Wikipedia talk:Templates for discussion/Archive 1

message: See Template talk:tfd. • Benc • 06:53, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  This same issue revisited 

message: Why is VfD 5 days and TFD 7 days for voting? Would it help to standardise these to similar waiting periods and rules?
*VfD is also seven days long. Zscout370 14:49, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: vfd / tfd equalisation 

message: Template:Gundam Seed mobile weapons was put up on TFD at somepoint and disappeared at a later point. I can't find the discussion, where would that be, and if possible, could it be copied to : Template talk:Gundam Seed mobile weapons ? 132.205.15.43 04:05, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template:Gundam Seed mobile weapons 

message: Now I'm thinking the whole process should be done over. Instead of moving templates through process sections, just leave them where they are and add notes to the bottom of discussions that indicate at what stage of the process they are. For the convenience of admins who come to do actual deletions, a simple list up front, "Admin attention please: templates ready to delete", with each entry linked into the main work area, just in case the visiting fireman has questions. Thus, new overall structure: 
* Process (explanation/instructions)
* Admin attention please: templates ready to delete
**A template
**Another template
* Workflow
**A template
***Some discussion
***Outcome: flagged for admin
**Another template
***Some discussion
***Outcome: flagged for admin
**Still another template
***Some discussion (no outcome yet)
**And yet another template
***Some discussion
***Outcome: keep (log discussion)
**Bork bork bork template
***Some discussion
***Outcome: flagged for admin
***Admin: deleted
New tfd's to be added at the bottom of the workflow; tfd's removed as their discussions are logged. (Note that "Foo bar template" is not shown; as soon as its discussion was logged, it was removed entirely from the workflow.) 
By keeping discussion and process stage together in chronological order within a single subsection for each template, I think we'll have a more straightforward process, less prone to error, and easier to operate.  — Xiong (talk) 01:07, 2005 Mar 23 (UTC)
Nobody objected to the last major overhaul of the TfD page -- granted it was mostly cosmetic. Nobody has objected to this upgrade, either -- though it is mostly structural. Absent comment, I'm going to work up an improved page and substitute it. Note that all discussions will remain intact during the upgrade.  — Xiong (talk) 04:00, 2005 Mar 31 (UTC)
:Hate to bring this up again, but I still favour the reverse sequence used on other similar pages - new entries at the top where they're easier to spot straight away, older ones further down, holding pen at the bottom for admins. Or better still, the same sort of system as on vfd, where each template has its own sub-page.  Grutness|hello?  05:39, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It's all templates. Template:Tfd could have been theoretically moved (just as you would move articles - redirects work in the Template: namespace just as well) to Template:Delete if that had not already existed, but there is no reason to move it. There are numerous deletion templates (and numerous things that require deletion), and that all have an equal claim to the name Template:Delete, so there's nothing wrong with . For information on how templates work, I suppose the best place to begin is Help:Template. For a list of templates used in Wikipedia, see Wikipedia:Template messages. — Itai (f&t) 16:34, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Streamline process structure 

message: And -- oh, hell -- change  tag itself to  or not? Where is the user's manual for this thing?  — Xiong (talk) 01:07, 2005 Mar 23 (UTC)
:It's all templates. Template:Tfd could have been theoretically moved (just as you would move articles - redirects work in the Template: namespace just as well) to Template:Delete if that had not already existed, but there is no reason to move it. There are numerous deletion templates (and numerous things that require deletion), and that all have an equal claim to the name Template:Delete, so there's nothing wrong with . For information on how templates work, I suppose the best place to begin is Help:Template. For a list of templates used in Wikipedia, see Wikipedia:Template messages. — Itai (f&t) 16:34, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Change tag? 

message: This template claims to be based on Template:University. However, I cannot find the latter. Was it deleted? If so, why? And should the same reasoning be applied to this template?  Radiant_* 13:56, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)
:It was really based on Template:University information as explained in Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#A_schools_template (full discussion).   Template:University information was taken off TFD  with no consensus. --iMb~Meow 14:42, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Delete I think it provides a bit too much information (principals photo and email) and most of the school articles that I see on the VfD can just be stuck on this template, so we can just see articles with just the template and information plugged in place. Zscout370 14:48, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Template:School]]

message: I'm as bad a culprit as anyone for this, I know, but the main page has god a bit out of hand as regards people entering new candidates under the right date. I was trying to work out where to move the "five day" bar to, and most of the entries under April 22 are from April 23, and the only one under April 23 was (just) from April 24. We all need to take a bit more care, methinks...  Grutness|hello?  08:08, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Main page a little skew

message: Please notify me if there needs to be a TfD bot. -- AllyUnion (talk) 02:51, 12 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bot automated process 

message: To counter instruction creep and repetitive discussion, I would like to propose the following:
*if a category is only used as part of a template (e.g. :Category:Foo Stubs to correspond with Template:Foo Stub), and that template is deleted by regular WP:TFD process, then the category can be speedily deleted.
*I would like to put this up for vote at WP:CSD, but first I'd like to garner some feedback here as to its appropriateness and wording. Radiant_* 07:56, May 13, 2005 (UTC)
**I've commented on this at Wikipedia talk:Categories for deletion. To avoid a fractured discussion, perhaps all comments would be more apropriate there? Thryduulf 08:25, 13 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Speedy category deletion

message: Template:Please don't edit this page, Template:Please don't change this page, Template:Please leave this line alone were listed with this explanation: "Duplicated text of Wikipedia:Introduction, Wikipedia:Introduction 2, Wikipedia:Introduction 3. Or is there a point to this that I'm missing?"
If there are no objections here I am going to remove this template from listing since there is a point that was missed. Trödel|talk 16:06, 13 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introduction templates