All of those look like a waste of time, but not copyvios or anything, so if
everyone would kindly resist the urge to wheel war over them I would
appreciate it. We have time to talk this out.
Ryan
On 1/11/06, Tony Sidaway <f.crdfa(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Following general discussion last week, I've pressed on in trying to
develop a strategy for dealing with the worst excesses of userboxes.
Focusing solely on attack templates--whose sole purpose is to
disparage their subject--I performed some test speedies yesterday.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Tony_Sidaway/Attack_speedies%2C_2006-01-10
There is considerable support for most of these deletions, but
significant resistance, and I'm not presently clear how firm that
resistance is. Some of the templates have been restored, usually in a
somewhat toned down form.
The discussions are taking place mainly on:
Wikipedia:Deletion review:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:DRV#More_attack_templates
Wikipedia talk: Criteria for speedy deletion
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion#At…
Policy discussion is perhaps a little premature, but there does seem
to be substantial consensus that some templates at least should be
speedily deleted as attacks, perhaps by extension of an existing
criterion for speedy deletion that is currently applied largely to
articles.
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l