-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Erik Moeller wrote:
The problem with templates is that it is very easy to
create them, and
very hard to get rid of them. Virtually all problem templates I've seen
have survived being listed on "Templates for deletion" because, usually,
there are multiple passionate fans -- the people who have been using the
template and who don't want to modify their existing workflows.
I think that if TFD votes keep for too many templates, it won't make a
difference if there's {{propsed template}}, since people will just vote
keep there instead. In fact, it may have more people voting keep since
it won't be visible to such a large group of people.
Do you see my point? I'm not sure if I'm being clear or not...everyone
who votes keep on TFD would've voted "use" on the discussion page
anyways; everyone who votes "delete" on TFD would also vote "don't
use"
on the discussion page. Unless I'm missing something, I think that this
would just make things more complex, and is unecessary considering the
fact that we already have TFD.
This has led to an abundance of pastel colored boxes,
as every editor
seems to want a template to call their own.
Very true, I've found myself doing it with one of my templates also.
It's my baby, and I can't bear to see it go.
I believe we have to treat new templates in the same
way we treat new
policy proposals. We can keep them around as proposals, but before we
actually *use* them, there has to be a consensus to do so.
Why not just nominate them for deletion if you feel they deserve to be
gone? Surely there will be more "passionate fans" on the discussion page
of that particular template than on TFD.
That effectively locks the template from being used
until the discussion
page shows that people agree on what to do with it.
Again, I feel that TFD would do better here. The lag is only 5
days...the only advantage I see of that system is that it gives editors
a little less time to put it on pages, which means that it's easier to
depopulate. However, I don't agree with the dogma that things should be
"guilty until proven innocent"- so in this case, "detrimental until
proven beneficial." There are a lot of templates on TFD that people
really do think are good. If we "freeze" templates, that would mean
that any template deletionist would get their way for five days (or
whatever the lag time is), regardless of how beneficial it is seen to be.
When there is obvious disapproval of a template, it:
a) isn't added to pages in the first place, unless by the creator of
said template
b) is usually removed by people watching that article, like the
"unresolved objections" banner on [[clitoris]] a while back.
c) is sometimes depopulated early if it's obviously something that needs
to go
Just my 2 cents on the matter.
- --
Blog:
http://frazzydee.ca
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (MingW32)
iD8DBQFCeVKDT65h0kZaRnYRAmNjAJ9WIfD8MEllIVB3mT5bRx7R452SgwCfWgAH
LlCQSVaZwhyKleXJDEbF4zo=
=BHiG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----