Template talk:Nn-warn-deletion

message: We already have  for tagged articles. This template seems like it's for admins to use after they have deleted an article. Is there any reason to add the "or soon will be" in that case? Thanks. -- JLaTondre 02:56, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't have a problem with the reversion - but I suppose it adds more flexibility for everyone if "or so will be" is there. E.g. used by Admin that tells user of deletion first and then deletes. Though I suppose it is not designed for normal users, because importantly it does miss out the "hand-on" information. Cheers Lethaniol 10:14, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I see why you reverted it. That was the right thing to do. I'm not sure why I didn't see nn-warn when I was looking for a template to use... I usually go to WP:TUSER to find the right template, and I can't think of any reason why I wouldn't have the time I ended up using this one, but nn-warn is clearly listed there so I wonder why didn't use that one and how I found this one... Ah well, I guess it's not important. *shrug* --Icarus (Hi!) 06:26, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: "or soon will be" addition

message: The title is not showing when the user provides no header. -- ReyBrujo 02:31, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes that is correct - unless the editor requests a header - as explained on the template page - then there is no header as default. Cheers Lethaniol 13:36, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I wish there were a single standard. We have templates that never leave headers, templates that may or may not leave headers, and templates that always leave headers. It becomes pretty confusing after a time. -- ReyBrujo 14:01, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well I think there will soon be a standard - this issue was discussed here - and this Wikiproject has the stated goals of removing all headers as standard - I thought this solution allowing for both was quite good - but I have not implemented in many templates only nn/spam/empty warn and deletion notifications... Lol just noticed that it was on your suggestion Rey that I got involved in this see User:Lethaniol/Archive1#Re:_Be_Nice_to_Noobs Cheers Lethaniol 14:26, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: And so the circle closes itself :-) -- ReyBrujo 17:32, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Header

message: The usage listed in the article (everything after <noinclude>) should be moved to the documentation page provided. Thanks. -- Suntag ☼ 22:36, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: , except for the protected page template (no clear consensus on which page this belongs on). עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:37, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Add usage to /doc page

message: I've proposed adding a sentence to help those new potential contributors who are willing and able to try to improve nn articles understand the WP:USERFY and/or WP:INCUBATOR process(es) at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Template:nn-warn-deletion should have recovery instructions. Selery (talk) 11:47, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recovery instructions proposal 

message: Can you add   in between the last sentence and Template:Nn-warn-deletion? Greatly appreciated.
buffbills7701 21:47, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:15, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

text: ...and undone. Revert. This makes the template behave differently from how people used to it will expect, and it really is not uncontroversial enough to be done without discussion. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:09, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request on 29 October 2013 

message: I have nominated this template for deletion, please add the TFD tag on the template with noinclude tags. --TL22 (talk) 15:18, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Done --Redrose64 (talk) 16:44, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protected edit request on 17 June 2015