Tom Cadden wrote:
I was always in favour of deletion of pages, and disagreed with those who wanted to keep every irrelevant, impossible-to-make-encyclopædic article. But rampant deletionism has hit ridiculous levels on WP now. I daren't even go near the article deletion page because of what goes on there. Now the template deletion page has become ridiculous.
As someone said in #wikipedia the other day: "the deletionists go around deleting stuff; the inclusionists just whinge on wikien-l about how bad it is." So: stop complaining, and start telling people *why* they need to be kept.
<snip>
We could no with a page of ''useful templates'' where existing templates could be picked out for use in new articles.
See [[WP:TM]]. It's a bit of a mess, but it's the best place to start.
It seems to be the same 'greek chorus' of deleters who do the blanket nominating and do blanket voting to delete everything in sight. They seem all too often to drown out protests from others that their deletionitis is out of control.
Once it was the case that only crap was deleted. Now it seems that crap survives while the delete gang propose good articles, good templates and good infoboxes for deletion.
Wikipedia needs to do something to reign in the delete brigade. Deletion used to be used to keep up standards. Now it is bringing down standards, doing damage to content and design and seriously pissing off users who are doing serious work and have to spend their days fighting off attempts to delete things. The final twist is that many of the most fanatical deleters seem to be down damn all writing themselves, simply proposing large numbers of things for deletion all the time, irrespective of quality, usefulness or benefit to Wikipedia.
Notifying the creator/last editor of such templates would be a Polite Thing To Do. But no, it's far easier to subst: and {{d}} something, because that way you can get away with it.
Deletion is Evil.