Template talk:tobediscussed

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Rationale

I think the current wording of {{tobedeleted}} gives the wrong impression, in particular because a lot of the time we really should be having a discussion about whether to merge rather than delete outright. I hereby propose this new wording. In addition to {{tobedeleted}}, this template would replace {{talktobedeleted}}, {{merge}}, and {{redirect}}, and would serve as a backup to {{delete}}. — It's dot com 22:49, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

This definately looks like a better way to go. The only thing that's not working for me is the lack of a cute image. -- Super Martyo boing! 22:54, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Sounds like a better idea to me. Deleting should be the last resort. Spyrox6

For pete's sake, It's Dot Com, after you put this much work into it, this better bethe new wording. Geez. friggin' workaholic. -- Super Martyo boing! 01:21, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Great jorb! Most improved. Ding! Loafing 22:55, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Re: "Project" and "Project talk": is that an actual namespace? And if so, why does search not allow it as a searchable namespace? If not, how does this work then? - Qermaq - (^T/C)  03:45, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Project and Project talk are generic names for HRWiki and HRWiki talk. For example: Project:Da Basement. — It's dot com 03:47, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

As I've been here a while and didn't know that, and I assume I'm not unique, should the instructions be reworded? - Qermaq - (^T/C)  03:53, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Sure, why not. — It's dot com 04:15, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm torn on this one. I like the clarity that having different templates tailored to different actions provides. That is, if you see Zubs and Coach B at the top of an article, you immediately know that the page has been proposed to be merged with another article (and which one). Same thing with the other templates. Just by glancing at the image, you get a quick summary of what's being proposed to do to the article.

On the other hand, I do like the emphasis this new template takes off deletion. That is, I can see that it may be discouraging to users who create a page to have the DELETED! picture quickly put at the top of their page! This softens the blow a little, and also it is easier to implement (only one template to remember).

So, I'm not completely excited by the idea, although perhaps (as silly as this sounds) I might be more so if there were a catchy image in the template. For now, I'm remaining neutral. Trey56 04:32, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

See also

See also the question here about whether this new wording would also replace {{move}}. — It's dot com 23:13, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Having one template to subsume all the ones mentioned above and also {{move}} is an excellent idea. 1) All of these actions are ambigously intertwined until a decision is made, 2) in all cases editors will need to check Talk for the specifics anyway, and 3) it is much easier for editors to remember one template to use instead of six. —BryanCTC 02:33, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

I very much like the idea. The new template has much less bias towards deletion, and it will hopefully be easier to use. I'm all for reducing the numbers of templates to chose from. Loafing 22:59, 11 April 2007 (UTC)