-----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(a)Wikipedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (MingW32)
iD8DBQFCeWvsT65h0kZaRnYRApmEAKCFqhVRDTLbNJI0NgoJPlW0nVxqzACgh7RG
FdUCMuLzRXPzlM67VuYXZFA=
=4PeB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----