Wikipedia talk:Categories for discussion/User/Archive 1

message: We need some new templetes ... the current cfd, cfr, cfm generate incorrect links.  Its important to make a nomination correctly link to the relevent discussion.  See :Category:WFD2008 for an example of a broken nomination, all of the cfd links are now incorrect. I've maually added a link at the top, but we certainly don't want to do this every time. -- ProveIt (talk) 14:55, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  User category tags 

message: It seems that we're shattering our focus here by considering userpage templates and userpage categories separately; why not follow the Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion model and utilize this new page for both categories and userboxen/templates? They're inextricably linked in my mind, and it would clean up both TfD/CfD from "nonencyclopedic" content. I'm at a loss as to what to gracefully call it, though; WP:UFD/Wikipedia:Userpage information for deletion? That's ugly. -- nae'blis 16:27, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Follow the SfD model? 

message: I nominated a lot of these, so I don't feel I can close them. Can somebody else close a bunch of these so we can move on?--Mike Selinker 06:43, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  looking for a closer 

message: So.... how would someone rename this? -- ProveIt (talk) 18:09, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:Category:Members of Esperanto organizations]] 

message: We're going to need an archival scheme eventually (since we don't use transclusion, CfD's /Log/ system won't work, to my mind), and one that the templates can take advantage of logically will be better sooner than later. I don't want to get too complex about this; I think MFD has a similar workload, and while they use transclusion, something similar to Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Archived debates might be sufficient. -- nae'blis 21:38, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That sounds like a good idea. I'll add it later today if nobody disagrees. TimBentley (talk) 16:00, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nevermind, you already created it. (Wikipedia:User categories for discussion/Archive for those interested) TimBentley (talk) 21:01, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  archival 

message: I currently have a proposed guideline for user categories. It's currently inactive because I didn't advertise it very well, but maybe the discussion can be revived. Please comment on it and revise it as you like. —Cswrye 02:49, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Guidelines for user categories 

message: Per User_talk:Dragons_flight#Wikipedia:User_categories_for_discussion, the trackerbot can't currently differentiate between UCFD and CFD. Do we need/want a different category structure for these discussions, or is that overkill? -- nae'blis 17:21, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category tracker 

message: Can anyone fix that one? It's going into its second MONTH on CfD.--Mike Selinker 21:11, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:Category:VoA scripted admins]] 

message: *Comments:
** Has anyone else noticed that it's essentially just the 5 of us now (with a couple admins acting as closers)? 
***Cswrye
***jc37
***kingboyk
***Mike Selinker 
***Hiding
* Sometimes we get a creator of a category, or the nominator from the actual CfD page (and sometimes a couple votes from there before it's moved here).  And sometimes we have an influx of pro/anti GUS editors for a specific issue.  But otherwise, we are nowhere near close on this page to the diversity of editors who look over the main CfD page.
*I'm not sure that "hiding" this on this page is fair to the rest of the wikipedian community. Yes, I know about the banners, which are in the middle of other text that people may gloss over. But I don't think it's a good idea ostracising people from a discussion because they are choosing to not read updated text. - jc37 02:14, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "Speedy" has it's own page, already (though I honestly think it too should be remerged to the main CfD pages, and if it is, then I agree).  Or are you talking about the "working" page? In that case, I agree. - jc37 17:42, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't know that "Speedy" had been moved to its own page. If it was, it must have already been remerged because it can be found at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion#Add requests for speedy renaming here. I'm proposing a new section, possibly below Wikipedia:Categories for discussion#Current discussions, where user categories would be listed. There would still be separate "working" pages for user categories and article categories. —Cswrye 21:37, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, you're talking about transclusion onto the main CfD page? That should be simple enough. - jc37 21:44, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

text: *I'll abstain since my bias is to delete all user categories and it appears that would be strengthened by moving back.  You might want to head over to WP:CFD and let them know there's a consensus here to move back, and that it's ghettoized.  I'd help close discussions here, but I won't close a discussion I comment in, and I'm doing a lot of discussing. Hiding Talk 20:42, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Well, it seems to me that we have a concensus on this. So now... Suggestions for implementation? (Preferably smoother than the split : ) - jc37 01:16, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I definitely agree, but I would like to clear some things out before we move them back. I don't want a repeat of the jarring switch that happened last time. Why not set a date (November 1st?) when the section will be moved back, and make an effort to get a big blocks of changes out of the way before then.--Mike Selinker 06:05, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That would be ok, I suppose, but from what I was hearing, it sounds like all we need to do at this point is edit this page's header down somewhat, and transclude it onto the "main" CfD page? - jc37 15:57, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Observation

message: I've created :Category:User categories for discussion, which is a common category for all user categories that are tagged with cfd-user, cfr-user, etc.  This will be used for the user categories instead of putting them in :Category:Categories for deletion, :Category:Categories for renaming, etc.  --Kbdank71 15:17, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: New User Category

message: I'm at a loss to explain why the categories on the Working page are not moving. I've changed the templates to the correct wording, but all the inhabitants are staying put. Anybody have any idea why?--Mike Selinker 04:53, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: For the against advertisements, you missed the User:Disavian/Userboxes/Wikipedia non-commercial template.  I'll check the rest.  --Kbdank71 14:14, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  why are no categories moving? 

message: I'm looking for someone to use their admin superpowers to delete the legion of empty categories at the bottom of the Working page. You can remove the backlog tags when it's done.--Mike Selinker 19:24, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll start on it.  --Kbdank71 19:26, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: They're all done except for the two that weren't empty.  --Kbdank71 19:40, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry about that. They're emptied now. Go ahead and delete them.--Mike Selinker 19:53, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done.  --Kbdank71 20:26, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good. I've removed the backlog tag. Would someone please delete the ones I put there since Kb's last deletions?--Mike Selinker 00:14, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: somebody must like to delete things

message: I can't fix the musical instrument categories, because of the  template. This is the code:

<includeonly>
</includeonly>
As I vaguely understand it, this code puts the template into a level-based category and a general category. One possibility is to nominate all the babel categories too, and convert them all at once (assuming it passes, which I don't know if it will). Someone needs to give me some direction here, or I can't do anything about that block of instrument categories on the Working page. Advice welcome.--Mike Selinker 14:17, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've come up with something at Template talk:User instrument, but it would, for example, create :Category:Wikipedian bodhránaís rather than :Category:Wikipedian bodhrán players. TimBentley (talk) 04:01, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That would just require changing the "ist" field of certain templates to less jargony names, such as replacing bodhránaí with bodhrán player, right? Doesn't sound like a tragedy to me.--Mike Selinker 13:23, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Update: I've now changed all the (instrument)-(level) templates to the correct -ist name from the nomination, and created all the new categories. So please implement this coding change right away, and we'll see what moves and what doesn't.--Mike Selinker 20:56, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The template is protected, so an admin will have to do it. TimBentley (talk) 20:59, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Update': All user instrument categories have been emptied, so they can all be deleted now. We have now have quite a backlog there, so I'd appreciate it if someone would take those out soon.--Mike Selinker 20:09, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  the instrument categories problem 

message: Well, we've picked up one or two more editors, but we still seem to be the hidden page.  What was finally decided about this? - jc37 00:21, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There was talk above about making the transition back on Nov. 1st. -- nae'blis 20:12, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, it's after the 1st. Now what? : ) - jc37 17:00, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

text: The only thing that I'm concerned about is the possibility of upsetting regulars on WP:CFD. It seems like a lot of editors (especially admins) don't look favorable on user categories, and if CFD was suddenly innundated with user category requests, we would get a lot of complaints. I feel like we need to be sure that there is consensus on the CFD page that they're okay with user catgories being discussed there and that they approve of the method we use. Otherwise, we may end up being forced to move user category discussions back here. —Cswrye 16:59, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Upsetting regulars? So categories can't be discussed on "Categories for discussion", because it might make some Wikipedians upset? Btw, I'm not intending an attack on you by any means. Just the idea of it... Besides, I'm fairly certain you're right... Just please pardon me if I comment how ridiculous this seems to me. Sounds a touch like: All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others. (Or is it an Argumentum ad baculum?) - jc37 08:52, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

text: *The reason behind this page was that the (rather large) amount of nominations on user cats were causing a backlog on CFD. Some people believe that categorization of articles is more important than categorizing our editors by astral sign, hair color and favorite food. (Radiant) 14:30, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

text: * Perhaps, but since apparently most wikipedians don't know this page exists, it "could" be seen as less than transparent. - jc37 15:11, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm with you on this, jc37, in that I would also prefer that user categories be discussed on CFD rather than here. I'm just saying that we need to keep in mind that a lot of editors don't, so we have to consider what actions they might take if we move the discussion to CFD. To give an example, there used to be several editors who automatically voted "delete" to every category discussion just because they are user categories. —Cswrye 19:35, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Buried treasure 

message: Per the November 4 discussion, this is to be moved to :Category:Wikipedians who contribute to Flags of the World. However, every single entry is due to a template that uses the correct category, and the individual pages don't think they are in the category. Help please? And sorry if this isn't the right place. -Amarkov babble 03:35, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Never mind, fixed it. -Amarkov babble 03:37, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requesting help on move of [[:Category:Wikipedians who use Flags of the World]] 

message: What is the tag being used to close debates on this page? --HappyCamper 13:28, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd say. Don't forget to subst it. Duja► 09:28, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  I want in on the secret...