Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 September 5: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→[[Template:OTA]]: +typo |
MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) m Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12) |
||
| (12 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
<noinclude><div class="boilerplate
{| width = "100%"
|-
!
!
|}
</div></noinclude>
===September 5===
==== [[Template:Badkarma]] ====
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background-color: #e3f9df; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page. ''
The result of the debate was '''0 consensous''' (keep) // [[User:Pilotguy|<span style="color:#000000;">'''Pilotguy'''</span>]] ([[User_talk:Pilotguy|<span style="color:#0000FF;">Have your say</span>]]) 20:20, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
:{{lt|Badkarma}}
'''Unused''' and simple boilerplate text. -[[User:Koavf|Justin (koavf)]]·[[User talk:Koavf|T]]·[[Special:Contributions/Koavf|C]]·[[Special:Emailuser/Koavf|M]] 23:14, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' - useful if employed; no one knows about it. [[User:Mike 7|Michael]] 23:18, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' - this template is required to be subst: anyways, so how do you know it's unused... plus it's a friendly NPOV warning [[User:DemosDemon|<
*'''Delete'''. Lazy boilerplate text for something that should be written specifically for the edits in question. [[User:BlankVerse|<sup
:''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 template's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.''</div>
==== [[Template:OTA]] ====
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background-color: #e3f9df; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page. ''
The result of the debate was '''no consensous''' for this one, a renomination might preoduce a better consensous. // [[User:Pilotguy|<span style="color:#000000;">'''Pilotguy'''</span>]] ([[User_talk:Pilotguy|<span style="color:#0000FF;">Have your say</span>]]) 03:56, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
:{{lt|OTA}}
'''Categorize and delete'''; this is a template for a minor organization representing at best a tertiary characteristic of its members that does nothing but point back to a category. Second submission (see [[Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2006_March_5#Template:OTA|TFD 20060305]]). [[User:Choster|choster]] 21:18, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
Line 24 ⟶ 33:
::And Choster your arguments : navigational templates for relatively minor industry associations are not wanted. As you can see about every major carrental in the US is part of this alliance.[[User:Mion|Mion]] 06:40, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
**Actually, I did not touch it until after the close of the previous TfD nomination, and in fact [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Open_Travel_Alliance&diff=43555355&oldid=42691307 what I did first] was provide the complete listing of members on the main [[Open Travel Alliance]] page and categorize the article properly. If you consider the complete list of members, you will see at once that listing all the members in the template is at best impractical, and to list them selectively problematic because it looks like commercial promotion. Second, my intent is not to belittle the OTA or the work it does; however, the point is not whether its members are major, but whether membership in the group is not only significant, but more significant than the dozens of other industry consortia and associations its members also belong to, ranging from the W3C to the IATA to the Dow Jones Industrial Average. Think how unwieldy an article like IBM or Sony or American Airlines will become if we set a precent even for trimmed templates for everything from the Blu-ray Disc Association to the IH&RA.-[[User:Choster|choster]] 14:33, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
:::Hi Choster, The vote was 2 keep, 2 delete, and 1 for categorize if I recal, which should have been 3 for categorizing the template. however the template is categorized, but the members are not in the kat [[:Category:Open Travel Alliance|Open Travel Alliance]].Hum sorry, i have to take that back, there was one '''categorize and delete''' which made it categorize or delete. So i better say thanks for waiting. [[User:Mion|Mion]] 14:39, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
Never mind, i'm sure you where trying to find a better solution on the underlying problem:
::::You mentioned it already, is it important to mention membership of big alliances. I think so, i made the template to show that there are more alliances in the Travel sector to channel price agreements. Thats also the reason that the EU and the US don't care to lift [[IATA]]'s permission for anti competetive price agreements, (which normally is forbidden) these price agreements will go on in the other alliances like [[SITA]] and [[OTA]].
Line 31 ⟶ 40:
*'''Delete''' - This template feels like a combination of [[Template:Air Transport Association]] and [[Template:Renters]]. Furthermore, the main article is essentially a list of companies organized by a very minor business organization. - [[User:DiegoTehMexican|DiegoTehMexican]] 20:44, 11 September 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 template's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.''</div>
==== [[Template:Notability]] ====
<div class="boilerplate
:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page. ''
Line 39 ⟶ 49:
:{{lt|Notability}}
"The template suggests that notability is a guidelne for inclusion which should be treated as law. These pages are merely definitions of what is notable, not actual policy or guideline. --
:They are indeed guidelines, except the ones marked "proposed." --[[User:Crazycomputers|Chris]] [[User talk:Crazycomputers|(talk)]] 01:42, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
::See [[WP:N]]. "'''Notability is not policy'''". These guidelines are merely guidelines defining notability, not guidelines saying "if anything fails this page's subjective tests it must be deleted." --
:::I agree, the pages do not cater for everything, they merely point out instances where things "are" going to be classified as notable and hence worthy of an "encyclopedic" article. Notice I can say all of that and not refer to a policy or founding principle! (not to put an overly cynical spin on things) [[User:Ansell/Esperanza|<span style="color:#0000FF;">Ans<span style="color:#009000;">e</span>ll</span>]] 02:02, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
::::Nice job not citing policy! I'm concerend with new editors thinking that all pages must follow these suggestions to the letter. Beacuse, after all, "An article's failure to meet these suggested requirements is frequently used as an argument to delete said article on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, but bear in mind that the only requirement for material to be included in Wikipedia is that it is verifiable." --
:::Guidelines are not policy either. You said ''these pages are merely definitions of what is notable, not actual policy or guideline.'' Then you said ''these guidelines are merely guidelines defining notability.'' Which one is it? --[[User:Crazycomputers|Chris]] [[User talk:Crazycomputers|(talk)]] 12:47, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
*This nom is at the very least ill-informed. If you think the template misstates the true status of these guidelines, change the template. No case for deletion has been made here. I suggest a sysop '''speedy close''' this debate. - <b>[[User:Crzrussian|CrazyRussian]]</b><small> [[User_talk:Crzrussian|talk]]/[[Special:Emailuser/Crzrussian|email]]</small> 02:30, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong keep.''' This is a dangerous idea. We must be able to use notability as a guiding principle, no matter how subjective. Without it, every single website, company, and person in existence can assert their existence by means of sources without any need to be a "good reason" to be in an encyclopedia. We have enough trouble with tons of useless bits of information being added under the guise of the "inclusionist" philosophy -- an appeal that threatens to further weaken the integrity and respectability of Wikipedia in the greater academic world. The template makes the specific point that an article is "more likely" to be deleted, rather than stating that this is a policy or that it definitely will. AfD review asissts in deleted articles getting a second chance. - [[User:Cobaltbluetony|CobaltBlueTony]] 02:35, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
:*Why rely on a review to tackle things from the direction of having to get things back again. And I have not read anywhere about people complaining that wikipedia has information on too many "random things". The only place I hear that is from Wikipedia editors. Its academic credibility might increase if more people spent time improving articles instead of "tagging them". [[User:Ansell/Esperanza|<span style="color:#0000FF;">Ans<span style="color:#009000;">e</span>ll</span>]] 03:25, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
**Yeah, it's dangerous to have too many encyclopedia articles. Forget that articles need to be cited in third party websites and need to be verifiable... those don't restrict articles at all, according to you. It's dangerous, you see, to include articles on things you haven't heard of. --
***A page about some cool guy and his website is not an article for an encyclopedia; adding more of those is not adding more encyclopedia articles. Also, while [[WP:N]] is not official policy, it is a reasonable extrapolation of [[WP:NOT]] and [[WP:5P]], which are central. —[[User:Centrx|Centrx]]→[[User talk:Centrx|''talk'']]
*'''Strong keep''' per Crz and CBT. This template is very helpful in a. tagging articles that don't necessarily meet deletion requirements, but are more likely of consideration for deletion than [[Mao Zedong]] or [[General Electric]], and b. alerting creators, especially new ones, that they should try to explain why the subject of "their" article is notable enough for remaining in this encyclopedia. I really don't understand the nomination. [[User:Picaroon9288|Picaroon9288]]•[[User talk:Picaroon9288|talk]] 02:41, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
**If the page doesn't meet deletion requirements what grounds are there for any action at all, except for [[WP:BOLD|improving]] the page. [[User:Ansell/Esperanza|<span style="color:#0000FF;">Ans<span style="color:#009000;">e</span>ll</span>]] 03:21, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
***I don't see why I should be required to try (perhaps in vain) to find information about some person I've never heard about and don't care about when the person who added it would have such knowledge or access to such information and when I might suspect the person doesn't even warrant an article anyway. Your argument could just as well apply to {{tl|wikify}} and {{tl|cleanup}}. —[[User:Centrx|Centrx]]→[[User talk:Centrx|''talk'']]
*'''Keep'''— Extremely usefull to foster the discussion of marginal articles. [[User:Williamborg|Williamborg (Bill)]] 03:46, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' Useful, functional template, as described above. It does not purport to list policy and is a useful means to flag articles that need revision to show their encyclopedic value but are by no means suitable for deletion. [[User:Agent 86|Agent 86]] 04:43, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''': Useful and often used templates. The arguments for deletion are not reasonable. —[[User:Centrx|Centrx]]→[[User talk:Centrx|''talk'']]
*'''Delete - template creep''' I'm fed up with this template. If something isn't notable enough for you, then nominate it for deletion. THis template is so often used when the notability of the article is explained or assered, but the tagger doen't view it as notable enough. That's a debate for afd, not for some lazy git stamping a hideously ugly boilerplate over the article and wandering off. --[[User talk:Doc glasgow|Doc]] 08:39, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. Notability ''is'' a guideline (though not a rule) for inclusion. Totally non-notable articles don't belong in the encyclopedia, and this template serves a real purpose by allowing for the tagging of borderline articles before nominating them for deletion. [[User:Zetawoof|Zetawoof]]<sup>([[User_talk:Zetawoof|ζ]])</sup> 08:51, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
:*Please link to the page stating that notability is a guideline. [[WP:N]] is an essay, and all the pages this templates link to aren't guidelines, but guidelines as to what is notable. --
*'''Keep''' Nice for marginal articles - AFD can be a hostile place and should be considered a last resort sometimes. [[User:RN|RN]] 09:11, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' as above. Useful for alerting the editor(s) of the article that it might needs rectifying, before waisting more time on AFD. [[User:The JPS|<
*'''Keep''', but it needs some work as it is far too big for a (necessarily self-referential) maintenance template. <b>[[User Talk:JzG|Guy]]</b> 11:43, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' Useful tool. Yes it might be better to have a less overbearing template but this is not the place for such a debate. Also, while notablity is not a policy, the template does refer to widely used guidelines. Also, whether people agree or not, there is a large working-consensus that non-notable subjects are not worthy of articles. Not an indiscriminate collection of information is indeed a policy and the guidelines tend to rely on that. [[User:Pascal.Tesson|Pascal.Tesson]] 12:01, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''— useful as a training tool for article creators / editors for improving the article. Doesn't stop nomination for deletion of the article but might improve it in time - or make clear that deletion is the right thing to do. --[[User:AlisonW|AlisonW]] 15:02, 5 September 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 template's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.''</div>
==== [[Template:User FORTH-1]] ====
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background-color: #e3f9df; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page. ''
The result of the debate was '''delete''' // [[User:Pilotguy|<span style="color:#000000;">'''Pilotguy'''</span>]] ([[User_talk:Pilotguy|<span style="color:#0000FF;">Have your say</span>]]) 20:20, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
:{{lt|User FORTH-1}}
'''Delete''' No Use, plus too many red links and red cats [[User:DemosDemon|<
*'''Delete''' per above. [[User:Mike 7|Michael]] 23:18, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per above - the links link to the wrong page [[Forth (programming language)|Forth programming language]] does exist ? The categories have been deleted - Note : there are also [[Template:User FORTH-0]], [[Template:User FORTH-2]] [[Template:User FORTH-3]] and [[Template:User FORTH-4]] with exacly the same faults for the same reasons (3) has one use (1) has one use the rest have none (Can we do a mass delete on the entire set ?) <sup>[[User:JasterMereel|Jaster]]</sup> 14:41, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' - There's also [[template:User FORTH-N]], which is in use by the creator. '''
:''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 template's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.''</div>
==== [[Template:MyBabble]] ====
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background-color: #e3f9df; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page. ''
The result of the debate was '''delete''' // [[User:Pilotguy|<span style="color:#000000;">'''Pilotguy'''</span>]] ([[User_talk:Pilotguy|<span style="color:#0000FF;">Have your say</span>]]) 20:20, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
:{{lt|MyBabble}}
Single-user Babel template. '''Subst and delete'''. '''
*'''Delete''' per nom. [[User:Mike 7|Michael]] 23:19, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
*'''Move to User's Space and Delete''' ... that was too much to bold... but it said it all [[User:DemosDemon|<
:''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 template's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.''</div>
| |||