Forum:Question about deleted template listing pages

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Index > Village Dump > Question about deleted template listing pages
Note: This topic has been unedited for 3125 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.

I would have put this on Zombiebaron's talk page, but his user and user talk pages mention an "extended sabbatical."

Anyway, a while ago Zombiebaron deleted Uncyclopedia:Templates/Content management (log, mentioning "nonsense") and Uncyclopedia:Templates/Deletion process (log, mentioning technical issues with categorization).

I think these pages did have some usefulness, just as they would for other newbies trying to find a template to use. I don't think deletion was really the best solution here, but I don't feel comfortable asking for a straightforward undeletion. Could we consider replacing them with text-only lists consisting of wikilinks, redirects to categories of templates, or something else? --Pentium5dot1|t~^_^~c 02:50, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

The problem, you see, is that templates suck. Putting any of the templates that were listed on that first page indicated that you cared enough about the page to put no thought whatsoever into editing it, and the stuff on the second was used to indicate that you wanted to keep the page but weren't willing to actually improve it. Also, we've still got Uncyclopedia:Templates. Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 05:51, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
Those lists might have some use in content management issues. I can see why hiding them might make sense, but I think "hiding" parts of the maintenance processes is sort of against the spirit of the wiki. I think a better solution would be to trim down the redundant "fix my article please" templates to maybe just a rewrite and a hard rewrite, and keeping the "fix this in 7 or 30 days or we'll delete it" templates as they are. Ideally, if there are specific issues with the page, they should be addressed on the talk page, and not thru article clutter. --Mnbvcxz 06:41, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
The problem is that the Uncyclopedia:Templates page doesn't actually list the templates; it only describes what the templates are for. I guess that's why we have categories and Special:Prefixindex, though... --Pentium5dot1|t~^_^~c 21:08, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
You have noticed that the two pages you have redlink'd at the start of this page are still listed as subpages on Uncyclopedia:Templates, right? That page doesn't have to list all of the templates, as the subpages do that. On a side note:
Cowbell2 This article needs more cowbell.

You can help by adding more cowbell.
Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 21:14, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

(arbitrary outdent) Yes, I have noticed, which is exactly why I posted this here. My point is that those redlinks are effectively holes in our listing system. --Pentium5dot1|t~^_^~c 21:57, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Not really. Uncyclopedia:Templates/Deletion process , for one, sucked. The VFD template is all that's needed, and it wasn't listed there. Also, "holes". Heh. Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 22:02, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
Wait. Hang on. Why was Uncyclopedia:Templates/Content management deleted? We need that. Well, we either need it, or we may as well huff all the templates it listed... MrN Icons-flag-gb HalIcon.png WhoreMrn.png Fork you! 01:40, Jan 26
Maybe it was filled with "userspace only" templates. You know, useless clutter (or worse than clutter) templates that we keep on VFD because they are on a few userpages. --Mnbvcxz 02:39, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
Here you go: {{Deadend}}. The only remotely useful template from that page (and even that one says "I care about your page enough to do as little as possible. I need to save my energy, you see, to have sex with your wife"). Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 03:58, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
Proof is here, now, but I assume it won't be for long. See what Modus means? - T.L.B. Baloon WotM, UotM, FPrize, AotM, ANotM, PLS, UN:HS, GUN 04:05, Jan 26
I would say some of those templates are useful, mainly those that actually warn the author of content s/he might not want to read. I.e. the NSFW template family, the racist template, and, I hate to say, the Bat Fuck Insane template. However, at least 75% of that stuff is crap that should be deleted. --Mnbvcxz 04:32, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
I restored Uncyclopedia:Templates/Content management, then went through and cut the cruft. Now can we go back to writing about things, stuff and whatnot? Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 05:31, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
If your bored, there is alot of cruft in the other sections. For example, the following unintentionally humorous template:

The Stuart Little Movie Series
Stuart Little | Stuart Little II | Stuart Little III | Willard
Stuart Little Miniseries (TV) | Stuart Little: Revenge Video Game

As expected, the only mainspace page is appears on is Stuart Little, where it has not blue links whatsoever. --Mnbvcxz 06:16, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Personal tools