http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Userbox_debates#User:...
This template which I speedied under CSD T1 and pure common sense is now on DRV because some process wonks are pointing out T1 doesn't apply outside template-space. (Which is, if you think about, blatant wikilawyering, since now anyone can just create the most offensive, polemical and divisive template ever in userspace and have all his buddies transclude it on their userpages.) I mentioned I had speedied the userbox on the Admins' noticeboard, and two other admins expressed agreement: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#User:Cj...
Maybe Jimbo should clarify how literally he wants T1 interpreted and whether userboxen in userspace are subject to this sort of thing.
John
I edited CSD T1 a week or so ago to cover transclusion in any space, precisely because some T1 speedies had shown up again in userspace (created in a good faith belief that otherwise objectionable templates would be acceptable if in userspace). It didn't last, Crotalus (who had created the userspace templates) reverted and the clause hasn't reappeared.
You were right though. BUT DON'T START REVERTING.
Fred
On Feb 20, 2006, at 7:12 AM, Tony Sidaway wrote:
I edited CSD T1 a week or so ago to cover transclusion in any space, precisely because some T1 speedies had shown up again in userspace (created in a good faith belief that otherwise objectionable templates would be acceptable if in userspace). It didn't last, Crotalus (who had created the userspace templates) reverted and the clause hasn't reappeared. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
John wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Userbox_debates#User:...
This template which I speedied under CSD T1 and pure common sense is now on DRV because some process wonks are pointing out...
Whoah. As near as I can tell, all the UDUIW userbox said was, "This user is a member of Users in Defense of Userboxes and Individuality on Wikipedia." So by suppressing it, we've made not one but two leaps:
(1) That userboxes can be so dangerous that they need to be suppressed, as argued by the oft-repeated incident in which a "this user is Catholic" userbox allowed 40+ users to rally around the deletion poll for [[Wikipedia:Catholic Alliance of wikipedia]].
(2) That suppressing dangerous userboxes is so contentious yet so vital that those in support of userboxes need to be suppressed also.
I hope I'm not being melodramatic, but this is really starting to sound like "The more you tighten your grip, the more star systems will slip through your fingers."
Steve Summit [[User:Ummit]] scs@eskimo.com
You forgot to mention an important detail: *UDUIW isn't even in template space, s*o its deletion is even more controversial.
On 2/20/06, Steve Summit scs@eskimo.com wrote:
John wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Userbox_debates#User:...
This template which I speedied under CSD T1 and pure common sense is now on DRV because some process wonks are pointing out...
Whoah. As near as I can tell, all the UDUIW userbox said was, "This user is a member of Users in Defense of Userboxes and Individuality on Wikipedia." So by suppressing it, we've made not one but two leaps:
(1) That userboxes can be so dangerous that they need to be suppressed, as argued by the oft-repeated incident in which a "this user is Catholic" userbox allowed 40+ users to rally around the deletion poll for [[Wikipedia:Catholic Alliance of wikipedia]].
(2) That suppressing dangerous userboxes is so contentious yet so vital that those in support of userboxes need to be suppressed also.
I hope I'm not being melodramatic, but this is really starting to sound like "The more you tighten your grip, the more star systems will slip through your fingers."
Steve Summit [[User:Ummit]] scs@eskimo.com
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On 2/20/06, John Lee johnleemk@gawab.com wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Userbox_debates#User:...
This template which I speedied under CSD T1 and pure common sense is now on DRV because some process wonks are pointing out T1 doesn't apply outside template-space. (Which is, if you think about, blatant wikilawyering, since now anyone can just create the most offensive, polemical and divisive template ever in userspace and have all his buddies transclude it on their userpages.) I mentioned I had speedied the userbox on the Admins' noticeboard, and two other admins expressed agreement: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#User:Cj...
Wikipedia:Deletion_review could undelete it wherever it is.
Maybe Jimbo should clarify how literally he wants T1 interpreted and whether userboxen in userspace are subject to this sort of thing.
John
We could but I doubt he could come up with an answer that is short enough to fit on CSD and impossible to rule lawyer around.
-- geni
A template is something that gets transcluded somewhere else, regardless of what namespace it's in.
While some templates are suitable to Wikipedia and User namespaces, templates that are speediable in the template namespace should be speediable anywhere else per common sense.
Mgm
On 2/20/06, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
On 2/20/06, John Lee johnleemk@gawab.com wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Userbox_debates#User:...
This template which I speedied under CSD T1 and pure common sense is now on DRV because some process wonks are pointing out T1 doesn't apply outside template-space. (Which is, if you think about, blatant wikilawyering, since now anyone can just create the most offensive, polemical and divisive template ever in userspace and have all his buddies transclude it on their userpages.) I mentioned I had speedied the userbox on the Admins' noticeboard, and two other admins expressed agreement:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#User:Cj...
Wikipedia:Deletion_review could undelete it wherever it is.
Maybe Jimbo should clarify how literally he wants T1 interpreted and whether userboxen in userspace are subject to this sort of thing.
John
We could but I doubt he could come up with an answer that is short enough to fit on CSD and impossible to rule lawyer around.
-- geni _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
geni wrote:
On 2/20/06, John Lee johnleemk@gawab.com wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Userbox_debates#User:...
This template which I speedied under CSD T1 and pure common sense is now on DRV because some process wonks are pointing out T1 doesn't apply outside template-space. (Which is, if you think about, blatant wikilawyering, since now anyone can just create the most offensive, polemical and divisive template ever in userspace and have all his buddies transclude it on their userpages.) I mentioned I had speedied the userbox on the Admins' noticeboard, and two other admins expressed agreement: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#User:Cj...
Wikipedia:Deletion_review could undelete it wherever it is.
Of course, but within reason. That's like saying DRV could undelete a copyvio -- Jimbo wouldn't like either action.
Maybe Jimbo should clarify how literally he wants T1 interpreted and whether userboxen in userspace are subject to this sort of thing.
John
We could but I doubt he could come up with an answer that is short enough to fit on CSD and impossible to rule lawyer around.
Judges clarify and interprete law -- they don't amend it. Jimbo just has to say "By 'template' I mean anything created for the purpose of being transcluded", or something to that effect. Typically this isn't necessary because of IAR and all that crap, but this userboxen debate will need Jimbo to step in eventually. His occasional pronouncements aren't working, and T1 isn't working well either.
I don't really care for political/ideological userboxen -- whether those go or stay, I don't care. They /can/ be used for factionalism, but they aren't necessarily so. But userboxen like the one currently on DRV that exist *only* to promote factionalism definitely ought to go. Given the choice between a T1 applicable only to stuff in the template namespace, and a T1 applicable to anything transcluded but only applicable to factionalist userboxen, I'd pick the latter.
John
On 2/21/06, John Lee johnleemk@gawab.com wrote:
Of course, but within reason. That's like saying DRV could undelete a copyvio -- Jimbo wouldn't like either action.
It could certainly undelete something listed as a copyvio. However If we look at how the regulars at DR commonly vote I think we agree such an outcome is unlikely.
Judges clarify and interprete law -- they don't amend it. Jimbo just has to say "By 'template' I mean anything created for the purpose of being transcluded", or something to that effect. Typically this isn't necessary because of IAR and all that crap, but this userboxen debate will need Jimbo to step in eventually. His occasional pronouncements aren't working, and T1 isn't working well either.
Of course it isn't working well since it is an abuse of CSD. The userboxen debate will burn itself quite happily as soon as people stop trying to use dramatic gestures to finish it. Currently we appear to have a situation where both sides are acting like third rate edit warriors
-- geni
I think the intent was that it would apply to userboxes. (not that I think it is wise)
Fred
On Feb 20, 2006, at 6:57 AM, John Lee wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/ Userbox_debates#User:Cjmarsicano.2FUDUIW
This template which I speedied under CSD T1 and pure common sense is now on DRV because some process wonks are pointing out T1 doesn't apply outside template-space. (Which is, if you think about, blatant wikilawyering, since now anyone can just create the most offensive, polemical and divisive template ever in userspace and have all his buddies transclude it on their userpages.) I mentioned I had speedied the userbox on the Admins' noticeboard, and two other admins expressed agreement: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators% 27_noticeboard#User:Cjmarsicano.2FUDUIW_deleted
Maybe Jimbo should clarify how literally he wants T1 interpreted and whether userboxen in userspace are subject to this sort of thing.
John _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l