-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
When there are significant problems with a template, but it is still decided that it should be kept (eg. "poorly written", "shouldn't be a box"), a note is made on the talk page about this. In theory, the problem should be rectified if it to be kept.
For example, {{deletedpage}} simply said "This page has been deleted and should not be re-created" before it was put on TFD. Consensus was to keep it, but nearly everybody felt that it was worded badly, and should be improved. It was therefore improved after the TFD process had concluded, and was only put on pages after it had been improved. The same can happen for the asymmetry that you have discussed.
In short, if a note is made on the talk page that most voters felt that it needed x, y and z improvements, that should be sufficient for people to see it and say "hey, let's do this before we actually put it on pages." That should also be a sufficient argument for removing it from pages (although just improving the template is almost always easier than removing it, improving it, and then putting it back).
- -Faraaz Damji - -- Blog: http://frazzydee.ca
Erik Moeller wrote:
Faraaz-
it's the asymmetry that needs to be addressed. A template that is supported by 3 people but opposed by 7 may not pass TFD because consensus is required for deletion. Hence, we end up with lots of templates that are supported only by a minority of users. Both sides of the debate often see an unsuccessful TFD as a victory for the template-supporters and accept its use.
We need to make clear that a template is a fundamental intrusion into the article namespace and, like a policy, needs broad community support before being put into active use. If 3 people strongly oppose a template and 7 support it, then their objections need to be resolved just as much as in the opposite situation, *before* the template is tagged onto articles. Marking templates as "proposed" is an important step towards clarifying the distinction between merely keeping a template and allowing its use.
Erik _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l