[WikiEN-l] Template madness

Sat Feb 5 19:46:10 UTC 2005

I see nothing wrong with any of those templates.  It's on VfD  because someone thought it wasn't worth keeping as an article, but if it's decided to keep, it still needs to be cleaned up and the POV cut down.  What's wrong with that?  The VfD template says "you are welcome to continue editing this article and improve it".

Why can't cleanup proceed if the person who initially created it thinks it can be kept?  Do we just totally ignore the appearance of articles listed on VfD, or do we have to wait till the article is cleaned up before we put it on VfD?

Or would you prefer we have no VfD at all, which is probably where you're aiming.

RickK

Erik Moeller <erik_moeller at gmx.de> wrote:
Take a look at

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kryon&oldid=9939921

How many different ways do we need to express that an article should be 
edited? When did Wikipedia become about editing pages to tell others how 
to edit pages?

I would support either radically cutting down the number of these 
templates, or limiting their use by policy to two total top-level boxes 
per page. Templates would be ordered by priority, so something 
ridiculous like "POV check" wouldn't have a chance if there are two 
important templates on the page already.

More controversially, I would even say that there's no point in an 
article being on Cleanup and VfD at the same time. Both are instruments 
of exposure, it's enough to use one of them and hope people fix the 
article because they see it there. Otherwise people will just keep 
adding Cleanup to any article on VfD out of fear that it will otherwise 
not get fixed before being deleted.

Regards,

Erik
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
 Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'