Template talk:bottom10
From Homestar Runner Wiki
(Difference between revisions)
(undid revision 638043;) |
Flicky1991 (Talk | contribs) |
||
Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
:::::::::You'd ''still'' have to ''find'' the template. {{User:MichaelXX2/sig}} 22:02, 23 March 2009 (UTC) | :::::::::You'd ''still'' have to ''find'' the template. {{User:MichaelXX2/sig}} 22:02, 23 March 2009 (UTC) | ||
::::::::::But the template makes it easier to type, and you have to find it on the main page too.--{{User:T3H_CH3K7_888/sig}} 22:03, 23 March 2009 (UTC) | ::::::::::But the template makes it easier to type, and you have to find it on the main page too.--{{User:T3H_CH3K7_888/sig}} 22:03, 23 March 2009 (UTC) | ||
+ | |||
+ | Also, the main page talk page has been archived since then, and I have no idea which archive it's in. I say keep it. [[User:Flicky1991|Flicky1991]] 18:59, 24 March 2009 (UTC) |
Revision as of 18:59, 24 March 2009
Needed?
Is a template like this really necessary? If someone wants the code, they can just get it off the Main Page Talk Page. — MichaelXX2 20:59, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
- Supposing they don't know it's on the Main Page talk... --DorianGray 21:00, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
- Then they'd have to know this template is here. I don't think this code is (or should be) widespread enough to warrant a template. — It's dot com 21:01, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
- If they really want a code like this so bad, they can get the code from somewhere or ask a sysop. Too many templates spoil the wiki. Maybe if I made a page like this as a mock-up on my namespace so users could use that instead. Like {{User:MichaelXX2/bottom10}} or something. — MichaelXX2 21:06, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
- I say keep it. (Granted I made it, but still.) People would use this! Don't you think? It's easier than going to the main page and getting the code.--Thy Not Dennis (t/c) 21:07, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
- But this template isn't contributing to the wiki. It's just here to use on namespaces, which you could do with my option above. — MichaelXX2 21:08, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
- Do userboxes contribute to the wiki?--Thy Not Dennis (t/c) 21:12, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
- Not really, but they aren't templates like this. Two wrongs don't make a right. — MichaelXX2 21:13, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
- True, but three rights make a left. :P Seriously though, I think it should stay. A bottom 10 is a common thing for userpages, this template makes it easier to put like the email.--Thy Not Dennis (t/c) 21:51, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
- You'd still have to find the template. — MichaelXX2 22:02, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
- But the template makes it easier to type, and you have to find it on the main page too.--Thy Not Dennis (t/c) 22:03, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
- You'd still have to find the template. — MichaelXX2 22:02, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
- True, but three rights make a left. :P Seriously though, I think it should stay. A bottom 10 is a common thing for userpages, this template makes it easier to put like the email.--Thy Not Dennis (t/c) 21:51, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
- Not really, but they aren't templates like this. Two wrongs don't make a right. — MichaelXX2 21:13, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
- Do userboxes contribute to the wiki?--Thy Not Dennis (t/c) 21:12, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
- But this template isn't contributing to the wiki. It's just here to use on namespaces, which you could do with my option above. — MichaelXX2 21:08, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
- I say keep it. (Granted I made it, but still.) People would use this! Don't you think? It's easier than going to the main page and getting the code.--Thy Not Dennis (t/c) 21:07, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
- If they really want a code like this so bad, they can get the code from somewhere or ask a sysop. Too many templates spoil the wiki. Maybe if I made a page like this as a mock-up on my namespace so users could use that instead. Like {{User:MichaelXX2/bottom10}} or something. — MichaelXX2 21:06, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
- Then they'd have to know this template is here. I don't think this code is (or should be) widespread enough to warrant a template. — It's dot com 21:01, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Also, the main page talk page has been archived since then, and I have no idea which archive it's in. I say keep it. Flicky1991 18:59, 24 March 2009 (UTC)