[WikiEN-l] Template asymmetry

Thu May 5 04:11:03 UTC 2005

On Thu, 5 May 2005, Erik Moeller wrote:

[snip]
>
> The problem with templates is that it is very easy to create them, and
> very hard to get rid of them. Virtually all problem templates I've seen
> have survived being listed on "Templates for deletion" because, usually,
> there are multiple passionate fans -- the people who have been using the
> template and who don't want to modify their existing workflows.
>
> This has led to an abundance of pastel colored boxes, as every editor
> seems to want a template to call their own.
>
> I believe we have to treat new templates in the same way we treat new
> policy proposals. We can keep them around as proposals, but before we
> actually *use* them, there has to be a consensus to do so.
>
> That way, we fix the current asymmetry: We make it harder to *adopt*
> templates; then it doesn't matter so much that it's hard to *delete* them.
>
> In practice, I suggest putting the
>
> {{Proposed template}}
>
> tag on top of dubious templates which do not yet have community support.
> That effectively locks the template from being used until the discussion
> page shows that people agree on what to do with it.
>
> Hopefully, this will help to stem the tide of questionable templates.
>
One useful step would be to help educate our fellow Wikipedians about
what Templates there are, which ones would work best -- & which ones should
be deprecated.

I mention this only because I've recently learned about {{Succession}},
which can be successfully applied to at least 98% of all imaginable
cases -- succession patterns of Roman Emperors, Popes, Presidents, &
Internet Kooks of the Month [*]. I've been using it quite happily in
writing my contributions of Ethiopian Emperors. And I'm sure there are
several other simple, flexible Templates that can be used to replace
countless others.

Once these simple & flexible ones are found & used to replace their
competition, then we can start deleting these templates on the basis
that they aren't used.

[*] The only case I can think of where {{Succession}} wouldn't work is
with Ancient Egyptian Pharaohs -- because not only would the office --
Pharaoh -- need to be included, but also the period of Egyptian history
(e.g., Old Kingdom, Second Intermediate, etc.) & the Dynasty. However,
I haven't been able to create a consensus about including the Dynasty in
such a template, so perhaps even this exception could be subsumed into
this template.

Geoff