On Fri, 11 Feb 2005 11:19:08 -0800 (PST), Daniel Mayer maveric149@yahoo.com wrote:
No - this is just as stupid as the current templates. There *is* no talk page the great majority of our mirrors.
More self-referential crap that I will delete on sight.
-- mav
Ah yes, our delightful mirrors. Hadn't thought of that. Although it's a disaster anyways with their snapshots grabbing all kinds of junk from us that can't be fixed until their next general update.
Actually, I'm not convinced that's a valid objection to geni's suggestion. There is a problem anyway if a mirror grabs a below-average version of an article.
If only one template is used, noting a previously observed problem (Major flaw, serious issue, below average-ness) that is surely enough for a reader to be helped in their judgement of the article. If they are on a mirror and can't find out what the problem is (cause of no talk page) then tough cookie, they should have gone to Wikipedia or a better mirror.
The point is that the current templates are often instructions to editors.
Zoney