where then is it, do you think? Is it the concept that unfortunately "we can all calculate, but mathematicians do it better"? Sorry but this concept is undeleteable. This will remain a fact (though disputed by the no-voters here), even if you delete the template. I respect your private opinion that for a reason you cannot name even after trying several times language skill evaluation has nothing to do with testing, but please, in return, accept the fact that the world sees this issue differently. And yes you are absolutely right, the tests that test English do test English language skills, and thus ''do not extend across anywhere near all the languages Wikipedians speak'', like you say.--[[User:Fenice|Fenice]] 13:37, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
********* I never said that language skill evaluation has nothing to do with testing; I said that this template has nothing to do with the language tests. If this box is being used by non-natives to claim that they are better than natives, that's just wrong. Mathematicians don't calculate better; they are notorious for calulating worse. Likewise, just because you write professionally, doesn't mean you're any better at writing English than the millions of us who don't. We don't need a Babel system that is inconsistent across languages, so using tests that test English doesn't help at all.--[[User:Prosfilaes|Prosfilaes]] 10:33, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
**********This template evaluates language skills, which are evaluated by language tests. Also, your sentence: ''Mathematicians don't calculate better; they are notorious for calulating worse.'' And another example: right here on this page you are voting for it to become impossible for the Babel-level 5 to be on en-5 for the English language, Prosfilaes. At the same time you are saying here that the Babel system should not be inconsistent across languages? I don't think I am the right person for you to talk to about these psychotic statements. The discussion is also completely beside the point and will lead nowhere; this is Wikipedia and idiotic things like the deletion of this template do happen. Babel of course is not static and can adjust to this problem - we will have to have a non-standard scale for the English language, because obviously nobody seriously discusses this. I think a discussion with you about the logical breaks in your arguments makes no sense, sorry.--[[User:Fenice|Fenice]] 10:53, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. What is the standard for a "professional" English speaker? Little known fact, I can contribute with a double secret level of English. Should I create [[Template:User en-6]]? [[User:Rhobite|Rhobite]] 17:11, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' Not really needed, as en-4 and en-N both cover it - [[Image:Union flag 1606 (Kings Colors).svg|20px|UK]] [[User:Bourbons3|'''«ßØÛ®ßÖѧ3»''']] <sup>[[User_talk:Bourbons3|Talk]] | [[special:contributions/Bourbons3|Contrib's]]</sup> 17:19, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
:*It is an option to do some research before a drive-by-shooting on an established project: en-4 is near-native (which of course does not imply that that person is a linguist or professional writer, don't know what could have given you that idea). En-N is ''only'' for native speakers, not for people who write professionally and have some other native language. Shouldn't the people who vote here be required to do _some_ at least basic research on exactly what they are destroying??--[[User:Fenice|Fenice]] 10:20, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
::*Those who write professionally and don't have English as a native language are en-4, "near native". It doesn't imply that the person is a linguist or professional writer, but the argument that there's no need to put that in the Bable template is key to the opposition against en-5. What does a linguist know about how to write, in any case? They study the theory of languages at a level not useful for actual writing.--[[User:Prosfilaes|Prosfilaes]] 10:47, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
:::*No, Profilaes. Just no. Those who write professionally are in en-5, not en-4. I don't understand how you could have possibly missed that since you are actually having a discussion on this topic for days. And it illustrates the point that your and my perception of reality and logic differ too widely for us to have a productive discussion. As mentioned on your talk page, I will not discuss any further because obviously this issue is already decided, there are more votes for deletion at this point and it is unlikely that more people will vote. Babel will have to deal with not being able to use the name user xx-5 for the English language. I am not available for further discussion and explanation, because this discussion cannot fulfil the aim of saving template en-5 or of initiating a policy discussion.--[[User:Fenice|Fenice]] 12:14, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' No harm. --[[User:Thorri|Thorri]] 17:20, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' Again not really needed, breaking the standard for no good reason I can detect. :: [[User:Kevinalewis|Kevinalewis]] : please contact me on my [[User talk:Kevinalewis|Talk Page]] : 17:24, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' &mdash; I think a level 5 is useful, I personally have problem with defining the step from ''expert'' to ''native''. A ''professional'' level for me indicates that the person in question have learned the language to a native level, but it's not his/her nativ language. For example a translator could use it to define it's profession is the language. <sub>→<font style="color:#975612">[[User:AzaToth|Aza]]</font><font style="color:#325596">[[User_talk:AzaToth|Toth]]</font></sub> 17:58, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
**But all other language templates have four levels. Why break the standard for English? Not only that, this template implies that the user is somehow a better English speaker than most other people. [[User:Rhobite|Rhobite]] 18:06, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
::*Perhaps there should be a lever 5 to the other languasges as well. Also, perhaps this user '''is''' a better English speaker that most other people, perhaps a professor in the English language for example. <sub>→<font style="color:#975612">[[User:AzaToth|Aza]]</font><font style="color:#325596">[[User_talk:AzaToth|Toth]]</font></sub> 18:17, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
:::<s>'''Comment''' Changing all other language templates just to accomodate this one userbox is a bit much IMO - [[Image:Union flag 1606 (Kings Colors).svg|20px|UK]] [[User:Bourbons3|'''«ßØÛ®ßÖѧ3»''']] <sup>[[User_talk:Bourbons3|Talk]] | [[special:contributions/Bourbons3|Contrib's]]</sup> 19:09, 4 January 2006 (UTC)</s>
::* According to your reasoning we would have to delete half of en.wikipedia because other languages are not as complete as this one is. --[[User:Fenice|Fenice]] 23:05, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
:*'''Comment''' Actually, AzaToth, you have just illustrated one of the problems with this template. I believe it is ''not'' intended to represent English ability equal to native English level (but without being native.) It is intended to indicate that the user's ability to write in English ''exceeds'' that of a typical native speaker. Hence, the description "professional"&mdash;this is intended for people who are ''professional writers'', and who therefore (claim) to have better command of the English language than the rest of us. There are all kinds of problems with this, as others have pointed out. The fact that the tag is prone to misuse and misunderstanding, as you have shown, is only one of them.--[[User:Srleffler|Srleffler]] 23:30, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
::*The wording can easily be changed, that is no reason to delete the template.--[[User:Fenice|Fenice]] 07:59, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Comment''': This would be useful if it was actually used by editors who write prose for a living, such as journalists, novelists, and certain academics and technical writers. As it is, however, I see this userbox adorning pages of 15-year old high-school boys who struggle with basic punctuation. Still, it is harmless, and no worse than putting a {{tl|User vain}} on your user page. [[User:OwenX|Owen&times;]] [[User talk:OwenX|<big>&#9742;</big>]] 18:47, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep.''' I don't use it, but professional editors and English scholars should. These users can then be consulted about stylistic and grammatical conventions. [[User:Primetime|Primetime]] 18:53, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Comment #2''': This template really doesn't belong on the en-''x'' scale. Here's an alternate approach: let's replace it with a new userbox called {{tl|User pro-writer}} which would be used ''in addition'' to the standard en-N box. Such a template could say, "'''User writes prose for a living, and would gladly help with stylistic issues in languages listed above'''". The box would be placed between the boxes for the languages which the editor writes professionally, and those that he can only use at an "amateur" level. This way it's also not restricted to English. A PD version of an icon such as [[:Image:Apple TextEdit.png|this]] would be nice for the new template. [[User:OwenX|Owen&times;]] [[User talk:OwenX|<big>&#9742;</big>]] 19:24, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
:*'''Agree complete with OwenX's points.''' In it's current form it's useless and tries to change the Babel system. In a form of professional writer it would be useful. -- [[User:Sneltrekker|Sneltrekker]] 14:33, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' like any userbox this could be misused - but this has real potentional for use. Imagine writing a featured article and needing some help with the writing, as the standards have risen a bit there - you could theoretically do a lookup of people with these templates and ask for advice, etc.. OwenX has a point but I think seperating the two could be clunky as having prof. writing skills in one language doesn't neccesarily apply to another. <small>[[User:RN|WhiteNight]] <sup><font color="#6BA800">[[User talk:RN|T]]</font> | <font color="#0033FF">[[Special:Emailuser/RN|@]]</font> | <font color="#FF0000">[[Special:Contributions/RN|C]]</font></sup></small> 19:30, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''What OwenX said'''. [[User:the wub|the wub]] [[User_talk:The wub|<font color="green">"?!"</font>]] 19:34, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong keep''' as en-4/n is understood to have an average vocabulary and understanding of English. En-5 can help us track down people who can help punch-up prose for articles recently mentioned in the media. Level-5 should be implemented in all other languages as this would help Stewards find people to help with interwiki work and disputes. - [[User:RoyBoy|Roy]][[User talk:RoyBoy|'''Boy''']] <sup>[[User:RoyBoy/The 800 Club|800]]</sup> 19:35, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Do what OwenX suggested''' - [[Image:Union flag 1606 (Kings Colors).svg|20px|UK]] [[User:Bourbons3|'''«ßØÛ®ßÖѧ3»''']] <sup>[[User_talk:Bourbons3|Talk]] | [[special:contributions/Bourbons3|Contrib's]]</sup> 19:56, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Comment.''' There's all sorts of xx-5. {{tl|ubx-5}} is an example and is used on many pages (my own included).--[[User:HereToHelp|HereToHelp]] ([[User talk:HereToHelp|talk]]) 21:41, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
*As above, '''delete''' en-5 but '''create''' a seperate identification for professional writers that's not part of the en-x scale. Oh, and we already have [[:Category:Wikipedian writers]]. [[User:Dragons flight|Dragons flight]] 22:03, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. [[User:Neutrality|Neutrality]]<sup>[[User talk:Neutrality|talk]]</sup> 23:01, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nom. Though I couldn't resist a look to see what experts we have among us. [[User:Markalexander100|Mark]][[User talk:Markalexander100|<sup>1</sup>]] 01:06, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nom. [[User:Gene Nygaard|Gene Nygaard]] 04:05, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. --[[User:Khoikhoi|Khoikhoi]] 04:07, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong Keep'''. A professional editor and English scholar, that's what I yam. I'd like to put my expertise, teaching experience, and compassion to use on Wikipedia. [[User:Halcatalyst|Halcatalyst]] 05:08, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
** How does this help you? It doesn't change your editing, and I, for one, am more likely to look at en-5 and think you're a twit rather than someone who actually knows something.--[[User:Prosfilaes|Prosfilaes]] 23:32, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''KEEP''' Hmmm. another tfd away from the official policy page on userboxes - but this one is more hidden so only you deletionist will find it and not the general populus of wikipedia that votes to keep these boxes.--'''[[User:God_of_War|God of]][[User Talk:God_of_War| War]]''' 06:48, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', but '''create''' a separate template to identify professional writers, per the suggestion of [[User:OwenX]].--[[User:Srleffler|Srleffler]] 07:01, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', non-standard template.&#160;— [[User:TheKMan|'''<font color="#0000FF">The</font><font color="#FF0000">KMan</font>''']][[User_talk:TheKMan|<font color="#000000"><sup><u>talk</u></sup></font>]] 07:32, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' non-standard template per nomination. A template identifying professional writers, as others have mentioned, may be useful, but it should not masqueride as a Babel template. &mdash; [[User:Knowledge Seeker|Knowledge Seeker]] [[User talk:Knowledge Seeker|&#2470;]] 08:02, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. Nonstandard template in the Babel-series. [[User:Sjakkalle|Sjakkalle]] [[User talk:Sjakkalle|<small>(Check!)</small>]] 08:11, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. Those who vote keep: prepare to have en-99 soon. If you need to emphasize it, an optional argument may be easily added to a template of your choice. &larr;[[User:Humus sapiens|Humus sapiens]][[User talk:Humus sapiens|&larr;ну?]] 10:01, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Week Delete and Comment''' As it stands, it is not well defined, and thus the reason for it is hard to tell. Is a “professional” level better or worse then native? What context is it “professional” in, translation, business, ...? --[[User:Bky1701|Bky1701]] 11:22, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' I am not seeing the problem with this - it seems to be a perfectly logical extension of the Babel box. Turning it into a non-language template would be the non-standard implementation. Leave as is. --[[User:Dschor|Dschor]] 11:30, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' np with it [[User:Larix|Larix]] 13:16, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' - It doesn't need to be sneering superiority. Create a new template that talks about being a professional in the subject of the English language - as in an English [[linguistics|linguist]] or [[philology|philologist]]. En-5 is the wrong place for this. - [[User:Cuivienen|Cuivienen]] 15:01, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' - It is a limited case, but a non-English professional translator would speak English at better than an en-4 level, but not be a native speaker (en-N). The en-5 template seems to cover that circumstance. --[[User:CBDunkerson|CBD]] <big><sub>[[User talk:CBDunkerson|&#x260E;]]</sub></big> <sup>[[Special:Emailuser/CBDunkerson|&#x2709;]]</sup> 15:10, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
:*'''Comment''' &mdash; Could someone define exactly what a ''native'' speaker is? I understand it to be ones mother tounge. For example, I'm a native speaker of Swedish, but I'm not a professional in it's grammar. <sub>→<font style="color:#975612">[[User:AzaToth|Aza]]</font><font style="color:#325596">[[User_talk:AzaToth|Toth]]</font></sub> 15:29, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
:::*'''Comment''', I agree based solely on your confusion of ''its'' and ''it's''! I kid, I kid ;) [[User:Sherurcij|Sherurcij]] <sup>([[User_talk:Sherurcij|talk]]) ([[Wikipedia:WikiProject Terrorism|Terrorist Wikiproject]])</sup>
*'''Delete or rename per [[User:OwenX]].''' Appears to be attempting a reform of the Babel system's structure in its own sneaky way. Whether more levels are needed could be discussed, but in its proper place, and if it meets acceptance by consensus, it should be implemented in a proper way. Also, in this particular case it seems to imply that a "professional" speaker (in itself an ill-defined concept) somehow differs in skill or level of authority from a ''native'' or ''near-native'' speaker, which, I would argue, is patently false. The main (and probably sufficient) argument for deletion is that it poses as a Babel template but does not follow the standard form of Babel templates. [[User:EldKatt|EldKatt]] <small>([[User talk:EldKatt|Talk]])</small> 16:39, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Rename and revise''' as per [[User: OwenX]]. [[User:DESiegel|DES]] [[User talk:DESiegel|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 17:23, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Rewrite''' text as the term "professional" has so many different meanings (is it someone writing or translating as a living? Is it someone holding a provincially-issued licence of some sort, in the same way "professional engineer" and "registered nurse" each have a specific legal meaning? Is it someone who knows just enough English to use it in the workplace when practicing some other unrelated profession? Or is it just a perceived level of linguistic quality somehow rated a little better than merely "unprofessional"? If the meaning is that this person's employment is that of a linguist, author or teacher of English, by all means ''say so''. The current wording is too vague to impart any meaning beyond that of {{tl|en-4}} and therefore useless. --[[User:Carlb|carlb]] 18:28, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''Delete'''. &mdash; [[User:Rdsmith4|Dan]] | [[User talk:Rdsmith4|talk]] 20:05, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
* '''Keep'''. &mdash; Many <u>native</u> speakers/writers of English can and do write at a near-illiterate level. A way to distinguish the better practitioners is needed, even if English isn't their native language. However, I'd rather see the template in a less-provocative color than the shades of red that it now uses. Another color might avoid offending the tender sensibilities of certain users. --[[User:Hydrargyrum|Quicksilver]]<sup>[[User_talk:Hydrargyrum|T]] [[Special:Emailuser/Hydrargyrum|@]]</sup> 20:25, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' - There is a distinct difference between being native in a language and taking college classes to learn the grammar.--'''[[User:God_of_War|God of]][[User Talk:God_of_War| War]]''' 21:29, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong keep''' - Look at all those people who contribute using textspeak, slang, "it's" in the wrong place, etc.. etc... They may be native speakers, but they definitely don't deserve the en-5 label. en-5 is a way to show people that you know when to use apostrophes, that you can spell correctly, etc.... You don't have to have written books to show that. Anyway, if it is deleted, people can just create a userbox on their own page, defeating the whole point of deleting it. Just look a second at all the people who have '''en-5''' on their user pages. They can all contribute with a high level of English and spelling correctly. At least three people on the first page of the '''en-N''' category can't spell or, even worse, don't use proper grammar. After all, what's the point of deleting a userbox, why the fuss? If people want to put '''en-5''' on their userpage, leave them alone... [[User:Nippoo|Nippoo]] 21:54, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''', as per [[User:Nippoo|Nippoo]]. Hi-cal usage isn't common even in native speakers; the '''en-5''' suggests encyclopedia-caliber competence, which is to be desired. Add it to other languages, too, I've no problem with that; if you're '''de-5''' (or Klingon-5, for all that), good on ya. [[User:Trekphiler|Trekphiler]] 22:25, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. If you're a professional editor, and want people to know it, why not ''write it in English on your user page''? Why does it need to be in a stupid box? -- [[User:SCZenz|SCZenz]] 22:30, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong delete'''. Nonstandard (and sets a terrible precedent), pointless, arrogant (by what standard do we judge "professional", other than just how well a person thinks of his own writing?), inaccurate, misleading, wasteful, unreliable (with no consistent standard, we'll have some of our best writers and some of our worst writers listed together, making the template useless), ugly. Has nothing to do with the Babel templates, which deal with whether you're a native speaker of the language or one who's learning it at some level or another. A distinct template should be created for things like "user is a professional writer", "user has an exceptional grasp of vocabulary and grammar, "user is a copyeditor", etc., if necessary. The Babel template deal with how ''fluent'' you are in English, not how ''skilled'' you are; whether your prose is masterful or not should be an unrelated template. Also, I have to say that I couldn't agree more with SCZenz; very good point. -[[User:Silence|Silence]] 22:38, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
:*The non-standard-issue can easily be changed - what color do you want it to be? en-4 is yellow, so that would also be non-standard, should we also delete it? Why else could this template be nonstandard? Why would this template be more misleading than other levels? I personally beleive en-2 is way more misleading. It can mean anything. To some people intermediate means advenced, to others it means beginner. According to your reasoning we should urgently delete the native template because it does not identify a person who is learning the language (?) (I think, hope, we can assume that everybody who writes for WP is trying to improve his language skills -> so lets delete all babel templates?). And could you expand on your notion that fluency has nothing to do with skill?--[[User:Fenice|Fenice]] 23:25, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' this non-standard and unnecessary template, although, as are said often above, a seperate userbox and category to show that you're a professional writer isn't a bad idea. [[User:Lord Bob|Lord Bob]] 00:06, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' Escapes the purpose of the Babel project, I believe. Plus, there's a duality difficult to resolve: this "professional speaker" could be a "über-native", that is, a native who also possesses a "professional knowledge" of the language, or a "über-level 4", that is, a person who is not a native speaker but who has studied and understands the language on a "professional level", such as an English teacher/professor in a non-English speaking country. Those two should not even be mixed to begin with, since it's not quite the same thing. Since this is not essential to the project, we'd be better off leaving this alone &mdash; plus what [[User:Silence|Silence]] said. [[User:Redux|Redux]] 01:31, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
:*...A duality difficult to resolve...says Redux. We can't list all articles for deletion that have dualities that are difficult to resolve. Doing that in this case sets an uncanny precedent.--[[User:Fenice|Fenice]] 23:25, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' - Pretentious as hell, and completely misleading. I lost track of the number of grammatical mistakes and misspelled words on the user pages of people with this userbox. Yeah, I'm a copyeditor. [[User:FCYTravis|FCYTravis]] 04:18, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
:*This bears some relevance in considering [[user:Silence]]'s argument above, who dreams of all natives and copyeditors having no more need to learn and improve.--[[User:Fenice|Fenice]] 23:25, 6 January 2006 (UTC)]
:**If someone is going to be pretentious enough to slap an "English professional" userbox on their userpage, they'd better not have a single freaking mistake on it. [[User:FCYTravis|FCYTravis]] 05:15, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong Delete''' levels 0 to 4 plus -N should be enough. Why break the norm for one language?. [[User:CharonX|CharonX]] 20:20, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
:*''You'' are breaking a norm by suggesting to delete this. 'Normally' there are more evaluation levels for language skills, as I mentioned above.--[[User:Fenice|Fenice]] 23:25, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
::* All of which are completley arbitrary. 4 sounds about right; I could decipher a message, I could communicate at a basic level, I'm pretty good in the language, I'm a native.--[[User:Prosfilaes|Prosfilaes]] 23:41, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
:::*They would not have to be that arbitrary if they would correspond better to what is done in real life: have more levels. To me 'being able to decipher a message' is en-0, basic level is en-1, pretty good sounds more like advanced (en-3). The more productive users are the ones that categorize themselves as "fluent" or having "a working knowledge", both terms are often found on resumés and are non-existent in Babel as of yet -> we need more levels on Babel.--[[User:Fenice|Fenice]] 07:56, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
::::* Being able to decipher a message is not en-0; that's I don't speak English. Adding more levels is just going to make it more confusing; if you don't know what the difference between en-2 and en-3 is, then making them en-2, en-3, en-4 isn't going to help. If you're fluent in English, you should be able to tell that that's en-4. And whether or not we need more levels is orthogonal to whether or not this particular level defined roughly as it is should stay. Arguing that this should stay because the Bable system needs to be more finely tuned is like arguing that User GWB should stay because the users from Green Water Bay need a userbox.--[[User:Prosfilaes|Prosfilaes]] 09:26, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
:::::* If you can 'decipher a message' you won't be able to contribute much and that is the criterion for en-0 (can't contribute). If you set fluency equal to current e-4, which is near native, we will need at least en-6 to cover the full spectrum. As to the Bay Water Green analogy, I have no idea what that is or where that is, but everybody here knows what English is. The analogy is faulty.--[[User:Fenice|Fenice]] 12:50, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
::::::* You're changing the meaning of the template mid-game.--[[User:Prosfilaes|Prosfilaes]] 10:33, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. Pretentious, unhelpful, offensive. If you're a professional who uses English, say that; there's a difference between that and "speaking English at a professional level".--[[User:Prosfilaes|Prosfilaes]] 20:37, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
:*If you have a problem with the wording, change it, be bold, click the edit button on top.--[[User:Fenice|Fenice]] 23:25, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
::*It's not the wording I have problems with; it's the fact that the Bable tool is being abused to look down at the people who only speak the language at a "native" level. It's an elitest and linguistically absurd concept.--[[User:Prosfilaes|Prosfilaes]] 23:41, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep.''' The user template deletion craze is really going beyond comment. --[[User:Fenice|Fenice]] 21:15, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per arguments above. --[[User:Fang Aili|Fang Aili]] 21:41, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong Keep''' This is ridiculous. Using that reasoning, we can delete every user template because it is "arrogant" and the user must be a "twit," right? Most languages have at least 5 levels, as the first comment noted. There is absolutely no reason to delete this, as it can be '''extremely''' useful in determining people who can help significantly with grammar. The argument that people with terrible grammar will use this is irrelevant, since someone could just as easily put a level 4 when they really speak at a level 2, and this would be apparent from the user page anyways. Using that reasoning, again, we can just delete all language templates because all Wikipedia users can be arrogant twits and lie, right? Wrong.
:* Tests (''not languages'') may have a level 5, but that doesn't mean that we should be that granular, and it espeically does not mean that we should have level 5 mean what en-5 does. Yes, they could put a level 4 when they speak at a level 2, but it's not really being an arrogant twit to say you're as good as most speakers. en-5 is misleadingly defined, since there's no linguistically accepted level of language knowledge beyond native, and there's no evidence that it's being used in a useful way.--[[User:Prosfilaes|Prosfilaes]] 00:01, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' a 4-level system is currently used for representing any user skill. So, an arbitrary fifth level does not fit in any way. --[[User:Angelo.romano|Angelo]] 23:56, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep.''' Significant difference between native and professional master in thr written form of a language. --[[User:Valmi|Valmi]][[User_talk:Valmi| &#10002;]] 04:25, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Comment.''' It seems like some of those voting keep here do so because they ''desire more levels in the Babel system''. Consider, then, that there are babel templates currently listed [[Wikipedia:Babel|here]] for '''232''' languages. Do you think an effective way of introducing a reform in this system (where the 5 levels, including native, are the currently established way of doing things) is to create an extra template for English that cannot easily be found and hoping that people will therefore adapt to some new, non-existent standard? If you really wish to change the Babel standard, raise the issue in a place where it can be discussed and, if consensus is reached, implemented properly. Please realize that, currently, this template breaks the 5-level (or 4-level, depending on how you see it) system that Babel currently follows, and keeping this can't really result in anything but confusion. [[User:EldKatt|EldKatt]] <small>([[User talk:EldKatt|Talk]])</small> 10:54, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
:*I am not sure how you got the idea that there are currently 4 levels (en-1 to en-4), when we are here obviously talking about ''deleting'' an existing level en-5. As you can see the link above is still blue, so 5 levels do exist. Level en-5 was created months ago and about 40 people have it on their userpages. You are twisting the facts. You are right, this is not the place to change the Babel standard, which is currently en-1 to en-5. En-5 was created the same way en-4 was finally created because there was a demand for it. --[[User:Fenice|Fenice]] 11:20, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
::*Why, then, do no other languages have a level 5? Why does [[Wikipedia:Babel]] explicitly list and describe the ''four levels'' at the top? [[Wikipedia:Babel/Levels]] does mention it, but it is referred to as a ''proposal'', not yet implemented. (Incidentally, I can't find any other references to this proposal, or it being discussed anywhere, which surprises me.) Please provide evidence of your claim that "the Babel standard [...] is currently en-1 to en-5", now that I have provided some evidence to the contrary. [[User:EldKatt|EldKatt]] <small>([[User talk:EldKatt|Talk]])</small> 12:08, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
:::*Some other languages have only three levels, some only one, see [Wikipedia:Babel]]. If there is no description of the fifth level it should be added and if en-5 is seen by some as just a proposal it should be discussed and not just deleted. I am saying it is standard because en-5 exists and is in heavy use. There is nothing more formal to that. From what you say I can draw no other conclusion other than there needs to be discussion, not deletion. The demand is there for en-5 and it it will be created again in some form sooner or later anyway. But if this deletion goes through and sets a precedent we will have to resort to calling it en-4.5 or something.--[[User:Fenice|Fenice]] 12:44, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
::::*If 45 users&mdash;compared to 108 for en-1, 799 for en-2, 1601 for en-3, 755 for en-4 and many thousands for en-N (is there an easy way of counting pages in a category?)&mdash;qualifies as "heavy use" by your standards, then there's not a lot we can discuss. I am still of the opinion that reforms of established systems (such as Babel with ''four levels'') should be attempted in the proper place, to enable serious discussion and successful potential implementation. I am also still of the opinion that en-5 is not standard, as you have claimed. [[User:EldKatt|EldKatt]] <small>([[User talk:EldKatt|Talk]])</small> 15:39, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
:::::*yes, we have different notions of what is standard. It's nice however to see that someone sticks to the rules on top of this page and admits that this was not the right place to decide that policy.--[[User:Fenice|Fenice]] 15:53, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
::::::Also, now that we have the exact numbers, again the suggestion: why not sacrifice en-1 with 108 users instead?--[[User:Fenice|Fenice]] 15:56, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
::::::*Well, it has twice as many users as en-5. And more importantly, I don't see the point of having a system where "intermediate" is the lowest level. It evidently fills a gap satisfactorily. [[User:EldKatt|EldKatt]] <small>([[User talk:EldKatt|Talk]])</small> 20:18, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
:::::::*As I said above, or was it below - the people on level en-1 will make nowhere near as many contributions as the ones that are on level 5. My rough estimate is that by deleting category en-5 you are chasing off about 100 times more edits than by deleting category en-1. Just imagine when these people discover this absurdly strange discussion here in a few weeks and find out that they are not wanted because their abilities are considered 'offensive'. Cool Cat, the user who initiated this stunt, is gonna have a good laugh. --[[User:Fenice|Fenice]] 21:38, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
::::::::*If they're going to be driven off by a deletion of one template, they don't have what it takes to survive at Wikipedia. And no one has said their abilities are offensive; they said this way of expressing them is.--[[User:Prosfilaes|Prosfilaes]] 10:33, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
:::::::::*The issue here&mdash;according to me as well as the majority of delete voters&mdash;has nothing to do with anything being offensive, as you claim. The issue is that it is non-standard. If this were named anything but "en-5", and thus made no claim of being part of the Babel system, a lot of those voting delete wouldn't mind it at all, as I interpret the discussion. (The notion that people would feel unwanted and leave Wikipedia because of a template being deleted is, to me, ''absurd''.) [[User:EldKatt|EldKatt]] <small>([[User talk:EldKatt|Talk]])</small> 20:19, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete.''' There are enough levels as it is and Wikipedia is not a translating agency. / [[User:Peter Isotalo|Peter]] <sup>[[User talk:Peter Isotalo|Isotalo]]</sup> 13:22, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
**Of course it is. Shouldn't users who vote here have ''some'' knowledge of what they are talking about?--[[User:Fenice|Fenice]] 14:30, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
***Of course it isn't. Wikipedia does not take material in for translation; we don't even straight-forwardly translate Wikipedia articles between different languages.--[[User:Prosfilaes|Prosfilaes]] 10:33, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
****'''Very funny. I was really amazed that anybody could actually be so remote from reality, judging by your statements above, and I am now kind of relieved to see you are only joking, Prosfilaes. Very funny.''' --[[User:Fenice|Fenice]] 22:01, 8 January 2006 (UTC) - Now watch Profilaes put all the translation pages up for deletion on the grounds that he feels offended by them.--[[User:Fenice|Fenice]] 22:04, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
*****What are you [[Wikipedia:Civility|talking]] about? [[User:EldKatt|EldKatt]] <small>([[User talk:EldKatt|Talk]])</small> 22:27, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
******(*Whispering at EldKatt:*)Have a look at Profilaes userpage. He knows perfectly well that there are translations. He has a link to them on his userpage. --[[User:Fenice|Fenice]] 22:35, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' en-4 is good enough.--[[User:MONGO|MONGO]] 14:07, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
**I suggest deleting en-1 instead. Makes more sense, since people on that level won't contribute much anyway.--[[User:Fenice|Fenice]] 14:30, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
***That's not a valid reason to delete en-1, and it's rather offensive. Even someone with en-1 can make suggestions and help clarify articles within their field of expertise. Making the facts right is worth a million minor grammatical fixes.--[[User:Prosfilaes|Prosfilaes]] 10:33, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' [[User:Djegan|Djegan]] 15:29, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' [[User:Brossow|BRossow]] 17:39, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Weak keep'''. I recognise that there is a difference in being a native speaker of the English language and being able to write a text that is of encyclopedic quality. The problem is that it is difficult for many people to judge if their own writing style is truly "professional". Then again, the user page is there for whatever people want to say about themselves, so I can't see why this shouldn't be available to them to use. [[User:Jamyskis|Jamyskis]] <font size="-3">[[User_talk:Jamyskis|Whisper]], [[Special:Contributions/Jamyskis|Contribs]]</font> [[Image:Flag_of_Germany.svg|25px|Germany]] 17:53, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' I just ran across this discussion by chance, since I'd stopped following, or caring about, the Babel template discussions some time ago. This discussion, and the mentality behind the whole notion of xx-5, xx-6, what fits here, there, etc., is the straw that breaks this camel's back. Combined with the whole proliferation of absurd, stupid, juvenile userboxes that have crawled up out of the primordial Babel ooze, the only conclusion I can come to is that far too many people are more interested in process than content here. I am going to remove my own Babel labels since their meaning and usefulness have been debased and will only become more so in the future. Good work, Wikipedians. -[[User:EDM|EDM]] 20:05, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Comment'''. What happened to [[Template_talk:User_en-5]]? There was some discussion there a few days ago.--[[User:Prosfilaes|Prosfilaes]] 10:47, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Change''' so it's not on the en-x scale. En-x is 1-4 and native. Let's not mess with that now that's it's nicely setup. Change to pro-writer or some of the other options above. [[User:Grenavitar|gren]] [[User talk:Grenavitar|グレン]] 13:54, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. [[Wikipedia:Babel|Babel]] is fundamentally a 5-step system: '''1''', '''2''', '''3''', '''4''', '''N'''. Period. There is no need to bloat it with [[Template:User en-5|en-5]], [[Template:User en-6|en-6]], [[Template:User en-0|en-0]], [[Template:User en-666|en-666]], [[Template:User en-2.5|en-2.5]], [[Template:User en-π|en-π]], [[Template:User en-i|en-''i'']] or any such nonsense. —[[User:Ilmari Karonen|Ilmari Karonen]] <small>([[User talk:Ilmari Karonen|talk]])</small> 21:30, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
**Actually, even [[Template:User en-4|en-4]] is a somewhat non-standard extension. The original Babels at [[:commons:Babel|commons]] and [[:meta:Babel|meta]] only go up to 3. —[[User:Ilmari Karonen|Ilmari Karonen]] <small>([[User talk:Ilmari Karonen|talk]])</small> 22:17, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
***That is a perfectly valid suggestion, Ilmari. Changes in policy can be made. The problem is that the standard way which would correspond to the instructions on the top of this page is to suggest a policy - [[Wikipedia: Policy proposal Guillotine Babel with an extension by Ilmari to also cut the feet off]] and have it discussed by the people who are interested. (I like your suggestion to delete en-0). Taking out one single brick of the building makes no sense whatsoever. There should have been an attempt to change the concept behind Babel and ban en-5 entirely from the English wiki. Now we will forever have users putting on en-5 on their pages and finding out that on en-wiki this is a red link because here on this page people could not cope with someone outing himself as capable of anything. --[[User:Fenice|Fenice]] 22:28, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
****You're the one who keeps pushing these new xx-5 levels without any consensus or policy behind you. I notice you've been [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:User_de-5&action=history creating more of these] and editing [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3ABabelsExt&diff=34168826&oldid=31315809 the] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ABabel&diff=34249334&oldid=34196536 Babel] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ABabel%2FLevels&diff=34253728&oldid=31717512 pages] to make it look like there's been an official change to the system. It's true that Wikipedia encourages editors to [[Wikipedia:be bold|be bold]], but this is starting to cross over from "bold" to "sneaky". —[[User:Ilmari Karonen|Ilmari Karonen]] <small>([[User talk:Ilmari Karonen|talk]])</small> 23:34, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
::* No need for personal attacks, Ilmari. "Sneaky" is one. And yes, I am obviously pushing xx-5. I am glad someone is reading the discussion. Bravo. --[[User:Fenice|Fenice]] 06:19, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
:::*Comments on somebody's behaviour do not equal personal attacks. (Your sarcasm above approaches it, though, but I don't see any need to discuss that any further.) Your swiftness in jumping to the conclusion that everyone is out to get you isn't really helping anyone. [[User:EldKatt|EldKatt]] <small>([[User talk:EldKatt|Talk]])</small> 16:54, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
::* '''Looking at the diffs you provide: I cannot see a single one that proves that the policy has been proposed and not opposed for months. You are presenting a onesided picture of the story to discredit another user.''' Can I call ''you'' sneaky for that one, Ilmari? --[[User:Fenice|Fenice]] 06:30, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
:::*-->Here are the links Ilmari has omitted so gracefully: Proposal on talk page, one objection by [[user:EDM]], others agree or don't mind:[[Wikipedia talk:Babel#New level descriptions]]. And: [[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ABabel%2FLevels&diff=28619636&oldid=28606921 diff]]- this is a Proposal "Levels" with a link to it on top of the Babel page with no objections since then.--[[User:Fenice|Fenice]] 06:53, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
:::**Reading that section on the talk page, I count one user besides the nominator ([[User:Ynhockey|Ynhockey]]) supporting, one ([[User:EDM|EDM]]) opposing, one ([[User:The Dogandpony|The Dogandpony]]) indifferent and one ([[User:Bo Lindbergh|Bo Lindbergh]]) proposing [[Template:User en-godlike|en-∞]] instead (with [[User:Cernen|Cernen]] supporting him). This does not, in my opinion, consensus make. Besides, this TfD nomination itself shows that there in fact are multiple people who consider the new level needless. —[[User:Ilmari Karonen|Ilmari Karonen]] <small>([[User talk:Ilmari Karonen|talk]])</small> 07:25, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Comment'''. Why not create a seperate template for "professional copy editor" or some such, outside of the babel language-level heirarchy? A user could be en-N or en-4 and add the "professional English" infobox as well. Obviously some non-natives are going to be more skilled at using a "professional" [[Register (linguistics)|register]] than many native speakers anyway. [[user:ntennis|ntennis]] 01:57, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*By the way, my vote for this template is '''Delete'''. And or the record, I'm against the user-4 category as well. A four-level system of beginner, intermediate, advanced, and "native or native-like" is plenty as far as i'm concerned. [[user:ntennis|ntennis]] 01:57, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 
People will sometimes also recommend '''[[Wikipedia:Template substitution|subst]]''', '''subst and delete''', or similar. This means they think the template text should be "[[Hard coding|hard-coded]]" into the articles that are currently using it. Depending on the content, the template itself may then be deleted; if preserving the edit history for attribution is desirable, it may be [[Wikipedia:History merging|history-merged]] with the target article or moved to mainspace and redirected.
'''I have now invited people on the talk page of Babel to comment here. I know that this is something that is despised by some as vote rallying and have not done it so far. However, Ilmari has written on this talk page first and placed an attack against my person on the talk page of Babel (I removed the personal attack), so I guess that gives me the right to inform those who are competent and concerned with these templates about this discussion.''' And: ciao. If nobody responds to this invitation, I have done my job here on this page at defending Babel. Unless someone officially allows me to do more efficient 'vote rallying' I won't discuss xx-5 here any more. I have said my share. But I will watch and remove all future personal attacks agains me on this page. --[[User:Fenice|Fenice]] 06:43, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 
Templates are rarely orphaned—that is, removed from pages that transclude them—before the discussion is closed. A list of open discussions eligible for closure can be found at [[Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Old unclosed discussions]].
* '''Strong keep'''. I'm the person who created that template. When I created it, on [[Wikipedia talk:Babel]] some people were favourable to the creation of a "professional" level template, others weren't. I created it expecting that, either consensus would be achieved that it's useful, and someone would make similar templates for other languages, or consensus would be achieved that it's useless, and it would be deleted.
 
=== Closing discussion ===
The reason why I created it was, a box for writers, teachers etc. of a language to show that they can help e.g. to copyedit articles in that language. Maybe the wording isn't the best possible one, if someone has a better idea, feel free to change it. (However, I disagree with the idea of making ''one'' category for professional writers of any language, IMO it's better to make a category for each language.)
Administrators should read the [[Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Closing instructions|closing instructions]] before closing a nomination. Note that [[WP:XFDcloser]] semi-automates this process and ensures all of the appropriate steps are taken.
 
</div>
Yes, this template may be deemed 'arrogant' or 'vain', and could be used by trolls, but even xx-4 templates used by non-native speakers have the same identical problem, haven't they? That's not a good reason to delete it. If someone makes inappropriate use of it, ''they'' are to blame, not the template... --[[User:Army1987|Army1987]] 15:48, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 
== Current discussions ==
* '''Strong delete'''. Changes likes these to the babel system should be discussed on meta and not on a single language version of Wikipedia. If we follow this course, the babel system would mean different things on each language version of Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects. --[[User:Maitch|Maitch]] 02:07, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
{{Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/{{ #time: Y F j }}}}
** In case you don't know, there are some Wikipedias which don't have xx-4 levels. Anyway, levels 1, 2 and 3 would stay unchanged, and only a part of the xx-4 people will go to xx-5. --[[User:Army1987|Army1987]] 20:56, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
{{Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/{{ #time: Y F j | -1 days }}}}
{{Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/{{ #time: Y F j | -2 days }}}}
{{Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/{{ #time: Y F j | -3 days }}}}
{{Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/{{ #time: Y F j | -4 days }}}}
{{Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/{{ #time: Y F j | -5 days }}}}
{{Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/{{ #time: Y F j | -6 days }}}}
{{Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/{{ #time: Y F j | -7 days }}}}
 
== Old discussions ==
* '''Delete''' per babel standard. It is my opinion that a fifth level does not enhance the current classification system. There is an important distinction between levels 4 and N, but the only difference between 4 and 5 or N and 5 is occupation. If a user really wants to have something on their userpage that describes their occupation, they can create their own private userbox easily enough. &#126;[[User:Mdd4696 |MDD]][[User_talk:Mdd4696 |46]][[Special:Contributions/Mdd4696 |96]] 03:27, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
{{#invoke:XfD old|transclude}}
*'''Delete''' per Rhobite --- [[User:Chalst|Charles Stewart]] 15:17, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''', since Wikipedia is planning to have a level 5 Babel template. --[[User:Terenceong1992|Terence Ong]] <sup>[[User talk:Terenceong1992|Talk]]</sup> 11:21, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', since it's not going to be like this. - [[User:Ulayiti|ulayiti]] [[User talk:Ulayiti|<font color="#226b22"><small>(talk)</small></font>]] 11:45, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' Babel-5 has special purpose [[User:DaGizza|<b><font color="darkblue"> D</font><font color="teal">a</font><font color="lightblue">Gizza</font></b>]]''<sup><font color="orange">[[User_talk:DaGizza|Chat]]</font></sup>'' <sup><b><font color="gold">[[Special:Contributions/DaGizza|(c)]]</font></b></sup> 11:55, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 
== Completed discussions ==
====[[Template:Mozilla]]====
A list of completed discussions that still require action taken on the template(s) — for example, a merge between two infoboxes — can be found at [[Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Holding cell|the "Holding Cell"]].
:[[Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/Not deleted/November 2005#Template:Fair use-firefox|(previous nomination)]]
Redundant to {{tl|logo}}, used on about ten images. That Mozilla explicitly says "go ahead and use this" is irrelevant; we don't allow "by-permission" images, and they're in fact speedyable. Their license explicitly disallows commercial exploitation (see their [http://www.mozilla.org/foundation/trademarks/faq.html faq]), making all images with this tag speedyable for that reason also. On top of this, they don't allow derivatives of any kind, further cementing the case that this is an unfree image. The only way images currently tagged with this template can be used on Wikipedia is under a fair use claim. &mdash;[[User:Cryptic|Cryptic]] [[User talk:Cryptic|(talk)]] 16:23, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
 
For an index of all old and archived discussions, see [[Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/Archives]].
*<s>'''Keep'''</s>, unless it's more important to [[Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy|bureaucratically]] follow [[Wikipedia:Ignore all rules|rules]] to the letter than it is to apply common sense. I've yet to read one logical explanation of why this setup is harmful or inappropriate, aside from "because rule X says this" or "rule Y says that." &mdash;[[User:David Levy|David Levy]] 16:42, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''', the images are being used under license, which is a lot better than being used under fair-use IMO. —[[User:Locke Cole|Locke Cole]] • [[User talk:Locke Cole|t]] • [[Special:Contributions/Locke Cole|c]] 16:53, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' - litigation gone mad. Mozilla are not going to be unhappy about people using their logo are they? People should really read [[WP:Common Sense]] more often. [[Image:Anglo-Indian Indentity.svg|20px]] [[User:Djr xi|Deano]] <small>([[User talk:Djr_xi|Talk]])</small> 16:55, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' [[User:Ian13|Ian]]<sup>[[User_talk:Ian13|13]]</sup><sub>ID:540053</sub> 16:56, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nom. Thanks/[[User:Wangi|wangi]] 16:57, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
*Litigation has nothing to do with it. Our [[m:Foundation issues|foundation issues]] aren't negotiable. &mdash;[[User:Cryptic|Cryptic]] [[User talk:Cryptic|(talk)]] 16:59, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' - [[Image:Union flag 1606 (Kings Colors).svg|20px|UK]] [[User:Bourbons3|'''«ßØÛ®ßÖѧ3»''']] <sup>[[User_talk:Bourbons3|Talk]] | [[special:contributions/Bourbons3|Contrib's]]</sup> 17:24, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' How is this any different from {{tl|Permission}} or {{tl|Noncommercial}}? See [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2005-05-23/Noncommercial images]] and [http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2005-May/023760.html]. --[[User:Sherool|Sherool]] <span style="font-size:75%">[[User talk:Sherool|(talk)]]</span> 17:35, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
::It's different because everyone and their cousin knows (or ''should'' know) that there's no harm in displaying the Mozilla logos in this context. &mdash;[[User:David Levy|David Levy]] 17:44, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
:::No it's not, using images we have been given permission to use doesn't carry any legal risk either, but because such images are unfree (does not allow commercial re-distribition) it has been dictated from the foundation level that such images are not to be used anymore (or at least used under the fair use doctrine instead). I don't see how this should somehow not apply here. --[[User:Sherool|Sherool]] <span style="font-size:75%">[[User talk:Sherool|(talk)]]</span> 22:56, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
::::These images are intended for use on '''user pages'''. If they ''were'' to be added to related articles, that would qualify as fair use. What's the problem? &mdash;[[User:David Levy|David Levy]] 03:48, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Comment''': This discussion's outcome has been rendered moot by Crytic, who pre-emptively nullified the template by adding {{tl|or-fu}} to the tagged images (despite the fact that no fair use claims have been made). &mdash;[[User:David Levy|David Levy]] 17:44, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' &mdash; Per David <sub>→<font style="color:#975612">[[User:AzaToth|Aza]]</font><font style="color:#325596">[[User_talk:AzaToth|Toth]]</font></sub> 17:51, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' per common sense. [[User:the wub|the wub]] [[User_talk:The wub|<font color="green">"?!"</font>]] 19:32, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. No reason to start coming up with exceptions to image policy. [[User:Jkelly|Jkelly]] 19:43, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
**There is no image policy. —[[User:Locke Cole|Locke Cole]] • [[User talk:Locke Cole|t]] • [[Special:Contributions/Locke Cole|c]] 19:51, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
***[[Wikipedia:Image use policy]], [[Wikipedia:Image copyright tags]]. See also links provided by [[User:Sherool]] above. [[User:Jkelly|Jkelly]] 20:06, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
****Ahh, for some reason I thought you were referring to [[WP:FU]] and [[WP:FUC]], which are only guidelines at the moment. Sorry for the misunderstanding (and it was totally my fault). —[[User:Locke Cole|Locke Cole]] • [[User talk:Locke Cole|t]] • [[Special:Contributions/Locke Cole|c]] 03:59, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*<s>'''Delete'''. I'm sorry to say this, but Cryptic is correct here. I have had some limited experince with trademark law. I can say it's not very intuitive. Copyright is even more complicated. If Wikipedia has a rule for that we must follow it. I assume that rule has been reviewd by experts and they know why. I'm not enough knowledgeable in this area, an expert sure could explain us in detail why this is so. One thing I think to understand is this: http://www.mozilla.org/foundation/trademarks/policy.html states that if a web site uses one of their trademarks (implies also their logo) that site must write somewhere that that trademark is owned by the Mozilla Foundation. I do not know where that notice should go on Wikipedia. Fair use of the name for example "Firefox" in the text to describe it is ok without that notice. This is fishy non-intuitive ground. We should really follow the rules we have here. [[User talk:Adrian Buehlmann|Adrian Buehlmann]] 20:11, 4 January 2006 (UTC)</s> '''Neutral'''. Dumb me. Trademark notice is there. Problem is still with the policy. And doesn't the Mozilla License prohibit the making of a Wikipedia DVD? [[User talk:Adrian Buehlmann|Adrian Buehlmann]] 23:10, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
::These images are intended for use in the user namespace. As Kelly and Tony have reminded us in recent days, this is not part of the encyclopedia proper. &mdash;[[User:David Levy|David Levy]] 03:48, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. As per above. Mozilla allows us to use these images. The reason they are under fire is because of ''Wikipedia's'' red tape, not Mozilla's. This is an example of [[WP:IAR|ignoring the rules]].--[[User:HereToHelp|HereToHelp]] ([[User talk:HereToHelp|talk]]) 21:37, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' Agree woth the reasons given by [[User:HereToHelp]]. As for where the "trademark is owned by the Mozilla foundation" should go. The image description page seems sensible to me. [[User:Theresa knott|Theresa Knott]] | [[User talk:Theresa knott|Taste the Korn]] 22:41, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nom. If the K-Meleon logo, (which is in the same boat as Firefox's) gets its logo rightfully ripped from its template, so should the other non-free Mozilla logos as well. [[User:Lbmixpro|LBMixPro]][[User talk:Lbmixpro|<sup><Sp</sup>]][[WP:EA|<font color="green"><sup>e</sup></font>]][[User talk:Lbmixpro|<sup>ak|on|it!></sup>]] 10:39, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
**[[Two wrongs make a right|Two wrongs don't make a right]]. —[[User:Locke Cole|Locke Cole]] • [[User talk:Locke Cole|t]] • [[Special:Contributions/Locke Cole|c]] 10:42, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' Is this about the image or the template? --[[User:Improv|Improv]] 15:50, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''', as per above. [[User:Matt Crypto|&mdash; Matt <small>Crypto</small>]] 16:31, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''', survived previous TFD.[[User:Gateman1997|Gateman1997]] 18:31, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', the nomination says it well -- [[User:Sannse|sannse]] [[User talk:Sannse|(talk)]] 21:17, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete with Comment''': We may have reached a solution to this jam at [[Template_talk:User_browser:Firefox]]. Maybe it can be used here? If not, delete this (regardless of how this discussion goes, license issues are non negotiable). --[[User:Improv|Improv]] 21:21, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' again, we can't use this tag in any manner consistent with our image policies. [[User:JYolkowski|JYolkowski]] // [[User talk:JYolkowski|talk]] 02:57, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' There is absolutely no reason not to allow this. Except for "the rules." Some people get so caught up in the rules that they forget why the rules are in place. In this case, there's no harm in letting this exception fly. So I say, keep.
*'''Keep''' per arguments above. And I'm sure the Mozilla folks don't care. --[[User:Fang Aili|Fang Aili]] 21:44, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep.''' Last I checked we weren't commercially exploiting anything, so why do we give a damn that they don't allow allow commercial exploitation? [[User:Rogue 9|Rogue 9]] 06:59, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
**Because our licensing model allows our content to be reused by others for commercial purposes. If that's too complicated for you, [http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2005-May/023760.html because Jimbo said so]. --[[User:Ngb|Nick Boalch]]<sup> [[User_talk:Ngb|?!?]]</sup> 10:52, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
***Again, we're talking about '''user pages'''. And Jimbo also endorsed [[WP:IAR]]. &mdash;[[User:David Levy|David Levy]] 22:02, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
****That's an ingenuous claim. Firstly, these images are being used in the main namespace. For example, the very first image listed on [[Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Mozilla]], [[:Image:Firefox logo 305x150.png]], is used on two articles, [[Mozilla Firefox]] and [[History of Mozilla Firefox]]. Secondly, if the images are intended for community use only why don't the pages (or the template) '''say''' so? --[[User:Ngb|Nick Boalch]]<sup> [[User_talk:Ngb|?!?]]</sup> 18:41, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*****You say that "these images are being used in the main namespace." In fact, only the one that you cited as your "example" was mistagged in this manner. (I corrected it.) The template was created specifically to tag images used exclusively on user pages, and this '''''is''''' explicitly referenced in the template: "It is believed that we have permission to use this for promotional purposes; e.g., on a user page." &mdash;[[User:David Levy|David Levy]] 22:03, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
******'e.g., on a user page' and 'only an a user page' are, of course, very different things, as I suspect you are well aware. --[[User:Ngb|Nick Boalch]]<sup> [[User_talk:Ngb|?!?]]</sup> 22:08, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*******This is a summary of Mozilla's policy, which doesn't single out user pages. If you believe that the template's wording is ambiguous, you're welcome to modify it. (I won't bother, given the fact that this debate's outcome has been rendered moot by those who insist upon following every rule to the letter.) But again, the template was created with user pages in mind. It makes absolutely no sense to apply it to images contained within Mozilla-related articles, because that qualifies as fair use. &mdash;[[User:David Levy|David Levy]] 22:18, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
********For clarity it would need to be changed to the effect that images tagged with it could '''only''' be used on community pages. However, note the precedent of {{tl|CommunityUseOnly}}: images tagged as non-commercial only are liable to be deleted on sight even if used only on userpages. --[[User:Ngb|Nick Boalch]]<sup> [[User_talk:Ngb|?!?]]</sup> 22:29, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. Mozilla Foundation allows special usage and, considering the popularity and scope of their products, this will be applicable enough to be at least marginally useful. If there's a rule against this, ignore all rules. [[User:Cookiecaper|Cookiecaper]] 10:46, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', retag the images with {{tl|logo}}. --[[User:Ngb|Nick Boalch]]<sup> [[User_talk:Ngb|?!?]]</sup> 10:52, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', pointless. We may well have the ''right'' to put these images on userpages. However, we also have a [[WP:IUP|policy]] saying that we won't. —[[User:Ilmari Karonen|Ilmari Karonen]] <small>([[User talk:Ilmari Karonen|talk]])</small> 21:53, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' as per JYolkowski. [[User:Zscout370|Zach]] <small><sup>[[User_talk:Zscout370|(Smack Back)]] [[WP:FU|Fair use policy]] </sup></small> 22:01, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' It's worth nothing that I've seldom seen such a blatant misunderstanding of [[WP:IAR|ignore all rules]] as has been exhibited by various contributors to this debate. --[[User:Ngb|Nick Boalch]]<sup> [[User_talk:Ngb|?!?]]</sup> 22:18, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
**By all means, please enlighten us. &mdash;[[User:David Levy|David Levy]] 22:20, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
***Note the first sentence of the first paragraph. Note the first sentence of the second paragraph. Note the first sentence of the third paragraph. --[[User:Ngb|Nick Boalch]]<sup> [[User_talk:Ngb|?!?]]</sup> 22:31, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
****Encyclopedias don't write themselves. The community spirit is the glue that holds this site together, and every little bit of needless bureaucracy chips away at the community spirit. &mdash;[[User:David Levy|David Levy]] 22:40, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
*****While I agree in general with your point about community spirit, I look at this particular instance from a rather different direction. Mistagging images in order to get round a fundamental Wikipedia policy, just in order to use them in silly userboxes, is hardly helping to get the encyclopaedia written. --[[User:Ngb|Nick Boalch]]<sup> [[User_talk:Ngb|?!?]]</sup> 23:09, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
******No, but bureaucratically forcing people to stop displaying a harmless image on their user pages contributes to an atmosphere less conducive to productivity. Instead of arguing that userboxes are insignificant, how about explaining why we should follow a rule purely for the sake of following the rule? Or do you believe that there's another reason why the Mozilla images shouldn't be used in this context? &mdash;[[User:David Levy|David Levy]] 00:45, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*******No, the only reason is that as a matter of policy non-free images 'are not acceptable for Wikipedia', except under an appropriately reasoned claim of fair use [http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2005-May/023760.html] [http://mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2004-April/012156.html]. If you don't agree with this policy, then fine, but in that case [[Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)|suggest changing it]] and persuade the community that it's in the interests of the encyclopaedia to do so, rather than mistagging images and [[WP:POINT|disrupting Wikipedia to prove a point]]. --[[User:Ngb|Nick Boalch]]<sup> [[User_talk:Ngb|?!?]]</sup> 12:46, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
********If I were to enforce the rules in question (or other rules) to the letter (in a manner defying common sense) as a means of demonstrating the inherent absurdity, ''that'' would be an example of disrupting Wikipedia to prove a point. I've done nothing that I did not believe to be in the best interests of community and the encyclopedia, and I resent your claim to the contrary. &mdash;[[User:David Levy|David Levy]] 17:50, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*********Sorry, that was poorly phrased and wasn't intended as a personal attack: I was trying to suggest that mistagging images in this way amounts to a [[WP:POINT]] violation; I have no idea if you personally have been involved in doing that. --[[User:Ngb|Nick Boalch]]<sup> [[User_talk:Ngb|?!?]]</sup> 20:02, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
**********This "mistagging" is a policy violation committed in good faith (as an application of [[WP:IAR]]). Whether you agree or not, some of us honestly believe that this is a sensible approach. It is ''not'' an example of the misguided tactic described at [[WP:POINT]] (in which a user deliberately acts in a manner that adversely affects Wikipedia, purely for the sake of proving that it was a bad idea). &mdash;[[User:David Levy|David Levy]] 20:31, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
***********I don't consider that to be the only relevant application of [[WP:POINT]], since both its key points 'Don't disrupt Wikipedia to prove a point' and 'State your point, don't prove it experimentally' have much wider applications. What has this been if not an attempt to prove a point experimentally rather than debating changing the relevant policy and getting appropriate consensus? --[[User:Ngb|Nick Boalch]]<sup> [[User_talk:Ngb|?!?]]</sup> 20:38, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
************We aren't attempting to disrupt Wikipedia, nor is it our goal to prove a point. We believe that the logic behind our stance is self-evident, and that our actions are a simple application of common sense (and should be uncontroversial). You're entitled to disagree, but that doesn't change our motives. Are you suggesting that every application of [[WP:IAR]] (which this is, even if you feel that such a measure is inappropriate in this context) is a [[WP:POINT]] violation? &mdash;[[User:David Levy|David Levy]] 21:09, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*************No, I'm suggesting that disrupting the encyclopaedia (for any reason) then pretending it's justified by [[WP:IAR]] is a [[WP:POINT]] violation. I don't think we're really getting anywhere with this discussion, though, since each of us thinks our viewpoints are self-evidently correct and neither of us seems likely to persuade the other :). I should note for the avoidance of doubt that, regardless of the outcome of this TFD, I intend to speedily delete the images tagged with {{tl|mozilla}} when this debate has concluded. --[[User:Ngb|Nick Boalch]]<sup> [[User_talk:Ngb|?!?]]</sup> 13:11, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
**************We've expressed an opinion contrary to yours, so the only logical explanation is that we're "pretending" to believe what we say, for the purpose of making some sort of point?! Aside from tossing the [[Wikipedia:Assume good faith|assumption of good faith]] out the window, you seem to be implying that no rational person could genuinely disagree with you on this issue. I find that very troubling. Also, how have we disrupted the encyclopedia? As for the images themselves, go ahead and delete them. I've long since given up hope of actually being permitted to use them. In fact, you might as well delete this template too, given the fact that it's been nullified. &mdash;[[User:David Levy|David Levy]] 17:08, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
***********There is no way this is an application of IAR. IAR necessitates that the good of the encyclopaedia be affected. This template doesn't fall under that criterion. [[User:Sam Korn|<nowiki>[[Sam Korn]]</nowiki>]] 20:41, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
************I disagree. Userboxes aren't part of the encyclopedia proper, but bureaucratically taking them away from people adversely affects the editors' morale, thereby indirectly affecting the encyclopedia's quality. For the record, my user page merely contains one [[Wikipedia:Babel|Babel]] box and an administrator box. I've never added a template containing a {{tl|Mozilla}}-tagged image (or any other userbox). &mdash;[[User:David Levy|David Levy]] 21:09, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*************With this attitude no wonder there's such opposition to IAR in the community at present. It is abused so often. [[User:Sam Korn|<nowiki>[[Sam Korn]]</nowiki>]] 21:12, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
**************My "attitude" is that a rule should be followed when it serves a logical purpose, but should ''not'' be followed purely for the sake of following it. I advocate ignoring rules only when the encyclopedia somehow benefits (either directly or indirectly) '''AND''' the aforementioned lack of logic exists. Please cite a logical reason (aside from "because the rules say so") why users should be prohibited from placing Mozilla images on their user pages. What harm does this cause? &mdash;[[User:David Levy|David Levy]] 21:28, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
***************Consistency. I am a fan of IAR, but not of it being abused, and certainly not of it being abused (or indeed used) in copyright matters. Copyright is already confusing enough to contributors without inconistencies creeping in. [[User:Sam Korn|<nowiki>[[Sam Korn]]</nowiki>]] 21:32, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
****************By its very nature, [[WP:IAR]] necessitates inconsistency. (The only way to achieve consistency is to unconditionally enforce every rule.) As no copyright violation is occurring, I view this as a harmless (and yes, beneficial) exception. You're entitled to object to this particular application of [[WP:IAR]] (just as anyone may object to any application), but that doesn't mean that it's being "abused." &mdash;[[User:David Levy|David Levy]] 21:46, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*****************The fact that there is inconsistency doesn't justify more. No copyright violation, no. But Wikipedia does have copyright policies, and those are some of the most vital. If we pick and choose when we apply them, we are inviting trouble and may soon find ourselves the targets of a lawsuit. Inconsistency about article content is vaguely acceptable, and about internal policies is also acceptable. However, this is a key, global policy, on a par with NPOV. Selective application of this policy could be disastrous. IAR is abused. It is meant to avoid rules-lawyering and slavish application of policy. It is not intended to allow us to pick and choose when we use policy. That is what you are doing. [[User:Sam Korn|<nowiki>[[Sam Korn]]</nowiki>]] 21:58, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
******************[[WP:IAR]] is based upon the axiom that we should abide by the spirit of a rule, not by the letter. It addresses the fact that we sometimes encounter situations in which enforcing a rule doesn't make sense, typically because its author(s) didn't envision such a scenario. I believe that this is true of the Mozilla images; a rule is being applied in a manner that adversely affects Wikipedia, purely for the sake of following the rule. To what type of lawsuit are you referring? &mdash;[[User:David Levy|David Levy]] 22:16, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', because this template is analogous to a [[Medical cannabis|cannabis prescription]] in the United States. Regardless of this debate's result, a higher authority will [[Gonzales v. Raich|step in and override]] the template's use. &mdash;[[User:David Levy|David Levy]] 17:08, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. Issues about Wikipedia infringing copyright are to be considered with utmost seriousness, but this template is not infringing copyright. If Mozilla has a problem with it (I doubt it at the moment, but they may change their mind) then they will no doubt politely ask for it to be removed. At the moment it's not doing any harm and it gives information about why we're using an image with an unorthodox copyright status. (Also, am I missing something or is the IAR debate above becoming somewhat irrelevant?) [[User:Dbiv|David]] | [[User talk:Dbiv|Talk]] 18:15, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
**It's not so much about infrinding copyright as it is about core wikipedia copyright policies based on our goal of creating free content. Images used with &#123;{[[Template:permission|permission]]}} are not allowed, and I have a hard time seeing this template as anytong other than a "with permission" template. --[[User:Sherool|Sherool]] <span style="font-size:75%">[[User talk:Sherool|(talk)]]</span> 21:47, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
*'''Very weak keep''' it might be relevantly useful, even if it would be much better to use the {{[[Template:Logo|logo]]}} one. --[[User:Angelo.romano|Angelo]] 04:55, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 
[[Category:Non-talk pages with subpages that are automatically signed]]
==Holding cell==
{{Wikipedia[[Category:Wikipedia deletion|Templates for deletion/Holding cell}}discussion]]
[[Category:Wikipedia template administration|Templates for discussion]]
[[Category:Wikipedia discussion]]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion"