{{User:Sam Hocevar/burninhell}}
I've certainly put it on *my* user page.
(Under the, ahh, userboxes.)
- d.
On 3/8/06, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
{{User:Sam Hocevar/burninhell}}
I've certainly put it on *my* user page.
(Under the, ahh, userboxes.)
- d.
Hmm fails CSD T1
And what about those people fighting over relgious userboxes. -- geni
On 3/8/06, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/8/06, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
{{User:Sam Hocevar/burninhell}}
Hmm fails CSD T1
As you wish, we'll rigidly apply policy: it isn't a template because it's in the user namespace.
-- Sam
On 3/8/06, Sam Korn smoddy@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/8/06, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/8/06, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
{{User:Sam Hocevar/burninhell}}
Hmm fails CSD T1
As you wish, we'll rigidly apply policy: it isn't a template because it's in the user namespace.
-- Sam
You accept that argument? Good.
-- geni
On 3/8/06, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
You accept that argument? Good.
Yes. Indeed, you have my full permission to take my words out of context and otherwise twist them to give them whatever meaning you so desire.
-- Sam
Hey, don't bite the.... Genis. There has been debate about whether a template is something in template space, or whether it's simply something that can be transcluded. There's little to take out of context here, unless you were trying to be ironic.
Ben
On 3/8/06, Sam Korn smoddy@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/8/06, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
You accept that argument? Good.
Yes. Indeed, you have my full permission to take my words out of context and otherwise twist them to give them whatever meaning you so desire.
-- Sam _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On 3/8/06, Sam Korn smoddy@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/8/06, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
You accept that argument? Good.
Yes. Indeed, you have my full permission to take my words out of context and otherwise twist them to give them whatever meaning you so desire.
-- Sam
You stated that policy did not support the extension of T1 outside the template namespace (or at least not within the user namespace). This is of course correct if not reflective of the practice of some of our more enthusiastic userbox removers. Do you wish withdraw or modify your statement?
Of course no one is really expecting you to rigidly apply policy as flawed as T1 because deleting [[Template:Nazism]] would probably be regarded as stupid by pretty much everyone.
On a personal level I think the new userbox sucks. But then at the last count I thought that about:
Userboxes in general (I can just about tolerate Babel boxes although I would rather people got the embassy system working instead) Messages on userpages saying "this page has been vandalised X times" where X is a single figure number Image galleries on userpages (subpages exist for a reason) [[Wikipedia:Esperanza/User Page Award]] Complex coding on User talk pages
However unless your image gallery is made up of fair use images I am not going to interfere with your choice to have a sucky userpage.
-- geni
G'day Sam,
On 3/8/06, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/8/06, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
{{User:Sam Hocevar/burninhell}}
Hmm fails CSD T1
As you wish, we'll rigidly apply policy: it isn't a template because it's in the user namespace.
Nonsense. We have three labels here: a) Templates b) Things in template space c) Things in user space
A template is a template is a template. If someone creates a template in userspace, they can't say it's not a template simply because it's not in the template namespace. Likewise, it's theoretically possible to create something in template space that isn't a template, though I've not seen it done.
-- Mark Gallagher "What? I can't hear you, I've got a banana on my head!" - Danger Mouse
On 3/9/06, Mark Gallagher m.g.gallagher@student.canberra.edu.au wrote: Nonsense. We have three labels here:
a) Templates b) Things in template space c) Things in user space
A template is a template is a template. If someone creates a template in userspace, they can't say it's not a template simply because it's not in the template namespace. Likewise, it's theoretically possible to create something in template space that isn't a template, though I've not seen it done.
Quite so. I shall be far more careful in future before applying my (far too) dry British humour.
-- Sam
G'day Sam,
Quite so. I shall be far more careful in future before applying my (far too) dry British humour.
Damn straight. From now on, I insist that any jokes on this list be made American-style: loud, crude, unfunny, and accompanied by a laugh track.
-- Mark Gallagher "What? I can't hear you, I've got a banana on my head!" - Danger Mouse
geni wrote:
On 3/8/06, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
{{User:Sam Hocevar/burninhell}}
I've certainly put it on *my* user page.
(Under the, ahh, userboxes.)
- d.
Hmm fails CSD T1
And what about those people fighting over relgious userboxes.
Technically it's not a userbox; it's not the same size and shape as all the others. Also, it doesn't have any categories.
Alphax (Wikipedia email) wrote:
geni wrote:
On 3/8/06, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
{{User:Sam Hocevar/burninhell}}
I've certainly put it on *my* user page.
(Under the, ahh, userboxes.)
- d.
Hmm fails CSD T1
And what about those people fighting over relgious userboxes.
Technically it's not a userbox; it's not the same size and shape as all the others. Also, it doesn't have any categories.
T1 applied to templates, not userboxes, IIRC (although Jimbo and sannse did craft it with intention to tackle boxen). I'm having a hard time telling how seriously the creator or others are taking this "template" (due to its large size I wonder if anyone is currently transcluding it). I know I didn't find it all that funny. It sounds too much like what's already been said before. True parody should twist things that have been said to produce something entirely different and absurd.
John
Funny, it appears the userbox war ended while no one was paying attention. As of yesterday, T1 became G10, which was then rolled into G3 as "no attack pages", defined as a page which disparages its subject. "Divisive" and "inflammatory" and "polemical" appear to have gone the way of "VfD" and "Jimbo on Wheels!" Given the "attack pages" def, {{burninhell}} appears to be one of the only userboxes left that *does* qualify for deletion.
Ben
On 3/9/06, John Lee johnleemk@gawab.com wrote:
Alphax (Wikipedia email) wrote:
geni wrote:
On 3/8/06, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
{{User:Sam Hocevar/burninhell}}
I've certainly put it on *my* user page.
(Under the, ahh, userboxes.)
- d.
Hmm fails CSD T1
And what about those people fighting over relgious userboxes.
Technically it's not a userbox; it's not the same size and shape as all the others. Also, it doesn't have any categories.
T1 applied to templates, not userboxes, IIRC (although Jimbo and sannse did craft it with intention to tackle boxen). I'm having a hard time telling how seriously the creator or others are taking this "template" (due to its large size I wonder if anyone is currently transcluding it). I know I didn't find it all that funny. It sounds too much like what's already been said before. True parody should twist things that have been said to produce something entirely different and absurd.
John _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On 3/9/06, Ben Lowe ben.lowe@gmail.com wrote:
Funny, it appears the userbox war ended while no one was paying attention. As of yesterday, T1 became G10, which was then rolled into G3 as "no attack pages", defined as a page which disparages its subject. "Divisive" and "inflammatory" and "polemical" appear to have gone the way of "VfD" and "Jimbo on Wheels!" Given the "attack pages" def, {{burninhell}} appears to be one of the only userboxes left that *does* qualify for deletion.
Ben
Sadly no. People are still going to object to the "this user is a Roman catholic" userboxes
-- geni
On Mar 8, 2006, at 11:18 AM, David Gerard wrote:
{{User:Sam Hocevar/burninhell}}
Wow. The text of the page, next to a picture of a atom bomb cloud, is the text: "This user believes<br>userboxes should<br>burn in [[Blogosphere|hell]]." What a perfect example of what John Lee said just now ( http://mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2006-March/041476.html ) about how the userbox issue is making people on both sides act deeply uncivil. This is not helpful, and this is not what our community should be about. While I greatly appreciate Sam Hocevar's contributions (such as godmode-lite), I'm sorry he made this page.
Jesse Weinstein
On Wed, 8 Mar 2006 22:20:16 -0800, you wrote:
What a perfect example of what John Lee said just now ( http://mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2006-March/041476.html ) about how the userbox issue is making people on both sides act deeply uncivil.
You think? I think parody is one of the few truly sane and appropriate reactions displayed thus far. Guy (JzG)