UDWiki:Administration/Deletions/Archive/2011 06: Difference between revisions

From The Urban Dead Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Shortcut|[[A/D]]}}
==Recent Actions==
 
===[[The_Republic_of_Digby|The Republic of Digby]]===
{{Moderationnav}}
Content cleared by owner, might as well be a speedy --[[User:Bean|Bean]] 15:33, 12 June 2011 (BST)
 
# '''Speedy''': Page was blanked by the only guy who maintained it, Author Edit Only implied --[[User:Bean|Bean]] 15:33, 12 June 2011 (BST)
{| cellspacing=0 cellpadding=0 style="margin-bottom: .5em; float: right; padding: .5em 0 .8em 1.4em; width: 33%"
#'''Scheduled''' - User has blanked the page and created a new group. Crit 7 by proxy.--[[User:Yonnua Koponen|<span style="color: DarkOrange">Yonnua Koponen</span>]]<sup>[[User_talk:Yonnua Koponen| <span style="color:Gold">T</span>]][[DvB| <span style="color: Goldenrod">G</span>]]</sup><sup><span class="plainlinks">[http://www.urbandead.com/profile.cgi?id=840689 <span style="color: DarkGoldenrod"> P</span>] </span></sup> [[User:Yonnua Koponen/Sandbox|<span style="color: Red">^</span>]][[Discosaurs|<span style="color: Red">^</span>]][[{{TALKPAGENAME}}#Donkey|<span style="color: Red">^</span>]] 16:01, 12 June 2011 (BST)
|__TOC__
|}
 
This page is for the request of page deletions within the Urban Dead wiki. Due to concerns about loss of data, the ability to delete pages is restricted to system operators. As such, regular users will need to request a deletion from the system operators. For consistency and accountability, system operators also adhere to the guidelines listed here.
 
==Guidelines for Deletion Requests==
 
All Deletion Requests '''must''' contain the following information in order to be considered:
 
* '''A link to the page in question.''' Preferably bolded for visibility. Note that Category and Image links need a colon at the front to turn them into links (ie <code><nowiki>[[:Category:Category]]</nowiki></code> and <code><nowiki>[[:Image:Image.jpg]]</nowiki></code>).
* '''A reason for deletion.''' This should be short and to the point.
* '''A signed datestamp.''' This can be easily done by adding <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> to the end of your request.
 
In addition to placing a request on this page, please place the '''''<nowiki>{{delete}}</nowiki>''''' tag on the top of the page that is being recommended for deletion. Please make sure that the original content remains on the page, so that others can judge whether the page is worthy of deletion.
 
Any deletion request that does not contain these three pieces of information will not be considered, and will be removed by a system operator.
 
Once the deletion request has been entered, the request shall remain on this page, where it will be voted on for a period of two (2) weeks, as judged by the initial datestamp. At the conclusion of this two weeks, the appropriate action will be taken by a system operator, and at the end of that day the request will be moved into the [[UDWiki:Administration/Deletions/Archive|Archive]].
 
Certain types of pages may be better being scheduled for deletion in order to reduce the amount of red tape and stop this page getting too cluttered. To lodge a request for scheduled deletions, go to [[UDWiki:Administration/Deletions/Scheduling]].
 
Deletion of pages that match a certain criteria may be better serviced by a request for a Speedy Deletion. Speedy Deletions are for removal of pages that are clearly of no value to the wiki, and do not incur the two week voting requirement. Speedy Deletion requests can be lodged at [[UDWiki:Administration/Speedy Deletions]].
 
{{speedydeletioncriteria}}
 
==Guidelines for Voting on Deletion Requests==
 
* One vote per user.
* Voting should take place underneath the request, and each vote should be started with a {{CodeInline|#}} with no empty lines inbetween votes.
* There are four vote types:
** '''Delete'''. For agreement with the deletion request
** '''Merge'''. For indication that the content on the page should be merged with another page (includes an implicit '''Delete''').
** '''Speedy Delete'''. For indication that the page meets one of the [[UDWiki:Administration/Speedy Deletions|Speedy Deletions]] Criteria (includes an implicit '''Delete''').
** '''Keep'''. For disagreement with the deletion request.
 
* The specific vote keyword should be bolded within the lodged vote. Any relevant comments are also allowed, but these should not be bolded.
* At least one '''Delete''' vote must be entered by the deadline in order for a page to be deleted. System operators may not use their own vote after the deadline to delete a page.
* If more '''Delete''' votes are entered than '''Keep''' votes, the page will be deleted. In any other circumstance, the page is kept.
* If 3 '''Speedy Delete'''s are lodged, and there are no '''Keep''' Votes, the page will be deleted as per [[UDWiki:Administration/Speedy Deletions|Speedy Deletions]].


==Deletion Queue==
'''Deleted''' as a crit 7 by proxy.--<span>[[User:The General|The General]] <sup>[[User Talk:The General|T]] [[Special:ListUsers/sysop|<span title="System Operator">Sys</span>]] [[Project_UnWelcome|<span title="Project UnWelcome">U!</span>]] [[Project Wiki Patrol|<span title="Project Wiki Patrol">P!</span>]] <span class="plainlinks">[http://urbandeadwiki.smfforfree.com/index.php <span title="Urban Dead Wiki Forum">F!</span>]</span></sup></span> 17:05, 12 June 2011 (BST)
<!-- Please place new requests directly below this message.
Place beneath this note, outside of the comment tags.  -->
===[[Malton Police Department/sandbox]]===
This page is no longer needed. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to qualify for A/SD, so I'm putting it here. [[User:G F J|G F J]] 18:24, 18 April 2010 (BST)
 
#'''Keep''' - Disc space = cheap! --[[User:Saromu|Sonny Corleone]] <sup>[[DORIS]] [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pXfHLUlZf4 I jizzed in my pants]  [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91a8pHj7V9k pr0n]</sup> 05:44, 19 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Keep''' - Well, it's a group sandbox.  Do we really know that it is no longer needed?  If that can be reasonably shown to be true I'll change my vote.--{{User:Giles Sednik/sig}} 12:36, 19 April 2010 (BST)
#:Yes, it's no longer needed. As it's a DEM/MPD subpage, the organization to decide whether it's still needed is the DEM/MPD, would you agree with that? I'm the current DEM chairman (feel free to contact us on Brainstock if you wish to verify), so yes, I do have the ability to find out whether we still need it or not, and we don't. But either way, here's why: The content on that page is nothing but an outdated copy of [[Malton Police Department|MPD]], the most important change had been the inclusion of [[:Template:MPDnavbar]]. If at all, that template is what is worthwhile to preserve. As deleting the sandbox does not delete the template, no valuable content is lost. Apart from the template, no complex and valuable changes had been made. Would that convince you? [[User:G F J|G F J]] 12:52, 19 April 2010 (BST)
#::Why not just blank the page? Or ask it to be moved to DEM/Sandbox or similar? --{{User:Rosslessness/Sig}} 16:00, 19 April 2010 (BST)
#:::If this does not pass, it might be what we'll do - but why? If a page is no longer needed and does not contain content that might be valuable in the future, why should it be kept instead of getting deleted? Instead of having x unused DEM subpages flying around, I'd rather have a "clean" wiki presence consisting only of what is used or worthwhile to preserve (an example for inactive pages definitely worthwhile: [[Malton Central Intelligence|MCI]] - this is quite different from a sandbox). I would think that having a "clean" instead of "messy" wiki presence does in general benefit the UD wiki, for instance decreasing the chance of newbies getting confused with different pages. Yes, it's unlikely that someone would see the sandbox and think that that is the up-to-date MPD page, but it can't be ruled out, I've seen (new) people getting confused with things that are even more obvious. Regards, [[User:G F J|G F J]] 16:16, 19 April 2010 (BST)
#::::Are you trawling the DEM pages completely, or working through in sections, one group at a time? Because we can merge pages, or turn them into redirects. --{{User:Rosslessness/Sig}} 16:18, 19 April 2010 (BST)
#:::::Eventually, all DEM pages should be taken a look at. Not just by myself, of course. However, my own time is quite limited, so it would be hard to give any time frame. As to whether anything is done on a per-group basis or just whatever comes to our attention, the second option probably fits better, though we do look at our pages systematically. And yes, merging and redirecting can certainly make sense in some case - where would I go to request a merge of, say, two DEM subpages? I don't seem to find a place for that at [[UDWiki:Administration]]? [[User:G F J|G F J]] 16:30, 19 April 2010 (BST)
#::::::What we'd probably do is copy everything over to one page and turned the other page into a protected redirect, so it couldn't be undone with out removing the protections. --{{User:Rosslessness/Sig}} 18:43, 19 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Delete''' - {{User:Krazy_Monkey/sig}} 16:49, 19 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Delete''' --{{User:Rosslessness/Sig}} 18:43, 19 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Delete''' -{{User:Poodle_of_doom/signiture}} 21:31, 19 April 2010 (BST)
 
===Crit 10 AND Crit 1's===
These are unused, as well as being crit 1's of the [[Template:Visited Bale Mall|Template:Visited XXXX Mall]] templates which can be seen on userpages such as [[User:Armpit Odor|these]].
*[[Template:Bale Mall]]
*[[Template:Ackland Mall]]
*[[Template:Blesley Mall]]
*[[Template:Calvert Mall]]
*[[Template:Dowdney Mall]]
*[[Template:Hildebrand Mall]]
*[[Template:Joachim Mall]]
*[[Template:Lumber Mall]]
*[[Template:Marven Mall]]
*[[Template:Marven Mall]]
*[[Template:Mitchem Mall]]
*[[Template:Nichols Mall]]
*[[Template:Pole Mall]]
*[[Template:Tompson Mall]]
*[[Template:Treweeke Mall]]
*[[Template:Woodroffe Mall]]
 
These re-qualify as SD candidates because they make juicy Crit 1's. --{{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig3}} 06:16, 17 April 2010 (BST)
 
#'''Keep''' - Not Crit 1 as they are not duplicates. The two template types are different sizes and allow different information to be added. -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 10:12, 17 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Speedy Delete''' as Crit 1 and 10. --{{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig3}} 12:09, 17 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Speedy Delete''' --{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature‎}} 13:49, 17 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Delete'''. [[User:G F J|G F J]] 17:54, 17 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Keep''' - First off, as isc said, they are not duplicates.  Look at the difference between [[:Template:Visited Pole Mall]] and [[:Template:Pole Mall]].  These templates are part of a "set" of 20 that people can use to show that they visited certain malls, which is silly, but so are most of the templates on this wiki.  You've listed 15 of the 20 templates that aren't currently in use, however some of the "set" are.  For example [[Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Caiger_Mall|Caiger]], and [[Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Buckley_Mall|Buckley]].  Users should have the option of using these templates when and if they visit these malls, so that their templates share the same aesthetic.  As an alternative to deletion, perhaps these two different template types could have links to each other so people can choose between the large and small versions.  Just a thought.--{{User:Giles Sednik/sig}} 13:39, 18 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Keep''' want me to make an image ark for them? --{{User:Rosslessness/Sig}} 16:06, 19 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Keep''' - As Iscariot --{{User:Michaleson/sig}} 23:28, 19 April 2010 (BST)
 
===Crit 10s===
Now these may be Subst templates, so someone like Aichon may need to check. Anything that said it was subst, I skipped, but there may be some others in here.
 
[[Template:Ackland Mall]]
 
[[Template:Ackland Staff]]
 
[[Template:BPBNobarricades]]
 
[[Template:BPWasteland]]
 
[[Template:Bale Mall]]
 
[[Template:Bale Staff]]
 
[[Template:Blesley Mall]]
 
[[Template:Blesley Staff]]
 
[[Template:Buckley Staff]]
 
[[Template:Caiger Mall2]]
 
[[Template:Calvert Mall]]
 
[[Template:Calvert Staff]]
 
[[Template:Dowdney Mall]]
 
[[Template:Dowdney Staff]]
 
[[Template:F.C.G.Venue]]
 
[[Template:Giddings Staff]]
 
[[Template:Hildebrand Mall]]
 
[[Template:Hildebrand Staff]]
 
[[Template:Joachim Mall]]
 
[[Template:Joachim Staff]]
 
[[Template:Lumber Mall]]
 
[[Template:Lumber Staff]]
 
[[Template:Marven Mall]]
 
[[Template:Marven Staff]]
 
[[Template:McLocations-nocat]]
 
[[Template:Metal]]
 
[[Template:Mitchem Mall]]
 
[[Template:Mitchem Staff]]
 
[[Template:NWSsurvivor]]
 
[[Template:Nichols Mall]]
 
[[Template:Nichols Staff]]
 
[[Template:PANTHER Barricade plan]]
 
[[Template:Pole Mall]]
 
[[Template:Pole Staff]]
 
[[Template:RedResistance]]
 
[[Template:StatusMap SB 2]]
 
[[Template:Stickling Staff]]
 
[[Template:Tompson Mall]]
 
[[Template:Tompson Staff]]
 
[[Template:Treweeke Mall]]
 
[[Template:Treweeke Staff]]
 
[[Template:Woodroffe Mall]]
 
[[Template:Woodroffe Staff]]
 
--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature‎}} 20:32, 16 April 2010 (BST)
 
With unused templates, Yon, stick the <nowiki>{{speedydelete}}</nowiki> tag on too, and see if anyone comes a-runnin. That's what I usually do on the rar occasion we purge the UnusedTemplates.. --{{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig3}} 01:25, 17 April 2010 (BST)
 
Out of curiosity, what makes you think I can check to see if templates are subst'd? I wouldn't have any idea where to start with something like that, aside from checking the contribs for people that are in the history of those templates, which would take days. Wish I could help with an easy fix though. I suppose we could ask Rooster if such a thing is possible, but I don't see how. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 06:33, 17 April 2010 (BST)
:I just saw your message on an unused template. I was just asking if you knew of any being used or anything.--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature‎}} 10:46, 17 April 2010 (BST)
::Gotcha. In retrospect, my last comment came off ''way'' too accusatory sounding. I was merely curious though, since I didn't know if I had given the impression I could do things I can't actually do. Anyway, I'm guessing you're talking about [[Template:Socmember|this template]]? If so, it's the only one I've done that with, and I'm afraid I have no special knowledge about other templates out there that are only used for subst purposes (well, aside from a few, but they're common knowledge templates involved in DS and Suggestions). {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 11:02, 17 April 2010 (BST)
:::Yeah, that's the one.--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature‎}} 11:04, 17 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Keep''' - I love these mass posts of yours, because it only needs a single keep. -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 20:36, 16 April 2010 (BST)
#:Why, may I ask?--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature‎}} 20:37, 16 April 2010 (BST)
#::At least one is a group page and should be on A/MR rather than here and more than half are less than a month old and you haven't even taken the time to poke the author of more than half of these to point out that we delete unincluded templates on this wiki. He'll notice that one's missing at some point and recreate the lot, causing him more work and potentially another case here if he again doesn't stick them on a page. And so the cycle will go on and on. -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 20:50, 16 April 2010 (BST)
#:::Ones requiring moves put on A/MR. Original author of most contacted. Everything left should be in order. The PANTHER one has been duped elsewhere, and saying I should wait a month is a stupid argument because the criterion is for a week.--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature‎}} 22:13, 16 April 2010 (BST)
#::::Wait, you admit that you were incompetently putting pages up for deletion that shouldn't be here and you want to quibble over allowing newbies a bit longer to store their work? It's a good job we have you enforcing these deadlines, or we'd run out of diskspace, which is expensive. -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 22:23, 16 April 2010 (BST)
#:::::Umm, no?--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature‎}} 23:17, 16 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Delete''' The funny thing about that one single keep vote,... is that someone else would be entitled to come along and vote delete. -{{User:Poodle_of_doom/signiture}} 22:35, 16 April 2010 (BST)
#:Thing is, you don't get it. -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 22:38, 16 April 2010 (BST)
#::Thing is,... your always welcome to piss the hell off. -{{User:Poodle_of_doom/signiture}} 02:44, 17 April 2010 (BST)
#:::No, see, a single vote for 'keep' means these can no longer be deleted via Speedy Deletions and have to go through regular Deletions for two weeks. {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 02:46, 17 April 2010 (BST)
#::::No see,... I did understand... thing is,... I can still vote delete.... and after two weeks, and enough delete votes,... his one keep vote didn't mean shit. His overall intent is to be a condescending ass. -{{User:Poodle_of_doom/signiture}} 02:56, 17 April 2010 (BST)
#:::::No, you don't understand. By voting keep I stop these being deleted for long enough for the author to be asked. Your delete however can mean that he can put them on a page and still be deleted even though they're in use. You could be depriving a user of their work even though they're using it because you have no comprehension of the system. Why do you think this hasn't been moved to the normal deletions page for two weeks already? Because I can retract my keep at any time if the author decides he doesn't want them. I understand the system, you don't and your petulant behaviour can have unintended consequences because you fail to understand the system. -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 10:17, 17 April 2010 (BST)
#::::::Actually,... I understand that it could fuck up the pages it's used one... and to be honest... I could give two shits less you half wit. I hope my vote breaks something,.... -{{User:Poodle_of_doom/signiture}} 22:49, 17 April 2010 (BST)
#:::::::You don't care if something you do breaks something on the wiki? Thanks, that's all I needed. -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 13:41, 18 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Speedy Delete''' --{{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig3}} 12:09, 17 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Speedy Delete''' - As my original justification.--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature‎}} 13:50, 17 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Delete'''. [[User:G F J|G F J]] 10:08, 18 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Keep''' - DDR just put many of these same templates up for deletion, which is weird and redundant.  I don't know why there are two different deletion requests for some of the same stuff, or why they are all being lumped together but now I'll just explain myself again.  Many of these templates are not duplicates.  Look at the difference between [[:Template:Visited Pole Mall]] and [[:Template:Pole Mall]].  The "mall" templates are part of a "set" of 20 that people can use to show that they visited certain malls, which is silly, but so are most of the templates on this wiki.  You've listed 15 of the 20 templates that aren't currently in use, however some of the "set" are.  For example [[Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Caiger_Mall|Caiger]], and [[Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Buckley_Mall|Buckley]].  Users should have the option of using these templates when and if they visit these malls, so that their templates share the same aesthetic.--{{User:Giles Sednik/sig}} 13:47, 18 April 2010 (BST)
#:I put them up for deletion as Crit 10s, and DDR put them up for deletion as Crit 1s.--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature‎}} 20:00, 18 April 2010 (BST)
#::Ah, so these were originally put up on speedy deletion and then moved here?  It's still a bit weird to have the same items up for two different deletion requests.--{{User:Giles Sednik/sig}} 12:41, 19 April 2010 (BST)
 
===[[Alliance/Department of Emergency Management - Fuerza Latina]]===
This page is no longer needed, out of date, and not linked to on any relevant pages. Please delete. Thanks, [[User:G F J|G F J]] 15:41, 13 April 2010 (BST)
 
*[http://www.hrwiki.org/wiki/File:Stupid_word.png '''Del Monte'''] {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 15:44, 13 April 2010 (BST)
*'''Speedy''' - Owner request. -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 17:02, 13 April 2010 (BST)
*'''Delete''' - Simple enough. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 18:46, 13 April 2010 (BST)
*'''Delete''' - It should have been only on the group pages, but if it's out of date and historically insignificant, then go ahead and diggity it. --{{User:TripleU/Sig}} 20:05, 13 April 2010 (BST)
*'''Delete''' --{{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig3}} 01:27, 17 April 2010 (BST)
*'''Keep''' - disc space = cheap! --[[User:Saromu|Sonny Corleone]] <sup>[[DORIS]] [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pXfHLUlZf4 I jizzed in my pants]  [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91a8pHj7V9k pr0n]</sup> 05:46, 19 April 2010 (BST)
 
===[[Second Battle of Krinks]]===
Doesn't exist. The "battle" is a guy and his zerg taking out generators and transmitters. Only two sentences long at the time of this edit and no real content can be hoped to be added. Plus, not a very good idea [[UDWiki:Administration/Arbitration#User:Iscariot versus User:Cornholioo|if you think about it]]. [[User:Infrastructure|Infrastructure]] 13:43, 10 April 2010 (BST)
:He added more info and [http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Second_Battle_of_Krinks&diff=1689129&oldid=1689128 removed] the template. The only problem? Most of the page are [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BlatantLies blatant lies]. [[User:Infrastructure|Infrastructure]] 14:05, 10 April 2010 (BST)
 
I give this one input and then leave it.
 
1. Most part of the NSU is currently training somewhere else. The Krinks (WWSIS) is also being attacked by NSU, though. So that makes it a  battle. That there are no dead/wounded yet, doesn't mean there is no battle. There have been several real-life wars without any dead or wounded. <br />
2. Your statement that "no real content can be hoped to be added" is totally irrelevant. You asked the page to be deleted within minutes after I made it. I was still editing it. <br />
3. The First Battle of Krinks and the Second Battle of Krinks have nothing to do with each others. --[[User:Cornholioo|Cornholioo]] 14:02, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
 
#'''Keep''' this rubbish off of admin pages.--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature‎}} 14:07, 10 April 2010 (BST)
#'''So fucking what''' {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 14:12, 10 April 2010 (BST)
#:As it happens, I got nothing else to do at the moment. [[User:Infrastructure|Infrastructure]] 14:13, 10 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Move''' to his userspace.--[[Image:Umbrella-White.png|14px]][[User:MisterGame|<span style= "color: maroon; background-color: white">'''''Thadeous Oakley''''']][[Image:Umbrella-White.png|14px]]</span> 14:18, 10 April 2010 (BST)
#:To clarify, any hope that this page can be NPOV is dead shit if the past drama can be counted on. We're better off labeling it Cornholioo's personal POV, and moving it to his userspace as a result. --[[Image:Umbrella-White.png|14px]][[User:MisterGame|<span style= "color: maroon; background-color: white">'''''Thadeous Oakley''''']][[Image:Umbrella-White.png|14px]]</span> 14:39, 10 April 2010 (BST)
#::This is nonsense, I'm just reproducing facts on that page. Quote me ''one'' sentence which is POV. You can't, since there are only facts out there. --[[User:Cornholioo|Cornholioo]] 14:09, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
#:::The page itself is already POV, it's not like you asked the other group for it. --[[Image:Umbrella-White.png|14px]][[User:MisterGame|<span style= "color: maroon; background-color: white">'''''Thadeous Oakley''''']][[Image:Umbrella-White.png|14px]]</span> 20:00, 10 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Move''' - As Thad. -- {{User:Krazy_Monkey/sig}} 14:34, 10 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Delete''' - Because this guy has very little idea of what a "battle" on UD traditionally is, and the original battle was barely one to begin with. Starting to stretch the boundaries a bit. Fuck it, a lot. --{{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig3}} 15:38, 10 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Keep''' - There's no good reason to delete. --[[User:Cornholioo|Cornholioo]] 15:59, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
#'''Move''' The amount of nonsense on it is already astounding. Move it to your namspace already. --[[User:Zyckde|zyckde]] 19:30, 10 April 2010 (BST)
#::Why you just don't edit it if you think it's wrong? You can even tell me what you think is wrong and I'll edit it myself. --[[User:Cornholioo|Cornholioo]] 18:52, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
#:::Oh yeah, that worked out fantastic last time didn't it? --[[Image:Umbrella-White.png|14px]][[User:MisterGame|<span style= "color: maroon; background-color: white">'''''Thadeous Oakley''''']][[Image:Umbrella-White.png|14px]]</span> 20:00, 10 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Move''' - As Thad. See you guys again in a few weeks for the Third Battle of Krinks. --{{User:N0RDAK/Sig}} 20:15, 10 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Delete''' - Nothing of value --{{User:Michaleson/sig}} 20:24, 10 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Keep''' - It's an article in progress in the mainspace.  Since when do we delete stuff as it's going up?  Even though most people on the wiki don't like the original author that's really no reason to go deleting all willy nilly.  If you wish to make it better add some positive contributions to it.  If you think it's pointless drivel, ignore it and let it die a natural death.--{{User:Giles Sednik/sig}} 20:39, 10 April 2010 (BST)
#:I think the problem is that these pages don't seem to just go away when ignored, as the last month's A/A and A/VB histories would show with the First Battle of Krinks. Also, it's closely related to an ongoing A/A case in which the page was locked to prevent his, and others', continuous conflicting edits. This page seems like a workaround. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 21:13, 10 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Move''' - To his userspace. It doesn't belong in the main namespace while it's so POV and a cause for this much drama. And since I know Cornholioo wants examples of POV, here are a few: referring to the occurrence as a "battle" within the context of UD (this isn't real life...battles in this game involve people dying, not staring at each other angrily), making the page before declarations of hostility from other allegedly involved parties (I've seen no acknowledgement from the groups you claim are involved that there is a battle occurring, and they even deny it outright), speaking on behalf of other allegedly involved parties (in the very first sentence, no less), NSU-centric writing (second sentence and the entire The Conflict section, since most of that information is trivial), and biased writing (first sentence of Casus Belli). Essentially, the entire thing is POV. Side note: I'll ignore any point-by-point rebuttals since there's nothing further for me to discuss (although I was teetering on the fence between Delete and Move...). {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 21:13, 10 April 2010 (BST)
#:If I follow that way of thinking, then the page of the First Battle of Krinks can be deleted as well, right? Maybe the WWSIS doesn't recognize the First Battle of Krinks as a battle as well. Deaths may follow. I've also said that on the page. --[[User:Cornholioo|Cornholioo]] 7:53, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
#<s>'''Ban Cornholioo'''</s> I mean,.... '''Move''' it to his user space... -{{User:Poodle_of_doom/signiture}} 22:07, 10 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Delete''' - We do not have pages for 'potential battles'. Three generators and a radio do not a battle make. -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 01:21, 11 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Move/delete''' - move into a user/group subpage, wherever the author wants it, then delete the redirect until a proper battle takes place <small>-- <span style="text-shadow: #bbb 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em">[[User:Boxy|<span style="color: Red">boxy</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Boxy|<span style="color: Red">talk</span>]] • [[The Rules|teh rulz]]</sup></span> 11:36 11 April 2010 (BST)</small>
#'''Delete''' - The mongtardation on that page is too great for it to be allowed to exist. --[[User:The Hierophant|Papa Moloch]] 12:29, 11 April 2010 (BST)
#:Your comment however, reflects great intelligence. --[[User:Cornholioo|Cornholioo]] 12:36, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
#::Jaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaam. {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 14:39, 12 April 2010 (BST)
#'''See Poodles''' --{{User:The Colonel/Sig}} 15:47, 11 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Keep''' - The only thing that's POV is whether it's actually a battle. If you don't think it deserves the title of 'The Second', just move it to the history section  of the building's page. --{{User:TripleU/Sig}} 06:06, 13 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Delete:''' I just feel it lacks anything of value. - [[User:Whitehouse]] 20:50, 16 April 2010 (BST)
#:I just feel your post lacks anything of arguments. I've never really supported democracy. This is why. --[[User:Cornholioo]] 15:49, 17 April 2010 (BST)
#::Is there any point to you saying that? You know, like, at all? [[User:Infrastructure|Infrastructure]] 15:54, 17 April 2010 (BST)
#:::Democracy is only fun when it swing your way, eh?--[[Image:Umbrella-White.png|14px]][[User:MisterGame|<span style= "color: maroon; background-color: white">'''''Thadeous Oakley''''']][[Image:Umbrella-White.png|14px]]</span> 23:58, 17 April 2010 (BST)
#::The reason I feel it lacks anything of value is because it's on a tiny scale. You call this a battle, I call it a skirmish, and even that's stretching it. All that happened was that a couple of people got killed and a few generators were destroyed. It's not really noteworthy, interesting or useful. - [[User:Whitehouse]] 00:07, 18 April 2010 (BST)
#::: Don't rise to it Cornhole here is just trying to provoke reactions. Ignore it and it will just be whining to itself--{{User:Michaleson/sig}} 00:09, 18 April 2010 (BST)
#:::: Seen as your intelligence requires it I will explain myself. If you pick a random person from this wiki there is an enormous chance you pick an idiot. For example: you and your dumb friends are not able to understand much. This always like that in society. The majority of the people is dumb and only a few people with a good education know stuff. However, the democrat is scared of the people, so gives them the right to vote (while their vote barely has influence, though). Just give the people with more experience (note: I didn't say I'm one of them), and only them, the right to vote, and the outcome would be a lot differend. But of course you have no idea what I'm talking about. --[[User:Cornholioo|Cornholioo]] 21:36, 18 April 2010 (BST).
#'''<strike>Nuke it from orbit''', it's the only way to be sure,</strike> err... '''Delete.''' I've tried myself to repair the worst bits of Cornys POV bullshit, to ''possibly'' restore some kind of value to the article. And all it did was that I ended up in an edit war, in which Corny even ignores the most factual and attestable points his opposition presents. If he wants just a personal toy that allows him to hallucinate how great deeds his group does, he should do so in his userspace. --[[User:Spiderzed|Spiderzed]] 21:55, 18 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Delete''' --[[User:Saromu|Sonny Corleone]] <sup>[[DORIS]] [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pXfHLUlZf4 I jizzed in my pants]  [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91a8pHj7V9k pr0n]</sup> 05:47, 19 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Move''' namespace baby. --{{User:Rosslessness/Sig}} 18:53, 19 April 2010 (BST)
 
===[[:Image:KKK.jpg]]===
 
Uhh... Yeah. Thoughts? --{{User:Haliman111/sig}} 02:28, 8 April 2010 (BST)
:[[DB|COME TO YOUR SENSES PEOPLE.]] --{{User:Haliman111/sig}} 00:54, 9 April 2010 (BST)
::Used to slander another group. Meh. Still not really insta-deletable or anything. I mean, we allow Swastikas, this is relatively not as bad.--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature‎}} 00:56, 9 April 2010 (BST)
:::Check the goals history. I'm pretty sure "To text rape everyone in Santlerville" is bad. Especially since there are so many groups that make text rape be bestiality. --{{User:Haliman111/sig}} 01:38, 9 April 2010 (BST)
::::And? So? But? Therefore? ''"I don't like them"'' is not a valid reason to have anything deleted on this wiki, we are not Conservapedia. -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 01:41, 9 April 2010 (BST)
:::::For the record, I support their new goal. :P --{{User:Haliman111/sig}} 02:08, 9 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Keep''' The file isn't really necessary within this medium, however, I do believe you need to give the uploader the time to make use of it in a positive light.... let's see how she makes use of it, and '''''if''''' she does,.... then I'll vote delete from there. -{{User:Poodle_of_doom/signiture}} 02:50, 8 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Keep''' - while the basis of the KKK was extremely negative to most races in the world the user may have some usage that isn't in a racist manner, until you know how it is going to be used, it should be kept, if its used hatefully then by all means delete the image and bring the person to A/VB --{{User:The Colonel/Sig}} 02:53, 8 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Keep''' - Regardless of how it's used. --{{User:TripleU/Sig}} 04:38, 8 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Keep''' - Give them time to use it. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 05:22, 8 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Keep''' - This is meh. even if they ''do'' use it as a KKK roleplay group. --{{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig3}} 06:29, 8 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Keep''' - As DDR. Not really much of an issue.--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature‎}} 10:53, 8 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Keep''' - Sewiously Pom-Pom. {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 00:58, 9 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Keep''' - Asking for 'thoughts' on something is done on talk pages, not in a deletions case. It is not an objectionable image in any way, people may disagree with a UD group but that does not make things connected to them subject to deletion. All this image depicts is a (still active) group of American racists, that's never been cause for removal from this wiki. -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 01:32, 9 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Keep''' - This is ridiculous. They're not even "based" on the KKK, it just represents the group (not as the KKK), kinda. --{{User:Skin/sig}} 02:28, 9 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Keep''' - pretty much as Iscariot, and that you've got no right to not be offended. I'll only vote for this if it's used in a manner that might get Kevan in legal trouble (although in that case, he'll probably intervene anyway.) {{User:Linkthewindow/Sig}} 15:14, 10 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Keep''' - delete as unused later... every player wins a prize <small>-- <span style="text-shadow: #bbb 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em">[[User:Boxy|<span style="color: Red">boxy</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Boxy|<span style="color: Red">talk</span>]] • [[The Rules|teh rulz]]</sup></span> 11:43 11 April 2010 (BST)</small>
 
==Recent Actions==
===[[User:PoliceScanner]]===
''Moved from [[A/SD]].''


Userspace designed to hold code in a similar manner as DangerReport, except that it was made redundant some time ago. The [[PD Status Map]] does not rely on it.
===[[Lamportians]]===
This page was [[UDWiki:Administration/Deletions/Archive/Feb_2008#Lamportians|already]] [http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=Lamportians deleted]. The only reason I haven't done this as a crit 6 is because the content doesn't match completely with the current version being more role-play than straight up recruiting(like the previous iteration). This is a term only used by a singular very small group. --<small>[[User:Karek#K|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev#Buildings_Update_Danger_Maps|maps 2.0?!]]</font></sup></small> 05:44, 25 May 2011 (BST)
*'''Obviously Delete''' - And I really want to do this as a crit 6 but am erring on the side of caution. --<small>[[User:Karek#K|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev#Buildings_Update_Danger_Maps|maps 2.0?!]]</font></sup></small> 05:44, 25 May 2011 (BST)
*'''delete''' - had potential but it's just kinda shit. -- {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig4}} 06:02, 25 May 2011 (BST)
*'''Speedy''' - Content is similar enough, IMHO: Expanding it doesn't mean its's not crit 6. This should be a group page, it's not a "generic term".--<span>[[User:The General|The General]] <sup>[[User Talk:The General|T]] [[Special:ListUsers/sysop|<span title="System Operator">Sys</span>]] [[Project_UnWelcome|<span title="Project UnWelcome">U!</span>]] [[Project Wiki Patrol|<span title="Project Wiki Patrol">P!</span>]] <span class="stealthexternallink">[http://urbandeadwiki.smfforfree.com/index.php <span title="Urban Dead Wiki Forum">F!</span>]</span></sup></span> 09:14, 25 May 2011 (BST)
*'''Delete''' - But I don't think it's enough for a speedy. They've expanded on it quite a bit.--[[User:Yonnua Koponen|<span style="color: DarkOrange">Yonnua Koponen</span>]]<sup>[[User_talk:Yonnua Koponen| <span style="color:Gold">T</span>]][[DvB| <span style="color: Goldenrod">G</span>]]</sup><sup><span class="stealthexternallink">[http://www.urbandead.com/profile.cgi?id=840689 <span style="color: DarkGoldenrod"> P</span>] </span></sup> [[User:Yonnua Koponen/Sandbox|<span style="color: Red">^</span>]][[Discosaurs|<span style="color: Red">^</span>]][[{{TALKPAGENAME}}#Donkey|<span style="color: Red">^</span>]] 13:42, 25 May 2011 (BST)


Two formatting templates for crit 10:
'''Deleted''' - This be unanimous.--[[User:Yonnua Koponen|<span style="color: DarkOrange">Yonnua Koponen</span>]]<sup>[[User_talk:Yonnua Koponen| <span style="color:Gold">T</span>]][[DvB| <span style="color: Goldenrod">G</span>]]</sup><sup><span class="stealthexternallink">[http://www.urbandead.com/profile.cgi?id=840689 <span style="color: DarkGoldenrod"> P</span>] </span></sup> [[User:Yonnua Koponen/Sandbox|<span style="color: Red">^</span>]][[Discosaurs|<span style="color: Red">^</span>]][[{{TALKPAGENAME}}#Donkey|<span style="color: Red">^</span>]] 22:41, 8 June 2011 (BST)
*[[Template:PD Ransacked]]
*[[Template:PD Unknown]]


The userspace for crit 1/10:
===[[Template:Wikipedia]]===
*[[User:PoliceScanner]]
A template which is literally identical to using the "Wikipedia:" prefix in a link. It saves precisely '''0''' bytes while using a template inclusion and increasing server load.--<span>[[User:The General|The General]] <sup>[[User Talk:The General|T]] [[Project_UnWelcome|<span title="Project UnWelcome">U!</span>]] [[Project Wiki Patrol|<span title="Project Wiki Patrol">P!</span>]] <span class="stealthexternallink">[http://urbandeadwiki.smfforfree.com/index.php <span title="Urban Dead Wiki Forum">F!</span>]</span></sup></span> 14:01, 20 May 2011 (BST)
*[[User:PoliceScanner/Barrville]]
#'''Merge''' with [[Template:WP]] and then delete. Are all the transclusions truly due to {{tl|unsigned}}? We should be linking to internal help about signatures, not to Wikipedia. ~[[Image:Vsig.png|link=User:Vapor]] <sub>15:03, 20 May 2011 (UTC)</sub>
*[[User:PoliceScanner/Chancelwood]]
#:Which I have [http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Template:Unsigned&curid=13862&diff=1891188&oldid=1870284 just done]. ~[[Image:Vsig.png|link=User:Vapor]] <sub>15:06, 20 May 2011 (UTC)</sub>
*[[User:PoliceScanner/Chudleyton]]
#:Mostly. I've used my bot to subst the template in on all non-protected pages, given that it's completely redundant.--<span>[[User:The General|The General]] <sup>[[User Talk:The General|T]] [[Project_UnWelcome|<span title="Project UnWelcome">U!</span>]] [[Project Wiki Patrol|<span title="Project Wiki Patrol">P!</span>]] <span class="stealthexternallink">[http://urbandeadwiki.smfforfree.com/index.php <span title="Urban Dead Wiki Forum">F!</span>]</span></sup></span> 15:38, 20 May 2011 (BST)
*[[User:PoliceScanner/Crooketon]]
#'''Speedy C1''' - a template that merely uses a single wiki code command is "No content" in my books. --<small>Oh, and vote on [[UDWiki:Projects/Very_Funny...or_Not|Project Funny]], by the way.</small> --'''<span style="font-family:monospace; background-color:#222222">[[User:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime"> Spiderzed</span>]][[User talk:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime">█ </span>]]</span>''' 15:12, 20 May 2011 (BST)
*[[User:PoliceScanner/Dakerstown]]
#'''Speedy''' - as Spiderzed.--<span>[[User:The General|The General]] <sup>[[User Talk:The General|T]] [[Project_UnWelcome|<span title="Project UnWelcome">U!</span>]] [[Project Wiki Patrol|<span title="Project Wiki Patrol">P!</span>]] <span class="stealthexternallink">[http://urbandeadwiki.smfforfree.com/index.php <span title="Urban Dead Wiki Forum">F!</span>]</span></sup></span> 20:25, 20 May 2011 (BST)
*[[User:PoliceScanner/Dartside]]
#'''Keep''' - You don't get to technicality off such a popular template. --<small>[[User:Karek#K|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev#Buildings_Update_Danger_Maps|maps 2.0?!]]</font></sup></small> 21:19, 20 May 2011 (BST)
*[[User:PoliceScanner/Dulston]]
#:[[Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Wikipedia|Popular?]] ~[[Image:Vsig.png|link=User:Vapor]] <sub>21:54, 20 May 2011 (UTC)</sub>
*[[User:PoliceScanner/Dunell Hills]]
#::The bot changed all of the edits so that's not exactly an accurate revelation of how people use it. [http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&limit=500&target=Thegeneralbot This] is more realistic. People use this template because not everyone knows about the magic word, don't punish ill-informed users for being ill-informed? --<small>[[User:Karek#K|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev#Buildings_Update_Danger_Maps|maps 2.0?!]]</font></sup></small> 03:44, 21 May 2011 (BST)
*[[User:PoliceScanner/Earletown]]
#:::Why not redirect the template to an explanation of magic words? The magic word is so similar to the template that anyone who uses the template should be perfectly capbable of using the magic word.--<span>[[User:The General|The General]] <sup>[[User Talk:The General|T]] [[Project_UnWelcome|<span title="Project UnWelcome">U!</span>]] [[Project Wiki Patrol|<span title="Project Wiki Patrol">P!</span>]] <span class="stealthexternallink">[http://urbandeadwiki.smfforfree.com/index.php <span title="Urban Dead Wiki Forum">F!</span>]</span></sup></span> 09:13, 21 May 2011 (BST)
*[[User:PoliceScanner/East Boundwood]]
#:::I was under the impression that the bot only subst'd {{tl|Wikipedia}} when found in {{tl|unsigned}} template calls. I may be wrong but still, I don't think the template is as popular as you're implying. And, yes I checked thegeneralbot's contribs. I so far haven't found any edits where {{tl|Wikipedia}} was subst'd other than inside {{tl|unsigned}}. ~[[Image:Vsig.png|link=User:Vapor]] <sub>16:02, 21 May 2011 (UTC)</sub>
*[[User:PoliceScanner/Foulkes Village]]
#::::That's because the use in unsigned made up the bulk of {{tl|wikipedia}} uses. That said, nope, it didn't just remove the ones in unsigned, which explains why I can't find any of my old uses of it, despite the fact that I've used it frequently in the past. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 07:04, 22 May 2011 (BST)
*[[User:PoliceScanner/Gatcombeton]]
#I support a '''merge''' with &#123;&#123;[[Template:WP|WP]]&#125;&#125;, but suggest retaining as a [[wikipedia:WP:SRD|soft redirect]], deleting only when we can get [[WP:]] implemented as an [[wikipedia:H:IW|interwiki]] shortlink. {{User:Revenant/Sig}} 05:41, 21 May 2011 (BST)
*[[User:PoliceScanner/Grigg Heights]]
#'''Delete''' -- {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig4}} 05:43, 21 May 2011 (BST)
*[[User:PoliceScanner/Jensentown]]
#'''Keep''' - It's not actually the same as just the plain link, since the plain link requires additional code to look the same. Quick example: <code><nowiki>{{wikipedia|example}}</nowiki></code> yields {{WP|example}} while <code><nowiki>[[wikipedia:example]]</nowiki></code> yields [[wikipedia:example]]. Note the different outputs. I prefer the template since it saves some typing, and the code is cleaner. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 09:18, 21 May 2011 (BST)
*[[User:PoliceScanner/Judgewood]]
#:You can use the [[wikipedia:Help:pipe trick|pipe trick]] to get the same appearance; although there is slightly more code, there is far less of a drain on server resources. {{User:Revenant/Sig}} 13:12, 21 May 2011 (BST)
*[[User:PoliceScanner/Lamport Hills]]
#::Pipes would work, sure, but that's why I mentioned less and cleaner code. Also, it doesn't produce "far less of a drain on server resources." When it comes to server load, the danger of templates is that if they are changed, every page they are included on needs to be re-cached. That's not an issue here since unsigned doesn't change. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 07:04, 22 May 2011 (BST)
*[[User:PoliceScanner/Molebank]]
#:::[{{fullurl:Template:Unsigned}}?action=history It's been changed twice recently]. {{User:Revenant/Sig}} 07:38, 22 May 2011 (BST)
*[[User:PoliceScanner/Mornington]]
#::::"...frequently". Sorry, forgot to put that at the end of my last comment. ;) Anyway, two edits in three years (both of which had to be requested via A/PT) is nothing to be concerned with. To put things in perspective, in the same time period, your sig has changed 15x more frequently and is on more than 45x as many pages, yet none of us seem to object to it. :P {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 10:38, 22 May 2011 (BST)
*[[User:PoliceScanner/New Arkham]]
#:::::Actually, ''I'' object. {{tongue}} I think we should get rid of templated sigs for precisely those reasons (added DB calls on every page load, plus cache invalidation of every page on which they are transcluded when they change), but while they are permitted by {{WIKILAW}}, I'm going to keep availing myself of the convenience. {{User:Revenant/Sig}} 22:40, 22 May 2011 (BST)
*[[User:PoliceScanner/Nixbank]]
#::::::Basically, yeah. This is why there was the request to delete Nosubst. This template is far less harmful though and more intuitive to the partially wiki-literate. It's a tool and you shouldn't take away tools that don't actually harm anything just for the sake of simplicity. --<small>[[User:Karek#K|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev#Buildings_Update_Danger_Maps|maps 2.0?!]]</font></sup></small> 03:02, 23 May 2011 (BST)
*[[User:PoliceScanner/Owsleybank]]
#:::::::Not sure how this template is more intuitive than the normal link; if they can find this template, they can find out how to use the link (which should be described in the help pages, anyway).--<span>[[User:The General|The General]] <sup>[[User Talk:The General|T]] [[Special:ListUsers/sysop|<span title="System Operator">Sys</span>]] [[Project_UnWelcome|<span title="Project UnWelcome">U!</span>]] [[Project Wiki Patrol|<span title="Project Wiki Patrol">P!</span>]] <span class="stealthexternallink">[http://urbandeadwiki.smfforfree.com/index.php <span title="Urban Dead Wiki Forum">F!</span>]</span></sup></span> 17:17, 24 May 2011 (BST)
*[[User:PoliceScanner/Peddlesden Village]]
#::::::::Wikipedia:wikipedia: for one. The fact that templates are easier to understand to a layman than magic words for two. We assume that most users can pick up and learn templates fairly quickly and magic words/parsers rarely. I'm actually not a fan of the template but I don't see a reason to remove the option just so we don't have to change them manually. --<small>[[User:Karek#K|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev#Buildings_Update_Danger_Maps|maps 2.0?!]]</font></sup></small> 03:41, 25 May 2011 (BST)
*[[User:PoliceScanner/Quarlesbank]]
#::::::Bah. If you ''really'' objected, your actions would speak for you and you wouldn't avail yourself of it at all. :P {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 03:57, 23 May 2011 (BST)
*[[User:PoliceScanner/Reganbank]]
#:::::::So the Nosubst deletion nomination counts for naught? {{tongue}}<br/> I have a policy discussion in the works, but I don't know how long it will take me to get to. {{User:Revenant/Sig}} 04:33, 23 May 2011 (BST)
*[[User:PoliceScanner/Rhodenbank]]
#::::::::So another policy will get passed by a group of individuals that give shit all about the wiki? Lovely. ~[[Image:Vsig.png|link=User:Vapor]] <sub>17:08, 24 May 2011 (UTC)</sub>
*[[User:PoliceScanner/Roywood]]
#:::::::::Whether it passes or not doesn't overly concern me. Which reminds me… {{User:Revenant/Sig}} 23:59, 24 May 2011 (BST)
*[[User:PoliceScanner/West Becktown]]
#'''Keep''' - u dont delete my contributions to the wiki without me having a say about it --[[User:Hagnat|People's Commissar Hagnat]] <sup>[[User_talk:Hagnat|[talk]]] [[wcdz|[wcdz]]]</sup> 20:37, 22 May 2011 (BST)
*[[User:PoliceScanner/West Boundwood]]
#'''Keep''' - I prefer the template--{{User:AnimeSucks/Sig}} 20:40, 22 May 2011 (BST)
*[[User:PoliceScanner/Wykewood]]


{{User:The_Rooster/Sig}} 19:42, 5 April 2010 (BST)
5 delete votes and 4 keeps. Merged (via move) with {{tl|WP}}. Kept {{tl|Wikipedia}} as a soft redirect. Fixed remaining links. ~[[Image:Vsig.png|link=User:Vapor]] <sub>05:40, 6 June 2011 (UTC)</sub>
:No reason to have a soft redirect when a standard redirect preserves functionality and doesn't make it harder to reach the new template page(the entire purpose of soft redirects)--<small>[[User:Karek#K|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev#Buildings_Update_Danger_Maps|maps 2.0?!]]</font></sup></small> 07:05, 6 June 2011 (BST)


#'''Keep''' - Are you this user? Until then fuck off. You don't get to arbitrarily delete a user's space just because you don't think it's worthwhile. For fuck's sake go do something useful instead of trying to wipe out the work of users that do things differently to you. -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 20:12, 5 April 2010 (BST)
... this must be one of the most dumb moves since gen tried to pass an anti-goon policy with the goons active in the wiki. Creating a redirect in [[template:wikipedia]] to ]]template:wp]] just adds more server load to a template whose main reason for deletion was server load. Its just too dumb for me to understand it. The merge votes should've count as a kept in this case, ffs --<small>[[User:Hagnat|hagnat]]</small> 12:31, 6 June 2011 (BST)
#:<small>Edit conflict before move from A/SD</small> This is hardly personal spite. The 'user' is not a user, and clearly just a another placeholder persona from years ago before the wiki knew better. The prefix on the pages means little. Still if these 1-3 year old unused and unfinished pages are still somehow useful, then I'd be happy to see A/D run. {{User:The_Rooster/Sig}} 20:31, 5 April 2010 (BST)
:You're right, since server load is the issue, we pretty much should have had this deleted lul -- {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig4}} 12:41, 6 June 2011 (BST)
#::The prefix on the page means fucking everything. This work belongs to a user and you have absolutely no proof that he/she isn't referencing this coding even years later from this site. Did you even ask the user on their page and await a response? You fucking didn't, did you? There's so much to be done on this wiki and you choose to spend your time eliminating user pages that in no way improves this wiki at all. I take it you've never heard of disk space = cheep? Or is there some mass crisis about the wiki running out of space that I've missed while I've been active and doing shit around here. -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 20:39, 5 April 2010 (BST)
::Yeah, pretty much. I kept as a soft redirect per Rev's suggestion but Karek reverted back to a typical redirect. If people want to keep it as a redirect or just keep the template rather than delete it then that's fine with me. That was never brought up during voting but whatever. ~[[Image:Vsig.png|link=User:Vapor]] <sub>15:31, 6 June 2011 (UTC)</sub>
#:::If I have to hear somebody trot out some line about disk space I might cry. I don't want it deleted to save space, because it doesn't. {{User:The_Rooster/Sig}} 21:03, 5 April 2010 (BST)
:::It's a soft redirect now actually. It was just waiting on verification that all usage was gone. Also, not really server intensive in any way. Even the claims of the editing of it were edits done by the people claiming they were a problem. Anyways, now it's set to sit for a month or three until we can be reasonably sure people have gotten the message.--<small>[[User:Karek#K|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev#Buildings_Update_Danger_Maps|maps 2.0?!]]</font></sup></small> 09:19, 7 June 2011 (BST)
#'''Eat it.''' With mustard. {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 20:32, 5 April 2010 (BST)
::::I think we're both misinterpreting what a soft redirect is. They are just a short messages directing someone to an ''external'' site. I don't even think a soft (or even a "hard") redirect is warranted TBQH. It should just be deleted since that is how the voting concluded. If there is sufficient reason to keep it, put in a request at [[A/U]]. Otherwise, it comes off a lot like just a disagreement with the voting results and maneuvering things to turn this into a keep. ~[[Image:Vsig.png|link=User:Vapor]] <sub>05:52, 8 June 2011 (UTC)</sub>
#'''Speedy Delete''' - As Rooster. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 20:38, 5 April 2010 (BST)
:::::I just set it up in a way to make it clear that [[Template:WP|WP]] was the current version and this page is no longer in use as a template. Terminology be damned I guess. --<small>[[User:Karek#K|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev#Buildings_Update_Danger_Maps|maps 2.0?!]]</font></sup></small> 08:43, 8 June 2011 (BST)
#'''Delete''' --{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature‎}} 21:21, 5 April 2010 (BST)
::::::That's all well and good, but it was ''voted'' for deletion??? -- {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig4}} 04:34, 9 June 2011 (BST)
#'''Delete''' Send it back to the bowls of hell! -{{User:Poodle_of_doom/signiture}} 21:45, 5 April 2010 (BST)
:::::::Yeah no, when 2 of the 5 deletes are merges and the other 4 votes are keeps that reasoning doesn't really fly. Especially when you actually read Revenants vote. That being said it's still ''going to be deleted'', it's just going to be left as a soft redirect for a bit first because the template still exists. --<small>[[User:Karek#K|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev#Buildings_Update_Danger_Maps|maps 2.0?!]]</font></sup></small> 09:04, 9 June 2011 (BST)
#'''Delete''' - There's no page for Wyke Hills. --{{User:TripleU/Sig}} 23:27, 5 April 2010 (BST)
::::::::My point is that it's funny when so many people vote but in the end it becomes a situational decision by one person pushing for what they want. I voted delete because I use the <nowiki>[[wikipedia]]</nowiki> code personally, but as a whole I'm indifferent. It's worth noting though that Merge got the ''least'' votes out of all the options, even if you aren't inclined to count them as implicit deletes (which you are) -- {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig4}} 09:25, 9 June 2011 (BST)
#'''Delete''' - It's about time you got round to this you lasy bastard ;) --{{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig3}} 05:25, 6 April 2010 (BST)
:::::::::Meh, the only reason it qualifies is that last Merge vote that puts it over and since the vote in question specifically qualifies itself as situational upon the soft redirect it's really just common sense. --<small>[[User:Karek#K|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev#Buildings_Update_Danger_Maps|maps 2.0?!]]</font></sup></small> 09:34, 9 June 2011 (BST)
#'''Delete''' - I'd say the lines "How to Update. guide coming soon" dated 2007 pretty much demonstrate the fact that this never became functional. Delete delete.--{{User:Giles Sednik/sig}} 13:32, 7 April 2010 (BST)
::::::::::I wasn't quite aware that we were intending on deleting it eventually and this was transitional? Is that actually the case? Cause if it is, it makes more sense and has made me look like a dil to boot. -- {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig4}} 11:21, 9 June 2011 (BST)
#'''Delete''' - As Giles Sednik. --{{User:Skin/sig}} 02:33, 9 April 2010 (BST)
:::::::::::We are and it is.--<small>[[User:Karek#K|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev#Buildings_Update_Danger_Maps|maps 2.0?!]]</font></sup></small> 11:27, 9 June 2011 (BST)
#'''Delete'''. [[User:G F J|G F J]] 17:58, 17 April 2010 (BST)
::::::::::::I remember reading that but somewhere along the line I forgot. I'm a bit of a mess -- {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig4}} 03:51, 11 June 2011 (BST)
Deleted. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 18:50, 19 April 2010 (BST)
:::::::::::::S'ok, apparently you're not [[User:Aichon|the only one]] who doesn't have time to read s recent comments make oh so clear. --<small>[[User:Karek#K|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev#Buildings_Update_Danger_Maps|maps 2.0?!]]</font></sup></small> 17:29, 11 June 2011 (BST)
What are you guys doing? Let me run through the process for handling a Delete and Merge result, since it's very simple, but has apparently been forgotten:
#Merge the two pages.
#Fix all links to point to the new page, except where they were specifically being used to refer to the old one as opposed to the new one (e.g. discussions like here)
#Fix all transclusions to point to the new page that it's being merged into
#Delete the page
That's all you guys had to do, but for some reason, you got stuck between #2 and #3. Why did no one check for and fix transclusions before replacing the template with text telling people not to use it? And why was that text put in at all, when your job was to follow the vote's results and ''delete'' the page? We don't need text telling people not to use a page that's been deleted, since people don't use pages that ''aren't there''. That's why you delete them. Why has this not been done? {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 21:32, 10 June 2011 (BST)
:I did fix all incoming links and transclusions (although I think I must have missed the one transclusion in this vote). As for deleting it, that's what is currently under discussion. Pages ''have'' been kept as a redirect during a deletion before. I don't know that a redirect of this nature has been used before but I'm open to using them. I just want it made clear what is happening, since at first it seemed to me like maneuvering to turn a delete decision into a keep decision. ~[[Image:Vsig.png|link=User:Vapor]] <sub>21:45, 10 June 2011 (UTC)</sub>
:1. Not a standard case. 2. If you can't be asked to read any of the intervening discussion that has happened don't bother to comment. You're just wasting everyone's time at this point. Third, since I know you won't bother to read through any of it because of your "right-ness"(a common problem with users of this wiki), [[Template:Wikipedia]] is a long existing template that was implemented 5 years ago. Above and beyond that it's a popular template on [http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Template:Wikipedia wikipedia] [http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Template:Wikipedia projects]. If you don't want to run the risk of users recreating it you do it [[Templte:Wikipedia|''this'']] way, which is also the only way it actually passes as a delete vote, having changed it essentially just saved the step of creating the soft redirect or redirect(since one is justified, the template [[Template:WP|still exists]]). Also, it's still getting deleted, now shoo. --<small>[[User:Karek#K|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev#Buildings_Update_Danger_Maps|maps 2.0?!]]</font></sup></small> 17:29, 11 June 2011 (BST)
::{{*}}"Can't be arsed".--[[User:Yonnua Koponen|<span style="color: DarkOrange">Yonnua Koponen</span>]]<sup>[[User_talk:Yonnua Koponen| <span style="color:Gold">T</span>]][[DvB| <span style="color: Goldenrod">G</span>]]</sup><sup><span class="plainlinks">[http://www.urbandead.com/profile.cgi?id=840689 <span style="color: DarkGoldenrod"> P</span>] </span></sup> [[User:Yonnua Koponen/Sandbox|<span style="color: Red">^</span>]][[Discosaurs|<span style="color: Red">^</span>]][[{{TALKPAGENAME}}#Donkey|<span style="color: Red">^</span>]] 18:32, 11 June 2011 (BST)
::I'll excuse your personal (and hurtful, coming from you) attacks on me as a courtesy. First off, I'm aware of its history and would prefer it stay around (see my vote above). Second, as I'm sure you agree, failing to fix any transclusions was an oversight in need of correction, and leaving them while altering the template is never part of proper procedure, so a mistake was definitely made here. Third, I think that you're not giving Rev enough credit, since he's a smart guy, is well-versed in the rules, and says what he means. If he had wanted it to be taken the way you say, he could have said Keep with his comment, or else he could have said Merge ''on the condition that'' it be done as he described. Instead, he said Merge, which he knows acts as a Delete, and he phrased it as a suggestion, instead of as a comment on which his vote was contingent. Fourth, see Crit 6. That's how you stop people from recreating the page on ''this'' wiki. Anyway, I'm not going to stick around to argue it further, so you'll get what you wanted from me. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 18:57, 11 June 2011 (BST)
:::Not personal, just frustrated. Sometimes even I tire of repeating myself and this would mke probably the fourth time this has been addressed. It's an unusual case and a close vote, it seems reasonable to try and do it in a way that has the least potential to cause issues(in this case phasing it out in steps). As for Crit 6, that's generally connected with vandalism cases historically. A situation that relies on it is less than ideal. --<small>[[User:Karek#K|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev#Buildings_Update_Danger_Maps|maps 2.0?!]]</font></sup></small> 21:44, 11 June 2011 (BST)


===[[Department of Emergency Management (new)]]===
=== Dupilcated image ===
This page had apparently been some kind of joke in 2008, it is superfluous and misleading. A "NDEM" does not exist and never existed, the page is not linked to on any other articles, and it does not contain valuable content (it is merely an outdated copy of [[Department of Emergency Management]] where a few words and numbers had been replaced - nothing which would make preserving it worthwhile). Thanks, [[User:G F J|G F J]] 11:32, 18 April 2010 (BST)
[http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/File:50x16t.PNG] Un-used duplicate of [http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/File:50x16.PNG], [http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/File:50x16t.PNG 1] could be deletead?--{{User:Michaleson/sig}} 16:03, 17 May 2011 (BST)
#'''Scheduled''' - but I'll check with Schwan before deleting. ~[[Image:Vsig.png|link=User:Vapor]] <sub>16:10, 17 May 2011 (UTC)</sub>
#'''Speedy''' - Two days short of a scheduled. -- {{User:Krazy_Monkey/sig}} 18:50, 17 May 2011 (BST)


# '''Merge''' - Also, this IS linked to on other pages.--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature‎}} 11:43, 18 April 2010 (BST)
A. Schwan confirmed [[User_talk:A.schwan#Orphaned_Images|on his talk page]] that the image was unneeded, so I deleted it as crit 7 by proxy. ~[[Image:Vsig.png|link=User:Vapor]] <sub>21:37, 17 May 2011 (UTC)</sub>
#:Merge with what, if I may ask? Definitely not with [[Department of Emergency Management]], in case that's what you were thinking about. This two year old "joke" that consisted of copying the DEM wiki page and replacing a few words has absolutely no place on any official DEM pages. Regarding links, please note that I wrote "articles" - the single link that exists is on the talk page of a group that appears to be inactive. With best regards, [[User:G F J|G F J]] 12:32, 18 April 2010 (BST)
#::The userspace of the person who made it.--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature‎}} 18:32, 18 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Keep''' - I consider this nomination an act of bad faith vandalism by a member of a partisan group. What next? The DHPD requesting The Dead be deleted? Summon Sonny to decide whether this page should be kept, any attempt by the DEM to delete it is immediately suspect based on the past actions of the group. -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 12:23, 18 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Delete''' - It is a forgotten joke that isn't terribly funny from what I can tell.  However, please do not mislead people with clever wording such as "not linked to any other ''articles''...". [[Special:Whatlinkshere/Department_of_Emergency_Management_(new)|It does link somewhere]].  Just be honest and save ocd users like myself the hassle of having to counterfeit your story.  Anyways, if this delete vote passes, the link on the talk page should be changed to link to this deletion request.--{{User:Giles Sednik/sig}} 13:56, 18 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Delete''' Same as giles. -{{User:Poodle_of_doom/signiture}} 15:07, 18 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Delete''' Also, he's right, it does not link to any articles. Look up the word "article", I can guarantee you it isn't a talk page. --[[Image:Umbrella-White.png|14px]][[User:MisterGame|<span style= "color: maroon; background-color: white">'''''Thadeous Oakley''''']][[Image:Umbrella-White.png|14px]]</span> 15:21, 18 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Keep''' - I can see no valid reason for deletion under any previous criterion or scheduling. {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 19:32, 18 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Keep''' - As leader of the Malton Sanitation Department I can assure you this organization is still very active. Labine and I scheme and plot every day. --[[User:Saromu|Sonny Corleone]] <sup>[[DORIS]] [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pXfHLUlZf4 I jizzed in my pants]  [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91a8pHj7V9k pr0n]</sup> 05:45, 19 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Delete''' Or remove all links to The DEM, this is nothing to do with The DEM and having links to our pages is misleading.--[[User:DI Marc Sweeny|DI Sweeny]] 10:51, 19 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Delete''' the use of the DEM table and the use of a similar page name, with the added (new) is somewhat misleading,and some wording still says DEM instead of NDEM, which could confuse someone not in on the parody. --[[User:Verratio|verratio]] 14:27, 19 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Keep''' but add a simple note.  ''this group is a parody of the [[DEM]] --{{User:Rosslessness/Sig}} 16:04, 19 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Keep''' but do what Ross said. Not that it's going to happen considering the DEM meatpuppeting'll start soon. ;p -- {{User:Krazy_Monkey/sig}} 16:40, 19 April 2010 (BST)
I don't like doing this, and another sysop can put it back if they disagree, but I'm pre-emptively '''Keep'''ing it due to lack of sufficient reason for deletion, given that the group is active. We do not delete pages of existing groups without good reason, and just because they're [[Phoolosphy_Kneets|parodies]] [[Decepticons|of]] [[Philosophe Knights|existing]] [[Autobots|groups]] in ways that may be potentially misleading is not a good enough reason (I'd link the Department of Evangelical Morons too, but the group requested that their page be deleted awhile back). Aside from the fact that the page has a link to it and the content that's different from the current DEM page is not insubstantial (just copy paste the code from NDEM to DEM and then tell it to show you the changes), the group leader (who was never contacted) claims they do indeed exist and are still active. That's all we need to know, since we don't go around deleting existing groups. Just add a NPOV section to the page (anyone can add one). {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 18:38, 19 April 2010 (BST)
:NPOV Added. --{{User:Rosslessness/Sig}} 18:56, 19 April 2010 (BST)
::I have slightly adjusted your notice, changing the link from <nowiki>[[DEM]]</nowiki> to <nowiki>[[Department of Emergency Management|DEM]]</nowiki> as previously it only referred to a disambiguation, and I added the short notice "which it is not affiliated with." to ensure that the use of the [[:Template:DEMnavbar|DEM navigation template]] which implies a connection to the DEM, parody or not, is properly explained. Is this acceptable? Furthermore, I would like to request that the DEM category is removed from the page. Just as one should not edit the page of a group one doesn't belong to, I would think that one should neither change the category of a group one does not belong to, for instance by wrongfully adding articles. Can this be done, or would removing the category be considered an act of vandalism?
::For clarification, I have nothing against parodies - the [[Department of Emotional Man-love]] has been there for a while, I am not aware of a single DEM member attempting to do something against it - I am more concerned with wrongful impersonation.
::By the way, could somebody have the kindness of pointing me to a wiki policy showing that deletion candidates may be decided about by a SysOp at any time, regardless of the "running time" and votes? I have seen that happen before and have no problems with it, do not misunderstand, but I'm curious as to where it is written down.
::Regards, [[User:G F J|G F J]] 19:31, 19 April 2010 (BST)
:::[[UDWiki:Administration/Guidelines#General_Conduct]] Your NPOV note is an improvement. --{{User:Rosslessness/Sig}} 19:37, 19 April 2010 (BST)
::::Regarding the nav template, I might be able to help you out with the template, making it impossible for other groups to steal it without outright copying the code for it (i.e. it'd show the navigation table on your page, and something else, such as "I'm stealing this template", for everyone else that uses it). Contact me on my talk page if you're interested. Not sure if it'd work for sure, but it might be worth considering. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 21:05, 19 April 2010 (BST)
:::::Actually, if it's not to much to ask,.... I'd like to continue with the vote. I know it's not something we do to groups,.... and I hate to say it, but the votes to damn close to call a keep. 5 delete votes, 5 keep votes, 1 merge vote. Though it's whatever you guys thinks is best. I'll agree with whatever everyone else wants.... -{{User:Poodle_of_doom/signiture}} 21:26, 19 April 2010 (BST)
::::::Why would you want to continue it? How close the vote was is inconsequential, since I didn't preempt it on the basis of the Keep votes outnumbering the Delete votes. The vote should not be taking place at all since the group is active, hence why it was preempted. I'd do the same thing if someone put up EVIL's page for deletion. ;) {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 00:16, 20 April 2010 (BST)
:::::Hmm, I just looked at the What Links Here for the navbar, and if we don't want to break all of those pages, the code would be rather large for making my idea work. Possibly not worth it, but I'm still open to discussing it. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 00:22, 20 April 2010 (BST)


===[[ZombieJesus treatment]]===
===[[Template:Nosubst]]===
As part of the battle against stupid [[Glossary]] articles, I present [[ZombieJesus treatment]]. I think it's stupid. The article is stupid. It's content is stupid and the whole idea, I barely understand. Then again, it could just be me being extra tired. Either way, I'm giving this a ago. --{{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig3}} 14:23, 2 April 2010 (BST)
Horrible hack that exists only to work around sensible software limitations. We should take the opportunity given by the new sig size limits to recognise this, delete this abomination, and have all users made to use proper signatures. {{User:Revenant/Sig}} 11:26, 2 May 2011 (BST)
:Just to be clear... this isn't going to break existing sig inclusions, is it. Just people who (attempt to) use it from now on.<br />I have long hated templated sigs, but then I also hate having to scroll through huge swathes of sig code if it's subst'ed into discussions <small>-- [[User:Boxy|boxy]] 11:37, 2 May 2011 (BST)</small>
::Correct.<br/> And yeah, me too, but it's a bit “damned if you do, damned if you don't”, and templated sigs cause more problems than they solve, which is why they're prohibited by default by the MediaWiki software unless you deliberately circumvent that with a measure such as this template.{{User:Revenant/Sig}} 11:53, 2 May 2011 (BST)
:::Or change a one-line setting in the software....--{{User:The General/sig}} 12:09, 2 May 2011 (BST)
::::Sadly I feel its too late. If it was setup from the beginning, I'd have no problem, but deleting it now is just going to break loads of links. Rev should set up UDWiki 2.0 --[[User:Rosslessness|Rosslessness]] 12:16, 2 May 2011 (BST)
:::::It '''was''' set up in the beginning, by Kevan, and then hacked around by users. And it shouldn't change any links that use it properly: the rest can be easily fixed. What it ''will'' do is necessitate users to change their sigs. {{User:Revenant/Sig}} 12:27, 2 May 2011 (BST)
::::::'''No it wasn't'''. The mediawiki software didn't originally force substitution in signatures: It was added in an update and there wasn't originally a setting to turn it off, so we developed a workaround.--{{User:The General/sig}} 12:33, 2 May 2011 (BST)
::::::Whats the fix? --[[User:Rosslessness|Rosslessness]] 12:37, 2 May 2011 (BST)
:::::::Mostly deleting it out of [[User:MrAushvitz|MrAushvitz]]'s [[Template talk:Nosubst|fucking sig]]. {{grr}} {{User:Revenant/Sig}} 12:44, 2 May 2011 (BST)
::::::::Ah, thats why its used on so many of the old suggestion pages. Get on that, use your crazy robot. --[[User:Rosslessness|Rosslessness]] 12:49, 2 May 2011 (BST)
#'''Kill''' with fire. {{User:Revenant/Sig}} 11:26, 2 May 2011 (BST)
#'''Keep''' - Templated sigs are allowed by wiki policy; If you don't like it then change the policy rather than  trying to delete the template that allows them.--{{User:The General/sig}} 11:44, 2 May 2011 (BST)
#:Mind to show me where a policy directly grants the use of templated sigs as a right? Can't find it in [[UDWiki:Administration/Policy Discussion/Signature Policy|the sig policy]], nor do I see any other applicable policy. --'''<span style="font-family:monospace; background-color:#222222">[[User:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime"> Spiderzed</span>]][[User talk:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime">█ </span>]]</span>''' 11:57, 2 May 2011 (BST)
#::The section that says: What would be allowed - Anything that isn't? --[[User:Yonnua Koponen|<span style="color: DarkOrange">Yonnua Koponen</span>]]<sup>[[User_talk:Yonnua Koponen| <span style="color:Gold">T</span>]][[DvB| <span style="color: Goldenrod">G</span>]]</sup><sup><span class="stealthexternallink">[http://www.urbandead.com/profile.cgi?id=840689 <span style="color: DarkGoldenrod"> P</span>] </span></sup> [[User:Yonnua Koponen/Sandbox|<span style="color: Red">^</span>]][[Discosaurs|<span style="color: Red">^</span>]][[{{TALKPAGENAME}}#Donkey|<span style="color: Red">^</span>]] 12:01, 2 May 2011 (BST)
#'''Kill''' this is terrible, I assume, so down with it or something. --'''<span style="font-size:95%">[[User:Katthew|<span style="color: #229922">カシュー</span>]]</span>''', <span style="font-size:80%">[[User:Katthew/Zombie Improvements|<span style="color: #229922">ザ ゾンビ クィーン</span>]]</span> <span style="font-size:50%; color: #229922">'''('''[[The Dead 2.0|<span style="color: #229922">ビープ ビープ</span>]]''')'''</span> [[Image:Katthewsigtag.gif]] <span style="font-size:115%; color: #229922">'''@'''</span> 12:17, 2 May 2011 (BST)
#'''Keep''' - This template is linked to [[Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Nosubst|lots of stuff]].  Who is going to fix all of the broken links if this gets deleted?--{{User:Giles Sednik/sig}} 12:24, 2 May 2011 (BST)
#:'''Me''', if nobody else does, and '''before''' it gets deleted. {{User:Revenant/Sig}} 12:34, 2 May 2011 (BST)
#'''keep''' as above--&nbsp;[[Image:Boobs.sh.siggie.gif|link=User:Sexualharrison|18px]] &nbsp; <small> [[User talk:Sexualharrison|<span style="color:Red">bitch</span>]]&nbsp;&nbsp;</small><small>12:31, 2 May 2011 (utc)</small>
#'''Keep''' - just because I think General has a better option of dealing with this- it would also allow more comfortable transition period for those of us who do used the damned templated sigs. -- {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig4}} 12:47, 2 May 2011 (BST)
#'''Keep''' --[[User:Yonnua Koponen|<span style="color: DarkOrange">Yonnua Koponen</span>]]<sup>[[User_talk:Yonnua Koponen| <span style="color:Gold">T</span>]][[DvB| <span style="color: Goldenrod">G</span>]]</sup><sup><span class="stealthexternallink">[http://www.urbandead.com/profile.cgi?id=840689 <span style="color: DarkGoldenrod"> P</span>] </span></sup> [[User:Yonnua Koponen/Sandbox|<span style="color: Red">^</span>]][[Discosaurs|<span style="color: Red">^</span>]][[{{TALKPAGENAME}}#Donkey|<span style="color: Red">^</span>]] 12:59, 2 May 2011 (BST)
#'''Keep''' -- [[Image:Cat Pic.png|14px]] [[User:MisterGame|<span style= "color: maroon; background-color: white">'''Thadeous Oakley''']]</span> [[User_Talk:MisterGame|<span style= "color: black; background-color: white">'''''Talk''''']]</span>  13:08, 2 May 2011 (BST)
#'''Kill''' -- Honestly ok with this. Can we get rid of the signature policy next? Maybe replace it with something that simply says your sig can't impersonate other users, break pages, and needs to show who you are and leave it at that? --<small>[[User:Karek#K|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev#Buildings_Update_Danger_Maps|maps 2.0?!]]</font></sup></small> 13:41, 2 May 2011 (BST)
#'''Kill''' Having looked at it,  seems fair, as long as rev wipes out the linked list. --[[User:Rosslessness|Rosslessness]] 13:52, 2 May 2011 (BST)
#'''Keep''' --{{User:Imthatguy/sig}} ''' 14:31, 2 May  2011 '''
#'''Keep''' It works fine. Has for years. Old folks coming back to the wiki will have to deal with some shit the first time they try to sign. Would be pretty off-putting I think. ~[[Image:Vsig.png|link=User:Vapor]] [[File:Etat.gif|link=http://on.cnn.com/lIVw45|Amurica. Fuck. Yeah]] <sub>22:19, 2 May 2011 (UTC)</sub>
#'''Delete''' <small>-- [[User:Boxy|boxy]] 07:42, 3 May 2011 (BST)</small>
#'''Delete''' -obsolete --[[User:Karloth_vois|Karloth Vois]] <sup>[[¯\(°_o)/¯]]</sup> 15:41, 3 May 2011 (BST)
#'''Keep''' - The only way I'll be okay with a delete if there is a code length limit on signatures. So steal from WP, basically. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 23:56, 10 May 2011 (BST)
#:With the software update, signatures are now limited by the software to 255 characters. {{User:Revenant/Sig}} 03:41, 11 May 2011 (BST)
#::The Goon's signature (and probably others) still manage to be ridiculously big. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 04:33, 11 May 2011 (BST)
#:::They're subst'd in. If they were using {{tl|nosubst}} and signing using e.g. {{tl|Goonsig|<nowiki>SUBST:</nowiki>Nosubst{{!}}Goonsig{{!}}Revenant}}, they'd be breaking the template transclusion limit on every page they posted on in short order. {{User:Revenant/Sig}} 04:40, 11 May 2011 (BST)
#::::That's not what I'm talking about; I'm talking about how long the code for their signatures are. It's very long. If templated signatures want to be deleted, it's better suited for policy discussion, provided a reasonable alternative is included (so no long signature codes, it makes me angry). --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 04:44, 11 May 2011 (BST)
#:::::I'm not sure you're understanding me, so I'll give you a demonstration… the invocation {{tl|Goonsig|Goonsig{{!}}Revenant}} gives {{Goonsig|Revenant}}, which is the same as what specifying {{tl|Goonsig|<nowiki>SUBST:</nowiki>Nosubst{{!}}Goonsig{{!}}Revenant}} '''as your signature''' results in. In contrast, using {{tl|Goonsig|<nowiki>SUBST:</nowiki>Goonsig{{!}}Revenant}} '''as your signature''' results in… <span style="font-size:xx-small; letter-spacing: -2px; text-shadow: #cc4444 1px 1px 10px">[[File:555Manbabies.gif|You rated this wiki '1'! Great job, go hog wild!|link=User:Revenant]][[User:ShaqFu|<span style="color:#FF0018">&#124;</span>]][[User:Katthew|<span style="color:#33DD33">&#124;</span>]][[User:Ryu|<span style="color:#FF0048">&#124;</span>]][[User:SprCobra|<span style="color:#FF0060">&#124;</span>]][[User:Laughing Man|<span style="color:#FF0078">&#124;</span>]][[User:Revenant|<span style="color:#FF0090">&#124;</span>]][[User:underisk|<span style="color:#FF00A8">&#124;</span>]][[User:I WARNED YOU ABOUT TEMPLATES BRO|<span style="color:#FF00C0">&#124;</span>]][[User:DeRathi|<span style="color:#FF00D8">&#124;</span>]][[User:DerpDerp|<span style="color:#FF00F0">&#124;</span>]][[User:Abd al-Rahim ibn al-Husain al-'Iraqi|<span style="color:#FF00ff">&#124;</span>]][[User:Sykic|<span style="color:#E700ff">&#124;</span>]][[User:Vaporware|<span style="color:#CF00ff">&#124;</span>]][[User:Nubis |<span style="color:#9F00ff">&#124;</span>]][[User:Riseabove|<span style="color:#8700ff">&#124;</span>]][[User:Teehee McGee |<span style="color:#6F00ff">&#124;</span>]][[User:Anothergenericzombie|<span style="color:#5700ff">&#124;</span>]][[User:Ryu|<span style="color:#0048ff">&#124;</span>]][[User:Mortimer Wiley|<span style="color:#0044DD">&#124;</span>]][[User:Deadone|<span style="color:#3F00ff">&#124;</span>]][[User:woland37|<span style="color:#2700ff">&#124;</span>]][[User:Colbear|<span style="color:#0000dd">&#124;</span>]][[User:Oh no!|<span style="color:#27ff00">&#124;</span>]][[User:Bender Bending Rodriguez|<span style="color:#0F00ff">&#124;</span>]]</span>
#::::::I think what AHLG is saying is that without {{tl|nosubst}}, ''all'' code heavy signatures will add heavy amounts of code to pages when signing. The inclusion sizes don't matter to too many people as long as they don't have to wade through umpteen lines of code when they want to contribute to dicussion. My biggest issue with this deletion request is that it is being passed off as sensible software limitations. I don't believe sensible is the right word. ''Minimal'' or ''default'' software limits is more descriptive. Its like saying that the [[:category:If Templates|"if" templates]] are a crappy hack job because the software has sensible limits on parser functions. The wiki software sucks. It's vanilla. So what if there exists a hack to make it suck less? It's rare that anything is broken because of templated sigs. ~[[Image:Vsig.png|link=User:Vapor]] <sub>05:26, 11 May 2011 (UTC)</sub>
#:::::::It's really not as rare as it would be without Nosubst. Not to mention that with Nosubst gone it would mean that actually useful templates won't be excluded from pages like A/VB and A/M. It actually opens up possibilities for us that we currently have to code around.--<small>[[User:Karek#K|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev#Buildings_Update_Danger_Maps|maps 2.0?!]]</font></sup></small> 05:50, 11 May 2011 (BST)
#::::::::When I say rare I mean extremely rare. The only instance of page breakage in recent history was A/VB and it was due mostly to the whole of A/VB/Bots being transcluded. And then it only became a problem when we came under heavy bot attacks. That problem was easily solved by no longer transcluding A/VB/Bots, which was largely unecessary to begin with. It could also be argued that it was the size of the regular non-sig templates causing it to break. If any other possibilities will arise by deleting {{tl|nosubst}}, I fail to see what they may be. ~[[Image:Vsig.png|link=User:Vapor]] <sub>06:10, 11 May 2011 (UTC)</sub>
#:::::::::It actually really can't because the sig templates were actually being called ''multiple'' times in the inclusion chain. While it's easy enough to noinclude them and thus limit the amount of data being called through them superficially, that also compromises the purpose of signing needlessly. We shouldn't have to adapt how pages work because some users want to use a feature actually disabled by the software itself. --<small>[[User:Karek#K|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev#Buildings_Update_Danger_Maps|maps 2.0?!]]</font></sup></small> 22:04, 11 May 2011 (BST)
#::::::::::Yes, the sigs were called multiple time but so were the non-sig templates due to the fact that the whole of A/VB/B being transcluded. In the case of the templated sigs, it was a template call ({{tl|nosubst}}), inside a template call (the template sig which themselves sometimes called on other templates) inside a template call (the transcluded A/VB/B). Similarly, with the non-sig templates, there were template calls ({{tl|usr}}), inside a template call ({{tl|vndl}}) inside a template call (the transcluded A/VB/B). The points I'm trying to make are that a) we've taken steps to correct page breaking on A/VB and b) it really wasn't necessary to transclude A/VB/B in the first place. Whatever value that A/VB/B added to A/VB was superficial and it is actually a lot simpler to just include links to it from [[MediaWiki:recentchangestext]] and [[MediaWiki:blockipsuccesstext]] and be done with it. ~[[Image:Vsig.png|link=User:Vapor]] <sub>14:40, 12 May 2011 (UTC)</sub>
#::::::Vapor: Not at all. There is a wiki software setting to enable unsubstituted template signatures. Kevan has it set to the default, which is to disable them. When I described this as a “hack workaround”, that was the literal truth. {{User:Revenant/Sig}} 07:19, 11 May 2011 (BST)
#:::::::That's not entirely accurate. Kevan hasn't set it to anything: When the wiki was first set up the setting wasn't available and templated signatures were allowed; a software update disallowed them and the setting to change that was only introduced later. We are forced to use this sort of hack due to the difficulty in getting Kevan to change the software.--<span>[[User:The General|The General]] <sup>[[User Talk:The General|T]] [[Project_UnWelcome|<span title="Project UnWelcome">U!</span>]] [[Project Wiki Patrol|<span title="Project Wiki Patrol">P!</span>]] <span class="stealthexternallink">[http://urbandeadwiki.smfforfree.com/index.php <span title="Urban Dead Wiki Forum">F!</span>]</span></sup></span> 09:09, 11 May 2011 (BST)
#:::::::Yeah, I'm not disputing that it is a hack, I just don't agree that it is a worthless hack. I really don't believe Kevan made a conscious decision to turn off unsubstituted signatures way back when. Just like I don't think he intentionally set the max characters for raw signatures to 255. He likely just ran the update without any customization. I think we can reasonably leave {{tl|nosubst}} in place and any sigs that happen to break pages can be dealt with on a case-by-case basis, as it has been done in the past. ~[[Image:Vsig.png|link=User:Vapor]] <sub>15:54, 11 May 2011 (UTC)</sub>
#:::::What I am saying is that when I hit edit there is a heck of a lot of code to wade through. [http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=UDWiki:Administration/Bureaucrat_Promotions&action=edit&section=8 Here is a sample from A/BP]. Removing templated signatures encourages code use, which wouldn't be so bad if some of the signatures (irrespective of the manner in which they are placed) are really code heavy. But besides any of that, what we are really talking about is the issue that templated signatures breaking similar templates and other templates on pages. A/VB is a good example, as are talk pages. A simple solution may be to not use templated signatures on just these pages if such a problem arises, and it rarely does, do as what Vapor said just above. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 16:32, 11 May 2011 (BST)
#::::::It's been a while since I checked but I'm pretty sure that template signatures trigger a few different DB searches every time they're included on a page. All changing this does is force the search to happen once when the user signs instead of every single time someone edits the page for every single time the template appears on it. On top of that signatures larger than 255 characters have to call a template in their code so that can actually be sorta policed easily enough. --<small>[[User:Karek#K|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev#Buildings_Update_Danger_Maps|maps 2.0?!]]</font></sup></small> 22:04, 11 May 2011 (BST)
#:::::::So, it is to say that after I sign at the end of this comment, the code is merely substed in instead of as a template? Meaning that the code length isn't an issue for whatever is added in the corresponding preferences section. It's still an issue though to how long the code is at the end result. The issue for me hasn't to do with me wanting to keep this more complex templated signature, I'm fine changing this I just find the heavy code sigs cumbersome when I go to edit. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 22:40, 11 May 2011 (BST)
#::::::::I'm saying that without {{tl|GoonSig}} the goon's sigs wouldn't be possible because it's a template call made in Preferences that's substituting the template. We can police that because the template has to exist for them to call, like your sig. I'm also saying that your sig makes the server do a lot more work then, say, mine. Something on the order of 3-5 times the work with one inclusion of your sig. More every time a user uses a template signature. Mine adds to this page's DB content and gets called as part of the Page's call then run through the wiki-markup and sent to the browser so it can act on the html, yours adds to the actual processing of the page ''before'' we see it because it has to be interpreted by the wiki markup and then search the DB for the page you're referencing in the signature which then also has to be run through the wiki markup each and every single time someone loads the page for each and every time someone signs on it with a template signature. In the best case scenario it's done once per signature per page and referenced from that, at worse it's done once for every time you sign. Hopefully that answers some of the question because I'm kinda confused about what you were trying to say.--<small>[[User:Karek#K|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev#Buildings_Update_Danger_Maps|maps 2.0?!]]</font></sup></small> 23:07, 11 May 2011 (BST)
#:::::::::It should be noted, however, that to say it is "3-5 times the load" is somewhat misleading because the queries take somewhere in the range of 0.003 seconds.--<span>[[User:The General|The General]] <sup>[[User Talk:The General|T]] [[Project_UnWelcome|<span title="Project UnWelcome">U!</span>]] [[Project Wiki Patrol|<span title="Project Wiki Patrol">P!</span>]] <span class="stealthexternallink">[http://urbandeadwiki.smfforfree.com/index.php <span title="Urban Dead Wiki Forum">F!</span>]</span></sup></span> 23:36, 11 May 2011 (BST)
#::::::::::I'm talking about actual stress on the server. Also should mention that that's actually not necessarily the case, especially on larger pages about these parts and larger signatures for that matter. The number of queries can have an impact in speed, and a notable one at that. Here's an example [[Suggestions/RejectedDecember2005]] vs [[User talk:Karek]]. The first has no expanding templates due to [[Special:LongPages|file size]], the second takes longer to load. --<small>[[User:Karek#K|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev#Buildings_Update_Danger_Maps|maps 2.0?!]]</font></sup></small> 05:36, 13 May 2011 (BST)
#:::::::::::I might be missing your point, Karek, but those don't seem to be good examples of pages breaking/server strain due to templated sig calls. Both have giant walls of text which cause them to be so large. When that happens, templates stop working properly. I can't find even a single attempt to call on a templated sig in your first example nor is there any extraneous template usage (just {{tl|prejection}} it seems). In your second example, nothing seems broken despite lots of templated sigs and it didn't seem to load any longer than any other page; not for my anyway. ~[[Image:Vsig.png|link=User:Vapor]] <sub>06:03, 13 May 2011 (UTC)</sub>
#::::::::::::It was a comparison of text size vs number of calls and their effect on speed. Largely irrelevant now that I've archived my talk but [[User_talk:Karek/20110513132417|here]] is that archive. Should have the same visible effect. --<small>[[User:Karek#K|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev#Buildings_Update_Danger_Maps|maps 2.0?!]]</font></sup></small> 14:43, 13 May 2011 (BST)
#:::::::::::I am a also talking about server load, hence my comment that a database query takes very little time. Yes, more queries do have an impact on server load but it is not generally a major problem: In fact, a few large queries are a lot heavier on the server than lots of small ones. So, yeah, lots of massive template inclusions will hurt the server but so will lots of massive walls of text on a single page and most signature templates aren't that largem.--<span>[[User:The General|The General]] <sup>[[User Talk:The General|T]] [[Project_UnWelcome|<span title="Project UnWelcome">U!</span>]] [[Project Wiki Patrol|<span title="Project Wiki Patrol">P!</span>]] <span class="stealthexternallink">[http://urbandeadwiki.smfforfree.com/index.php <span title="Urban Dead Wiki Forum">F!</span>]</span></sup></span> 08:45, 13 May 2011 (BST)
#::::::::::::Unless we want to ask [[Kevan]] for some performance stats to settle this, can we stop waving our wiki-peens? {{tongue}} {{User:Revenant/Sig}} 08:54, 13 May 2011 (BST)
#:::::::::::::I would prefer to call it a "reasoned debate" {{Tongue}}.--<span>[[User:The General|The General]] <sup>[[User Talk:The General|T]] [[Project_UnWelcome|<span title="Project UnWelcome">U!</span>]] [[Project Wiki Patrol|<span title="Project Wiki Patrol">P!</span>]] <span class="stealthexternallink">[http://urbandeadwiki.smfforfree.com/index.php <span title="Urban Dead Wiki Forum">F!</span>]</span></sup></span> 14:36, 13 May 2011 (BST)
#::::::::::::::^This. Although we could probably move it to the talk page or {{tl|Nosubst}} talk page or something. --<small>[[User:Karek#K|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev#Buildings_Update_Danger_Maps|maps 2.0?!]]</font></sup></small> 14:43, 13 May 2011 (BST)
#:::::::::::::::Seconded, although keep the current discussion points here so for perspective voters. ~[[Image:Vsig.png|link=User:Vapor]] <sub>14:51, 13 May 2011 (UTC)</sub>
#'''Keep''' - after some serious pondering. I'd vote delete in a heartbeat if it had been that way all the time, but pulling it away now will cause a lot of issues for rarely active users. Adding substings to sigs occassionally, while not fun, is the lesser evil. --'''<span style="font-family:monospace; background-color:#222222">[[User:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime"> Spiderzed</span>]][[User talk:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime">█ </span>]]</span>''' 17:02, 11 May 2011 (BST)
#'''Keep''' - I'm with Vapor and Gnome on this one.--{{User:AnimeSucks/Sig}} 23:42, 13 May 2011 (BST)
#'''Keep''' - What problem is this fixing? Transclusion limits on high-traffic pages? If so, just ban templated sigs on the pages in question. Otherwise, I'm with AHLG. I do NOT want to read "lol" followed by 14 lines of code before I can see the next comment, which is what this would cause to happen far too often. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 08:49, 15 May 2011 (BST)


#'''delete''' --{{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig3}} 14:23, 2 April 2010 (BST)
'''Kept'''. 12 Keep votes and 6 Delete votes. ~[[Image:Vsig.png|link=User:Vapor]] <sub>05:27, 17 May 2011 (UTC)</sub>
#'''Eat it with barbeque sauce''' {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 14:31, 2 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Delete''' - although I really want to see this actually tried in practice. {{User:Linkthewindow/Sig}} 15:38, 2 April 2010 (BST)
#<s>'''Delete'''- If only more people did this.--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature‎}} 15:46, 2 April 2010 (BST)</s>
#'''Delete''' its as dumb as a [[Pistol Ninja]] --{{User:Rosslessness/Sig}} 16:25, 2 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Delete''' What is this? I can't even... --{{User:Suffery/sig}} 16:29, 2 April 2010 (BST)
#:{{Grr}} Get it right! {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 16:35, 2 April 2010 (BST)
#:: :( --{{User:Suffery/sig}} 22:36, 3 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Delete''' - By which I mean keep, in order to make the silly humans waste AP for no reason. --{{User:TripleU/Sig}} 19:40, 2 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Delete''' - Diskspace = Cheep! -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 21:05, 2 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Delete''' - Preferably with a vengeance. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 04:57, 3 April 2010 (BST)
#Keep - We should not '''Delete''' this page because if we do '''Delete''' this page, I will be sad that we '''DELETE'''D this page. I mean, people who try to '''DELETE THIS PAGE RIGHT NOW''' are crazy. --{{User:Haliman111/sig}} 03:04, 4 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Delete''' Speedily if Hali wasn't really serious with his keep vote.... -{{User:Poodle_of_doom/signiture}} 14:53, 4 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Delete''' - Wow it makes my head hurt.  I'm [[User:Giles_Sednik/Sandbox4#An_abortion_of_a_page_that_got_deleted|archiving it]] so that future generations may use it as a weapon.--{{User:Giles Sednik/sig}} 13:36, 7 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Speedy Delete''' - Now duped as a crit 1.--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature‎}} 10:54, 8 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Delete''' - <_< --{{User:N0RDAK/Sig}} 19:49, 10 April 2010 (BST)
Deleted. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 05:55, 17 April 2010 (BST)


===[[Wabbajack]]===
Another possible victim of the Glossary purge. This was part of a big create-silly-redirect spree that Revenant had which, if I remember right, left a lot of annoying clones of his group [[With Blackjack and Hookers]]. Ah yes, here they are, [http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=WABBAJACK_AND_HOOKERS_DAMMIT&oldid=1650656 here], [http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Wabbajack_and_hookers_damnit&oldid=1650659 here], [http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Wabbajack_and_hookers_damnit&oldid=1650654 here], and [http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Wabbajack_and_Hookers&oldid=1650653 here], the latter an example of him changing the redirects that previously went to [[With Blackjack and Hookers]], so they went to [[Wabbajack and Hookers]]. I'm pretty sure at the time I made them all redirects to original group.


'''Either way''', I'm rambling about crap. The point is [[Wabbajack]] is a product of these sprees and is totally off-topic and imo should be either deleted, or moved into groupspace. Personally, I'm really wanting to go for Speedy Delete as crit 2.
===[[Federal_Stafford_Loan_Program|Federal Stafford Loan Program]]===
Oh, I guess this is how pages are deleted? It was some sort of weird spam. -[[User:Susan Bakersfield|Susan Bakersfield]] 03:22, 14 May 2011 (BST)
:Got this one when clearing out the [[A/VB/B|bots]]. It's best to report them there (although it gets done here anyway). Thanks <small>-- [[User:Boxy|boxy]] 07:55, 14 May 2011 (BST)</small>


#'''Speedy Delete''' as a crit 2. Maybe change to '''Move''' to group subspace later though. --{{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig3}} 12:48, 4 April 2010 (BST)
===[[Smart Revive Policy]]===
#'''Keep''' - This is a valid redirect. As a member of the group Revenant is entitled to dictate how the group is known colloquially. While it does not belong in the glossary category it is a valid group redirect. For as long as [[MAHB]] redirects to the [[Militant Order of Barhah]], this should redirect to its group. -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 13:01, 4 April 2010 (BST)
The Smart Revive Policy was created in error and is effectively the [[No Random Revive Policy]]. It appears that [[User:Obsdark|Obsdark]] didn't read the [[No Random Revive Policy]], and just looked at the old title of the page. There is only a few pages that link to the [[Smart Revive Policy]] and those could be redirected to the [[No Random Revive Policy]]. I also updated the [[No Random Revive Policy]] to merge in any of the needed information from [[Smart Revive Policy]]. --{{User:Akule/sig}} 02:07, 27 April 2011 (BST)
#:If you think it would make a legitimate ''redirect'', then you can always make it one. But at the moment it contains paragraphs of crit 2 content which can't be justified with the "namespace" argument- since it isn't in their namespace to begin with. --{{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig3}} 13:10, 4 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Keep''' - this is a filibuster vote {{User:Nubis/sig}} 02:14, 27 April 2011 (BST)
#::My bad, I fail reading. I'm remembering the fictional world where this was a redirect plain and simple. Wipe the page and turn it into a redirect as it's currently O/T. -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 13:15, 4 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Speedy''' crit 1 though voting speedy seems kind of pointless due to the above "vote". ~[[Image:Vsig.png|link=User:Vapor]] <sub>03:09, 27 April 2011</sub>
#:::Yeah, I dig that. --{{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig3}} 13:16, 4 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Delete''' - Technically crit 1, but seeing how Nubis is reading from the dictionary, it'll have to wait it out. -- {{User:Krazy_Monkey/sig}} 13:50, 27 April 2011 (BST)
#'''Delete''' Unneeded and inferior copy of an established tactic. --'''<span style="font-family:monospace; background-color:#222222">[[User:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime"> Spiderzed</span>]][[User talk:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime">█ </span>]]</span>''' 14:24, 27 April 2011 (BST)
#'''Speedy''' - Criteria 1.--[[User:Yonnua Koponen|<span style="color: DarkOrange">Yonnua Koponen</span>]]<sup>[[User_talk:Yonnua Koponen| <span style="color:Gold">T</span>]][[DvB| <span style="color: Goldenrod">G</span>]]</sup><sup><span class="stealthexternallink">[http://www.urbandead.com/profile.cgi?id=840689 <span style="color: DarkGoldenrod"> P</span>] </span></sup> [[User:Yonnua Koponen/Sandbox|<span style="color: Red">^</span>]][[Discosaurs|<span style="color: Red">^</span>]][[{{TALKPAGENAME}}#Donkey|<span style="color: Red">^</span>]] 14:41, 27 April 2011 (BST)
#'''delete'' this is a busterfily vote -- {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig4}} 17:07, 27 April 2011 (BST)
#'''keep''' As a [[Help:Redirection|Redirect]]. --<small>[[User:Karek#K|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev#Buildings_Update_Danger_Maps|maps 2.0?!]]</font></sup></small> 21:25, 27 April 2011 (BST)
#'''Keep''' - redirect <small>-- [[User:Boxy|boxy]] 07:44, 3 May 2011 (BST)</small>
#'''Keep''' as the boxman --&nbsp;[[Image:Boobs.sh.siggie.gif|link=User:Sexualharrison| HEY! HANDS OFF MAH BOOBS! | 16px]] &nbsp; <small> [[User talk:Sexualharrison|<span style="color:Red">bitch</span>]]&nbsp;&nbsp;</small><small>06:31, 11 May 2011 (utc)</small>
#'''Keep''' - Redirect it--{{User:Michaleson/sig}} 22:19, 11 May 2011 (BST)


YEE BOYY!!!! (converted to a redirect- solves many isssues with it) --{{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig3}} 13:17, 4 April 2010 (BST)
5 to 5. '''Kept''' as a redirect. ~[[Image:Vsig.png|link=User:Vapor]] <sub>06:25, 13 May 2011 (UTC)</sub>
:As an aside I fully support all such changes, O/T pages don't belong on this wiki, but if groups are using them as disambigs/O/T pages turn them all into redirects as we have no shortage of random wiki pages to serve as redirects and its the business of the group in question as to what they have as a redirect. If [[Extinction]] want [[Zerging Scumfucks]] as a redirect, all power to them. -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 13:23, 4 April 2010 (BST)
===[[The living]]===
::The easy thing is, most of the pages in this summary clusterfuck will be easily fixed like that, at the very leased by merging ''some'' of the helpful information first. I almost can't wait. --{{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig3}} 13:31, 4 April 2010 (BST)
Not really much in the way of content here. I'd like to have the page deleted so that I can use the name (with a capitol L). {{User:Clint_Clintstone/sig}} 10:35 21 April 2011 (EST)


===[[User:Sweawm_rune/The_sweawm_rune_show]]===
#'''delete''' - never got off the ground etc. -- {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig4}} 03:46, 22 April 2011 (BST)
This user decided to take over 27.20 on the wiki... I have never heard him broadcast nor have i ever even heard him. Yet he took apon himself to add this page to 27.20, At the very top. This user has not been active in ages, And the page it's self is pitiful. I would like to see if this page can be removed, And i would like to remove him from the 27.20 frequency. Ridicules. --{{User:Suffery/sig}} 21:09, 31 March 2010 (BST)
#'''Keep''' - This is both history, a group that existed(and we don't delete disbanded groups just 'cause), and also a page stuffed full of content when [[The Dead|context]] is shown. We killed crit 12 for a reason. --<small>[[User:Karek#K|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev#Buildings_Update_Danger_Maps|maps 2.0?!]]</font></sup></small> 03:52, 22 April 2011 (BST)
:We can't just delete the subpages of a user for these things, but you're free to ask him to remove his listing from radio frequency in question. {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 21:13, 31 March 2010 (BST)
#'''Keep'''. Its well linked. --[[User:Rosslessness|Rosslessness]] 11:04, 22 April 2011 (BST)
:Alrighty, I understand. Thank you anyway :)--{{User:Suffery/sig}} 20:11, 1 April 2010 (BST)
#:My arse. it has like 8 and you made half of them years ago and only because they mentioned the dead? -- {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig4}} 12:07, 22 April 2011 (BST)
*'''Keep''' - But consider your formatting fixed anyway. :P --{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature‎}} 21:21, 31 March 2010 (BST)
#::Sorry, its referred to as part of the did you know section of the wiki, I don't know why Clint doesn't just use [[The Living]] --[[User:Rosslessness|Rosslessness]] 12:28, 22 April 2011 (BST)
*'''Keep''' - Forgot about doing this. Been a long day. {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 21:24, 31 March 2010 (BST)
#'''Keep'''. As Ross. You don't have to get rid of that page to create [[The Living]]. And we could also add a disambiguation notice on top of the page to refer to the older/newer group respectively. --'''<span style="font-family:monospace; background-color:#222222">[[User:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime"> Spiderzed</span>]][[User talk:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime">█ </span>]]</span>''' 12:47, 22 April 2011 (BST)
*'''Keep''' - Same as Mis... -{{User:Poodle_of_doom/signiture}} 22:45, 31 March 2010 (BST)
#:This^. Especially since they're both unique pages and the stats page links by caps(like the whole wiki). --<small>[[User:Karek#K|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev#Buildings_Update_Danger_Maps|maps 2.0?!]]</font></sup></small> 13:42, 22 April 2011 (BST)
*'''Keep''' - It's his namespace, and it's about his doings. There's nothing wrong about it being poorly written or obscure. --{{User:TripleU/Sig}} 00:54, 1 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Keep''' - As Above.{{User:Zombie Lord/sig2}} <tt>13:46 22 April 2011(UTC)</tt>
*'''Keep''' - For obvious reasons that have already been stated. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 02:07, 1 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Delete''' Just another of those "exists only on paper" kind of groups with no real content, the kind of which we deleted hundreds of. -- [[Image:Cat Pic.png|14px]] [[User:MisterGame|<span style= "color: maroon; background-color: white">'''Thadeous Oakley''']]</span> [[User_Talk:MisterGame|<span style= "color: black; background-color: white">'''''Talk''''']]</span>  13:59, 22 April 2011 (BST)
*'''Keep''' - anticipating a pre-emptive cycling of this as kept in a few days --{{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig3}} 09:04, 1 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Delete''' - this page doesn't stop you using the capital L space... and anyway, afaik, this one is just a reactionary page to [[The Dead]]... puppy tears, and all that, y'know {{tongue}} <small>-- [[User:Boxy|boxy]] 15:08, 22 April 2011 (BST)</small>
*'''Keep''' - bandwagon. {{User:Linkthewindow/Sig}} 07:31, 2 April 2010 (BST)
#:He'll find it difficult to do as that [[The Living]] is now in use. --{{User:Akule/sig}} 21:38, 25 April 2011 (BST)
*'''Keep''' - Alternately we could delete this page and all of Suffery's just to make a point... -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 21:06, 2 April 2010 (BST)
#'''Keep''' -- [[User:Asheets|Asheets]] 16:15, 22 April 2011 (BST)
#'''Keep''' SHUT THE FUCK UP!. i loled.--<small><div style="display: inline-block; height: 14px; width: 18px; overflow: hidden; vertical-align: text-bottom;">[[User:Sexualharrison|<span style="position: absolute; display: block; font-size: 0px; height: 14px; width: 18px;"> </span>]][[Image:Boobs.sh.siggie.gif|18px]]</div>&nbsp;&nbsp;[[User talk:Sexualharrison|<span style="color:Red">bitch</span>]]&nbsp;</small><small>16:19, 22 April 2011</small>
#'''Delete''' - get out. --[[User:Karloth_vois|Karloth Vois]] <sup>[[¯\(°_o)/¯]]</sup> 17:50, 22 April 2011 (BST)
#'''Keep''' - this is a filibuster vote {{User:Nubis/sig}} 23:57, 23 April 2011 (BST)
#'''Keep''' - Sure, why not - [[User:DeRathi|Serious Post]] {{User:DeRathi/Sig}} 15:27, 24 April 2011 (BST)
#'''Keep''' - We're already deleting the living from the game, why not have a reminder they once existed here? --[[User:Laughing Man|Laughing Man]] 15:44, 24 April 2011 (BST)
#'''Weak Keep''' - As Karek and Ross, but weaker. {{User:Linkthewindow/Sig}} 16:18, 24 April 2011 (BST)
#'''Keep''' - As Karek and Ross. --{{User:Akule/sig}} 21:38, 25 April 2011 (BST)
#'''Keep''' - As Spiderzed.--[[User:Yonnua Koponen|<span style="color: DarkOrange">Yonnua Koponen</span>]]<sup>[[User_talk:Yonnua Koponen| <span style="color:Gold">T</span>]][[DvB| <span style="color: Goldenrod">G</span>]]</sup><sup><span class="stealthexternallink">[http://www.urbandead.com/profile.cgi?id=840689 <span style="color: DarkGoldenrod"> P</span>] </span></sup> [[User:Yonnua Koponen/Sandbox|<span style="color: Red">^</span>]][[Discosaurs|<span style="color: Red">^</span>]][[{{TALKPAGENAME}}#Donkey|<span style="color: Red">^</span>]] 17:40, 26 April 2011 (BST)


I've given this a pre-emptive '''keep''' since Suffery seems to understand now. --{{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig3}} 02:51, 4 April 2010 (BST)
Kept with 12 Keeps and 4 Deletes. ~[[Image:Vsig.png|link=User:Vapor]] <sub>06:17, 9 May 2011 (UTC)</sub>
:My idea was better. -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 12:41, 4 April 2010 (BST)
===[[Bookmarks]]===
I wanted to make a page under my username, but instead made this. I already remade the page under my user-name, [[User:ShadowScope/Bookmarks|here]], so I would like for you to delete this page (somebody else may want to use Bookmarks in the future, and I don't want to waste space).--[[User:ShadowScope|ShadowScope]]<sup>[[User:Kevan|'the true enemy']]</sup> 02:33, 1 May 2011 (BST)
:EDIT: Also requesting a Speedy Delete, if that is all possible.--[[User:ShadowScope|ShadowScope]]<sup>[[User:Kevan|'the true enemy']]</sup> 02:34, 1 May 2011 (BST)
::'''Scheduled''' – Speedy, Crit 7 by proxy. All gone. {{smile}} {{User:Revenant/Sig}} 03:56, 1 May 2011 (BST)


==Archive==
==Archive==
{{Deletearchivenav}}
{{Deletearchivenav}}

Latest revision as of 11:12, 7 April 2013

Recent Actions

The Republic of Digby

Content cleared by owner, might as well be a speedy --Bean 15:33, 12 June 2011 (BST)

  1. Speedy: Page was blanked by the only guy who maintained it, Author Edit Only implied --Bean 15:33, 12 June 2011 (BST)
  2. Scheduled - User has blanked the page and created a new group. Crit 7 by proxy.--Yonnua Koponen T G P ^^^ 16:01, 12 June 2011 (BST)

Deleted as a crit 7 by proxy.--The General T Sys U! P! F! 17:05, 12 June 2011 (BST)

Lamportians

This page was already deleted. The only reason I haven't done this as a crit 6 is because the content doesn't match completely with the current version being more role-play than straight up recruiting(like the previous iteration). This is a term only used by a singular very small group. --Karekmaps 2.0?! 05:44, 25 May 2011 (BST)

  • Obviously Delete - And I really want to do this as a crit 6 but am erring on the side of caution. --Karekmaps 2.0?! 05:44, 25 May 2011 (BST)
  • delete - had potential but it's just kinda shit. -- ϑanceϑanceℜevolution 06:02, 25 May 2011 (BST)
  • Speedy - Content is similar enough, IMHO: Expanding it doesn't mean its's not crit 6. This should be a group page, it's not a "generic term".--The General T Sys U! P! F! 09:14, 25 May 2011 (BST)
  • Delete - But I don't think it's enough for a speedy. They've expanded on it quite a bit.--Yonnua Koponen T G P ^^^ 13:42, 25 May 2011 (BST)

Deleted - This be unanimous.--Yonnua Koponen T G P ^^^ 22:41, 8 June 2011 (BST)

Template:Wikipedia

A template which is literally identical to using the "Wikipedia:" prefix in a link. It saves precisely 0 bytes while using a template inclusion and increasing server load.--The General T U! P! F! 14:01, 20 May 2011 (BST)

  1. Merge with Template:WP and then delete. Are all the transclusions truly due to {{unsigned}}? We should be linking to internal help about signatures, not to Wikipedia. ~Vsig.png 15:03, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
    Which I have just done. ~Vsig.png 15:06, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
    Mostly. I've used my bot to subst the template in on all non-protected pages, given that it's completely redundant.--The General T U! P! F! 15:38, 20 May 2011 (BST)
  2. Speedy C1 - a template that merely uses a single wiki code command is "No content" in my books. --Oh, and vote on Project Funny, by the way. -- Spiderzed█ 15:12, 20 May 2011 (BST)
  3. Speedy - as Spiderzed.--The General T U! P! F! 20:25, 20 May 2011 (BST)
  4. Keep - You don't get to technicality off such a popular template. --Karekmaps 2.0?! 21:19, 20 May 2011 (BST)
    Popular? ~Vsig.png 21:54, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
    The bot changed all of the edits so that's not exactly an accurate revelation of how people use it. This is more realistic. People use this template because not everyone knows about the magic word, don't punish ill-informed users for being ill-informed? --Karekmaps 2.0?! 03:44, 21 May 2011 (BST)
    Why not redirect the template to an explanation of magic words? The magic word is so similar to the template that anyone who uses the template should be perfectly capbable of using the magic word.--The General T U! P! F! 09:13, 21 May 2011 (BST)
    I was under the impression that the bot only subst'd {{Wikipedia}} when found in {{unsigned}} template calls. I may be wrong but still, I don't think the template is as popular as you're implying. And, yes I checked thegeneralbot's contribs. I so far haven't found any edits where {{Wikipedia}} was subst'd other than inside {{unsigned}}. ~Vsig.png 16:02, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
    That's because the use in unsigned made up the bulk of {{wikipedia}} uses. That said, nope, it didn't just remove the ones in unsigned, which explains why I can't find any of my old uses of it, despite the fact that I've used it frequently in the past. —Aichon— 07:04, 22 May 2011 (BST)
  5. I support a merge with {{WP}}, but suggest retaining as a soft redirect, deleting only when we can get WP: implemented as an interwiki shortlink. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 05:41, 21 May 2011 (BST)
  6. Delete -- ϑanceϑanceℜevolution 05:43, 21 May 2011 (BST)
  7. Keep - It's not actually the same as just the plain link, since the plain link requires additional code to look the same. Quick example: {{wikipedia|example}} yields example while [[wikipedia:example]] yields wikipedia:example. Note the different outputs. I prefer the template since it saves some typing, and the code is cleaner. —Aichon— 09:18, 21 May 2011 (BST)
    You can use the pipe trick to get the same appearance; although there is slightly more code, there is far less of a drain on server resources. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 13:12, 21 May 2011 (BST)
    Pipes would work, sure, but that's why I mentioned less and cleaner code. Also, it doesn't produce "far less of a drain on server resources." When it comes to server load, the danger of templates is that if they are changed, every page they are included on needs to be re-cached. That's not an issue here since unsigned doesn't change. —Aichon— 07:04, 22 May 2011 (BST)
    It's been changed twice recently. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 07:38, 22 May 2011 (BST)
    "...frequently". Sorry, forgot to put that at the end of my last comment. ;) Anyway, two edits in three years (both of which had to be requested via A/PT) is nothing to be concerned with. To put things in perspective, in the same time period, your sig has changed 15x more frequently and is on more than 45x as many pages, yet none of us seem to object to it. :P —Aichon— 10:38, 22 May 2011 (BST)
    Actually, I object. Tongue :P I think we should get rid of templated sigs for precisely those reasons (added DB calls on every page load, plus cache invalidation of every page on which they are transcluded when they change), but while they are permitted by WIKI LAW, I'm going to keep availing myself of the convenience. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 22:40, 22 May 2011 (BST)
    Basically, yeah. This is why there was the request to delete Nosubst. This template is far less harmful though and more intuitive to the partially wiki-literate. It's a tool and you shouldn't take away tools that don't actually harm anything just for the sake of simplicity. --Karekmaps 2.0?! 03:02, 23 May 2011 (BST)
    Not sure how this template is more intuitive than the normal link; if they can find this template, they can find out how to use the link (which should be described in the help pages, anyway).--The General T Sys U! P! F! 17:17, 24 May 2011 (BST)
    Wikipedia:wikipedia: for one. The fact that templates are easier to understand to a layman than magic words for two. We assume that most users can pick up and learn templates fairly quickly and magic words/parsers rarely. I'm actually not a fan of the template but I don't see a reason to remove the option just so we don't have to change them manually. --Karekmaps 2.0?! 03:41, 25 May 2011 (BST)
    Bah. If you really objected, your actions would speak for you and you wouldn't avail yourself of it at all. :P —Aichon— 03:57, 23 May 2011 (BST)
    So the Nosubst deletion nomination counts for naught? Tongue :P
    I have a policy discussion in the works, but I don't know how long it will take me to get to. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 04:33, 23 May 2011 (BST)
    So another policy will get passed by a group of individuals that give shit all about the wiki? Lovely. ~Vsig.png 17:08, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
    Whether it passes or not doesn't overly concern me. Which reminds me… ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 23:59, 24 May 2011 (BST)
  8. Keep - u dont delete my contributions to the wiki without me having a say about it --People's Commissar Hagnat [talk] [wcdz] 20:37, 22 May 2011 (BST)
  9. Keep - I prefer the template--THE Godfather of Яesensitized, Anime Sucks Yalk | W! U! WMM| CC CPFOAS DORISFlag.jpg LOE ZHU | Яezzens 20:40, 22 May 2011 (BST)

5 delete votes and 4 keeps. Merged (via move) with {{WP}}. Kept {{Wikipedia}} as a soft redirect. Fixed remaining links. ~Vsig.png 05:40, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

No reason to have a soft redirect when a standard redirect preserves functionality and doesn't make it harder to reach the new template page(the entire purpose of soft redirects)--Karekmaps 2.0?! 07:05, 6 June 2011 (BST)

... this must be one of the most dumb moves since gen tried to pass an anti-goon policy with the goons active in the wiki. Creating a redirect in template:wikipedia to ]]template:wp]] just adds more server load to a template whose main reason for deletion was server load. Its just too dumb for me to understand it. The merge votes should've count as a kept in this case, ffs --hagnat 12:31, 6 June 2011 (BST)

You're right, since server load is the issue, we pretty much should have had this deleted lul -- ϑanceϑanceℜevolution 12:41, 6 June 2011 (BST)
Yeah, pretty much. I kept as a soft redirect per Rev's suggestion but Karek reverted back to a typical redirect. If people want to keep it as a redirect or just keep the template rather than delete it then that's fine with me. That was never brought up during voting but whatever. ~Vsig.png 15:31, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
It's a soft redirect now actually. It was just waiting on verification that all usage was gone. Also, not really server intensive in any way. Even the claims of the editing of it were edits done by the people claiming they were a problem. Anyways, now it's set to sit for a month or three until we can be reasonably sure people have gotten the message.--Karekmaps 2.0?! 09:19, 7 June 2011 (BST)
I think we're both misinterpreting what a soft redirect is. They are just a short messages directing someone to an external site. I don't even think a soft (or even a "hard") redirect is warranted TBQH. It should just be deleted since that is how the voting concluded. If there is sufficient reason to keep it, put in a request at A/U. Otherwise, it comes off a lot like just a disagreement with the voting results and maneuvering things to turn this into a keep. ~Vsig.png 05:52, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
I just set it up in a way to make it clear that WP was the current version and this page is no longer in use as a template. Terminology be damned I guess. --Karekmaps 2.0?! 08:43, 8 June 2011 (BST)
That's all well and good, but it was voted for deletion??? -- ϑanceϑanceℜevolution 04:34, 9 June 2011 (BST)
Yeah no, when 2 of the 5 deletes are merges and the other 4 votes are keeps that reasoning doesn't really fly. Especially when you actually read Revenants vote. That being said it's still going to be deleted, it's just going to be left as a soft redirect for a bit first because the template still exists. --Karekmaps 2.0?! 09:04, 9 June 2011 (BST)
My point is that it's funny when so many people vote but in the end it becomes a situational decision by one person pushing for what they want. I voted delete because I use the [[wikipedia]] code personally, but as a whole I'm indifferent. It's worth noting though that Merge got the least votes out of all the options, even if you aren't inclined to count them as implicit deletes (which you are) -- ϑanceϑanceℜevolution 09:25, 9 June 2011 (BST)
Meh, the only reason it qualifies is that last Merge vote that puts it over and since the vote in question specifically qualifies itself as situational upon the soft redirect it's really just common sense. --Karekmaps 2.0?! 09:34, 9 June 2011 (BST)
I wasn't quite aware that we were intending on deleting it eventually and this was transitional? Is that actually the case? Cause if it is, it makes more sense and has made me look like a dil to boot. -- ϑanceϑanceℜevolution 11:21, 9 June 2011 (BST)
We are and it is.--Karekmaps 2.0?! 11:27, 9 June 2011 (BST)
I remember reading that but somewhere along the line I forgot. I'm a bit of a mess -- ϑanceϑanceℜevolution 03:51, 11 June 2011 (BST)
S'ok, apparently you're not the only one who doesn't have time to read s recent comments make oh so clear. --Karekmaps 2.0?! 17:29, 11 June 2011 (BST)

What are you guys doing? Let me run through the process for handling a Delete and Merge result, since it's very simple, but has apparently been forgotten:

  1. Merge the two pages.
  2. Fix all links to point to the new page, except where they were specifically being used to refer to the old one as opposed to the new one (e.g. discussions like here)
  3. Fix all transclusions to point to the new page that it's being merged into
  4. Delete the page

That's all you guys had to do, but for some reason, you got stuck between #2 and #3. Why did no one check for and fix transclusions before replacing the template with text telling people not to use it? And why was that text put in at all, when your job was to follow the vote's results and delete the page? We don't need text telling people not to use a page that's been deleted, since people don't use pages that aren't there. That's why you delete them. Why has this not been done? —Aichon— 21:32, 10 June 2011 (BST)

I did fix all incoming links and transclusions (although I think I must have missed the one transclusion in this vote). As for deleting it, that's what is currently under discussion. Pages have been kept as a redirect during a deletion before. I don't know that a redirect of this nature has been used before but I'm open to using them. I just want it made clear what is happening, since at first it seemed to me like maneuvering to turn a delete decision into a keep decision. ~Vsig.png 21:45, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
1. Not a standard case. 2. If you can't be asked to read any of the intervening discussion that has happened don't bother to comment. You're just wasting everyone's time at this point. Third, since I know you won't bother to read through any of it because of your "right-ness"(a common problem with users of this wiki), Template:Wikipedia is a long existing template that was implemented 5 years ago. Above and beyond that it's a popular template on wikipedia projects. If you don't want to run the risk of users recreating it you do it this way, which is also the only way it actually passes as a delete vote, having changed it essentially just saved the step of creating the soft redirect or redirect(since one is justified, the template still exists). Also, it's still getting deleted, now shoo. --Karekmaps 2.0?! 17:29, 11 June 2011 (BST)
*"Can't be arsed".--Yonnua Koponen T G P ^^^ 18:32, 11 June 2011 (BST)
I'll excuse your personal (and hurtful, coming from you) attacks on me as a courtesy. First off, I'm aware of its history and would prefer it stay around (see my vote above). Second, as I'm sure you agree, failing to fix any transclusions was an oversight in need of correction, and leaving them while altering the template is never part of proper procedure, so a mistake was definitely made here. Third, I think that you're not giving Rev enough credit, since he's a smart guy, is well-versed in the rules, and says what he means. If he had wanted it to be taken the way you say, he could have said Keep with his comment, or else he could have said Merge on the condition that it be done as he described. Instead, he said Merge, which he knows acts as a Delete, and he phrased it as a suggestion, instead of as a comment on which his vote was contingent. Fourth, see Crit 6. That's how you stop people from recreating the page on this wiki. Anyway, I'm not going to stick around to argue it further, so you'll get what you wanted from me. —Aichon— 18:57, 11 June 2011 (BST)
Not personal, just frustrated. Sometimes even I tire of repeating myself and this would mke probably the fourth time this has been addressed. It's an unusual case and a close vote, it seems reasonable to try and do it in a way that has the least potential to cause issues(in this case phasing it out in steps). As for Crit 6, that's generally connected with vandalism cases historically. A situation that relies on it is less than ideal. --Karekmaps 2.0?! 21:44, 11 June 2011 (BST)

Dupilcated image

[1] Un-used duplicate of [2], 1 could be deletead?--Michalesonbadge.pngTCAPD(╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻ 16:03, 17 May 2011 (BST)

  1. Scheduled - but I'll check with Schwan before deleting. ~Vsig.png 16:10, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
  2. Speedy - Two days short of a scheduled. -- Cheese 18:50, 17 May 2011 (BST)

A. Schwan confirmed on his talk page that the image was unneeded, so I deleted it as crit 7 by proxy. ~Vsig.png 21:37, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Template:Nosubst

Horrible hack that exists only to work around sensible software limitations. We should take the opportunity given by the new sig size limits to recognise this, delete this abomination, and have all users made to use proper signatures. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 11:26, 2 May 2011 (BST)

Just to be clear... this isn't going to break existing sig inclusions, is it. Just people who (attempt to) use it from now on.
I have long hated templated sigs, but then I also hate having to scroll through huge swathes of sig code if it's subst'ed into discussions -- boxy 11:37, 2 May 2011 (BST)
Correct.
And yeah, me too, but it's a bit “damned if you do, damned if you don't”, and templated sigs cause more problems than they solve, which is why they're prohibited by default by the MediaWiki software unless you deliberately circumvent that with a measure such as this template.ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 11:53, 2 May 2011 (BST)
Or change a one-line setting in the software....--The General T Sys U! P! F! 12:09, 2 May 2011 (BST)
Sadly I feel its too late. If it was setup from the beginning, I'd have no problem, but deleting it now is just going to break loads of links. Rev should set up UDWiki 2.0 --Rosslessness 12:16, 2 May 2011 (BST)
It was set up in the beginning, by Kevan, and then hacked around by users. And it shouldn't change any links that use it properly: the rest can be easily fixed. What it will do is necessitate users to change their sigs. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 12:27, 2 May 2011 (BST)
No it wasn't. The mediawiki software didn't originally force substitution in signatures: It was added in an update and there wasn't originally a setting to turn it off, so we developed a workaround.--The General T Sys U! P! F! 12:33, 2 May 2011 (BST)
Whats the fix? --Rosslessness 12:37, 2 May 2011 (BST)
Mostly deleting it out of MrAushvitz's fucking sig. Grr! Argh! *shaking fist* ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 12:44, 2 May 2011 (BST)
Ah, thats why its used on so many of the old suggestion pages. Get on that, use your crazy robot. --Rosslessness 12:49, 2 May 2011 (BST)
  1. Kill with fire. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 11:26, 2 May 2011 (BST)
  2. Keep - Templated sigs are allowed by wiki policy; If you don't like it then change the policy rather than trying to delete the template that allows them.--The General T Sys U! P! F! 11:44, 2 May 2011 (BST)
    Mind to show me where a policy directly grants the use of templated sigs as a right? Can't find it in the sig policy, nor do I see any other applicable policy. -- Spiderzed█ 11:57, 2 May 2011 (BST)
    The section that says: What would be allowed - Anything that isn't? --Yonnua Koponen T G P ^^^ 12:01, 2 May 2011 (BST)
  3. Kill this is terrible, I assume, so down with it or something. --カシュー, ザ ゾンビ クィーン (ビープ ビープ) Katthewsigtag.gif @ 12:17, 2 May 2011 (BST)
  4. Keep - This template is linked to lots of stuff. Who is going to fix all of the broken links if this gets deleted?--GANG Giles Sednik CAPD 12:24, 2 May 2011 (BST)
    Me, if nobody else does, and before it gets deleted. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 12:34, 2 May 2011 (BST)
  5. keep as above-- Boobs.sh.siggie.gif   bitch  12:31, 2 May 2011 (utc)
  6. Keep - just because I think General has a better option of dealing with this- it would also allow more comfortable transition period for those of us who do used the damned templated sigs. -- ϑanceϑanceℜevolution 12:47, 2 May 2011 (BST)
  7. Keep --Yonnua Koponen T G P ^^^ 12:59, 2 May 2011 (BST)
  8. Keep -- Cat Pic.png Thadeous Oakley Talk 13:08, 2 May 2011 (BST)
  9. Kill -- Honestly ok with this. Can we get rid of the signature policy next? Maybe replace it with something that simply says your sig can't impersonate other users, break pages, and needs to show who you are and leave it at that? --Karekmaps 2.0?! 13:41, 2 May 2011 (BST)
  10. Kill Having looked at it, seems fair, as long as rev wipes out the linked list. --Rosslessness 13:52, 2 May 2011 (BST)
  11. Keep --Weed.jpgArthur DentWeed.jpg BIN LADEN IS DEAD!!!!! 14:31, 2 May 2011
  12. Keep It works fine. Has for years. Old folks coming back to the wiki will have to deal with some shit the first time they try to sign. Would be pretty off-putting I think. ~Vsig.png Amurica. Fuck. Yeah 22:19, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
  13. Delete -- boxy 07:42, 3 May 2011 (BST)
  14. Delete -obsolete --Karloth Vois ¯\(°_o)/¯ 15:41, 3 May 2011 (BST)
  15. Keep - The only way I'll be okay with a delete if there is a code length limit on signatures. So steal from WP, basically. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 23:56, 10 May 2011 (BST)
    With the software update, signatures are now limited by the software to 255 characters. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 03:41, 11 May 2011 (BST)
    The Goon's signature (and probably others) still manage to be ridiculously big. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 04:33, 11 May 2011 (BST)
    They're subst'd in. If they were using {{nosubst}} and signing using e.g. {{SUBST:Nosubst|Goonsig|Revenant}}, they'd be breaking the template transclusion limit on every page they posted on in short order. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 04:40, 11 May 2011 (BST)
    That's not what I'm talking about; I'm talking about how long the code for their signatures are. It's very long. If templated signatures want to be deleted, it's better suited for policy discussion, provided a reasonable alternative is included (so no long signature codes, it makes me angry). --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 04:44, 11 May 2011 (BST)
    I'm not sure you're understanding me, so I'll give you a demonstration… the invocation {{Goonsig|Revenant}} gives You rated this wiki '1'! Great job, go hog wild!||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||, which is the same as what specifying {{SUBST:Nosubst|Goonsig|Revenant}} as your signature results in. In contrast, using {{SUBST:Goonsig|Revenant}} as your signature results in… You rated this wiki '1'! Great job, go hog wild!||||||||||||||||||||||||
    I think what AHLG is saying is that without {{nosubst}}, all code heavy signatures will add heavy amounts of code to pages when signing. The inclusion sizes don't matter to too many people as long as they don't have to wade through umpteen lines of code when they want to contribute to dicussion. My biggest issue with this deletion request is that it is being passed off as sensible software limitations. I don't believe sensible is the right word. Minimal or default software limits is more descriptive. Its like saying that the "if" templates are a crappy hack job because the software has sensible limits on parser functions. The wiki software sucks. It's vanilla. So what if there exists a hack to make it suck less? It's rare that anything is broken because of templated sigs. ~Vsig.png 05:26, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
    It's really not as rare as it would be without Nosubst. Not to mention that with Nosubst gone it would mean that actually useful templates won't be excluded from pages like A/VB and A/M. It actually opens up possibilities for us that we currently have to code around.--Karekmaps 2.0?! 05:50, 11 May 2011 (BST)
    When I say rare I mean extremely rare. The only instance of page breakage in recent history was A/VB and it was due mostly to the whole of A/VB/Bots being transcluded. And then it only became a problem when we came under heavy bot attacks. That problem was easily solved by no longer transcluding A/VB/Bots, which was largely unecessary to begin with. It could also be argued that it was the size of the regular non-sig templates causing it to break. If any other possibilities will arise by deleting {{nosubst}}, I fail to see what they may be. ~Vsig.png 06:10, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
    It actually really can't because the sig templates were actually being called multiple times in the inclusion chain. While it's easy enough to noinclude them and thus limit the amount of data being called through them superficially, that also compromises the purpose of signing needlessly. We shouldn't have to adapt how pages work because some users want to use a feature actually disabled by the software itself. --Karekmaps 2.0?! 22:04, 11 May 2011 (BST)
    Yes, the sigs were called multiple time but so were the non-sig templates due to the fact that the whole of A/VB/B being transcluded. In the case of the templated sigs, it was a template call ({{nosubst}}), inside a template call (the template sig which themselves sometimes called on other templates) inside a template call (the transcluded A/VB/B). Similarly, with the non-sig templates, there were template calls ({{usr}}), inside a template call ({{vndl}}) inside a template call (the transcluded A/VB/B). The points I'm trying to make are that a) we've taken steps to correct page breaking on A/VB and b) it really wasn't necessary to transclude A/VB/B in the first place. Whatever value that A/VB/B added to A/VB was superficial and it is actually a lot simpler to just include links to it from MediaWiki:recentchangestext and MediaWiki:blockipsuccesstext and be done with it. ~Vsig.png 14:40, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
    Vapor: Not at all. There is a wiki software setting to enable unsubstituted template signatures. Kevan has it set to the default, which is to disable them. When I described this as a “hack workaround”, that was the literal truth. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 07:19, 11 May 2011 (BST)
    That's not entirely accurate. Kevan hasn't set it to anything: When the wiki was first set up the setting wasn't available and templated signatures were allowed; a software update disallowed them and the setting to change that was only introduced later. We are forced to use this sort of hack due to the difficulty in getting Kevan to change the software.--The General T U! P! F! 09:09, 11 May 2011 (BST)
    Yeah, I'm not disputing that it is a hack, I just don't agree that it is a worthless hack. I really don't believe Kevan made a conscious decision to turn off unsubstituted signatures way back when. Just like I don't think he intentionally set the max characters for raw signatures to 255. He likely just ran the update without any customization. I think we can reasonably leave {{nosubst}} in place and any sigs that happen to break pages can be dealt with on a case-by-case basis, as it has been done in the past. ~Vsig.png 15:54, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
    What I am saying is that when I hit edit there is a heck of a lot of code to wade through. Here is a sample from A/BP. Removing templated signatures encourages code use, which wouldn't be so bad if some of the signatures (irrespective of the manner in which they are placed) are really code heavy. But besides any of that, what we are really talking about is the issue that templated signatures breaking similar templates and other templates on pages. A/VB is a good example, as are talk pages. A simple solution may be to not use templated signatures on just these pages if such a problem arises, and it rarely does, do as what Vapor said just above. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 16:32, 11 May 2011 (BST)
    It's been a while since I checked but I'm pretty sure that template signatures trigger a few different DB searches every time they're included on a page. All changing this does is force the search to happen once when the user signs instead of every single time someone edits the page for every single time the template appears on it. On top of that signatures larger than 255 characters have to call a template in their code so that can actually be sorta policed easily enough. --Karekmaps 2.0?! 22:04, 11 May 2011 (BST)
    So, it is to say that after I sign at the end of this comment, the code is merely substed in instead of as a template? Meaning that the code length isn't an issue for whatever is added in the corresponding preferences section. It's still an issue though to how long the code is at the end result. The issue for me hasn't to do with me wanting to keep this more complex templated signature, I'm fine changing this I just find the heavy code sigs cumbersome when I go to edit. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 22:40, 11 May 2011 (BST)
    I'm saying that without {{GoonSig}} the goon's sigs wouldn't be possible because it's a template call made in Preferences that's substituting the template. We can police that because the template has to exist for them to call, like your sig. I'm also saying that your sig makes the server do a lot more work then, say, mine. Something on the order of 3-5 times the work with one inclusion of your sig. More every time a user uses a template signature. Mine adds to this page's DB content and gets called as part of the Page's call then run through the wiki-markup and sent to the browser so it can act on the html, yours adds to the actual processing of the page before we see it because it has to be interpreted by the wiki markup and then search the DB for the page you're referencing in the signature which then also has to be run through the wiki markup each and every single time someone loads the page for each and every time someone signs on it with a template signature. In the best case scenario it's done once per signature per page and referenced from that, at worse it's done once for every time you sign. Hopefully that answers some of the question because I'm kinda confused about what you were trying to say.--Karekmaps 2.0?! 23:07, 11 May 2011 (BST)
    It should be noted, however, that to say it is "3-5 times the load" is somewhat misleading because the queries take somewhere in the range of 0.003 seconds.--The General T U! P! F! 23:36, 11 May 2011 (BST)
    I'm talking about actual stress on the server. Also should mention that that's actually not necessarily the case, especially on larger pages about these parts and larger signatures for that matter. The number of queries can have an impact in speed, and a notable one at that. Here's an example Suggestions/RejectedDecember2005 vs User talk:Karek. The first has no expanding templates due to file size, the second takes longer to load. --Karekmaps 2.0?! 05:36, 13 May 2011 (BST)
    I might be missing your point, Karek, but those don't seem to be good examples of pages breaking/server strain due to templated sig calls. Both have giant walls of text which cause them to be so large. When that happens, templates stop working properly. I can't find even a single attempt to call on a templated sig in your first example nor is there any extraneous template usage (just {{prejection}} it seems). In your second example, nothing seems broken despite lots of templated sigs and it didn't seem to load any longer than any other page; not for my anyway. ~Vsig.png 06:03, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
    It was a comparison of text size vs number of calls and their effect on speed. Largely irrelevant now that I've archived my talk but here is that archive. Should have the same visible effect. --Karekmaps 2.0?! 14:43, 13 May 2011 (BST)
    I am a also talking about server load, hence my comment that a database query takes very little time. Yes, more queries do have an impact on server load but it is not generally a major problem: In fact, a few large queries are a lot heavier on the server than lots of small ones. So, yeah, lots of massive template inclusions will hurt the server but so will lots of massive walls of text on a single page and most signature templates aren't that largem.--The General T U! P! F! 08:45, 13 May 2011 (BST)
    Unless we want to ask Kevan for some performance stats to settle this, can we stop waving our wiki-peens? Tongue :P ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 08:54, 13 May 2011 (BST)
    I would prefer to call it a "reasoned debate" Tongue :P.--The General T U! P! F! 14:36, 13 May 2011 (BST)
    ^This. Although we could probably move it to the talk page or {{Nosubst}} talk page or something. --Karekmaps 2.0?! 14:43, 13 May 2011 (BST)
    Seconded, although keep the current discussion points here so for perspective voters. ~Vsig.png 14:51, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
  16. Keep - after some serious pondering. I'd vote delete in a heartbeat if it had been that way all the time, but pulling it away now will cause a lot of issues for rarely active users. Adding substings to sigs occassionally, while not fun, is the lesser evil. -- Spiderzed█ 17:02, 11 May 2011 (BST)
  17. Keep - I'm with Vapor and Gnome on this one.--THE Godfather of Яesensitized, Anime Sucks Yalk | W! U! WMM| CC CPFOAS DORISFlag.jpg LOE ZHU | Яezzens 23:42, 13 May 2011 (BST)
  18. Keep - What problem is this fixing? Transclusion limits on high-traffic pages? If so, just ban templated sigs on the pages in question. Otherwise, I'm with AHLG. I do NOT want to read "lol" followed by 14 lines of code before I can see the next comment, which is what this would cause to happen far too often. —Aichon— 08:49, 15 May 2011 (BST)

Kept. 12 Keep votes and 6 Delete votes. ~Vsig.png 05:27, 17 May 2011 (UTC)


Federal Stafford Loan Program

Oh, I guess this is how pages are deleted? It was some sort of weird spam. -Susan Bakersfield 03:22, 14 May 2011 (BST)

Got this one when clearing out the bots. It's best to report them there (although it gets done here anyway). Thanks -- boxy 07:55, 14 May 2011 (BST)

Smart Revive Policy

The Smart Revive Policy was created in error and is effectively the No Random Revive Policy. It appears that Obsdark didn't read the No Random Revive Policy, and just looked at the old title of the page. There is only a few pages that link to the Smart Revive Policy and those could be redirected to the No Random Revive Policy. I also updated the No Random Revive Policy to merge in any of the needed information from Smart Revive Policy. --Akule Maker of fine, hand-crafted UDWiki sass since 2006 -- Akule School's back in session™ 02:07, 27 April 2011 (BST)

  1. Keep - this is a filibuster vote – Nubis NWO 02:14, 27 April 2011 (BST)
  2. Speedy crit 1 though voting speedy seems kind of pointless due to the above "vote". ~Vsig.png 03:09, 27 April 2011
  3. Delete - Technically crit 1, but seeing how Nubis is reading from the dictionary, it'll have to wait it out. -- Cheese 13:50, 27 April 2011 (BST)
  4. Delete Unneeded and inferior copy of an established tactic. -- Spiderzed█ 14:24, 27 April 2011 (BST)
  5. Speedy - Criteria 1.--Yonnua Koponen T G P ^^^ 14:41, 27 April 2011 (BST)
  6. 'delete this is a busterfily vote -- ϑanceϑanceℜevolution 17:07, 27 April 2011 (BST)
  7. keep As a Redirect. --Karekmaps 2.0?! 21:25, 27 April 2011 (BST)
  8. Keep - redirect -- boxy 07:44, 3 May 2011 (BST)
  9. Keep as the boxman -- HEY! HANDS OFF MAH BOOBS!   bitch  06:31, 11 May 2011 (utc)
  10. Keep - Redirect it--Michalesonbadge.pngTCAPD(╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻ 22:19, 11 May 2011 (BST)

5 to 5. Kept as a redirect. ~Vsig.png 06:25, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

The living

Not really much in the way of content here. I'd like to have the page deleted so that I can use the name (with a capitol L). *Clint Clintstone* Talk 10:35 21 April 2011 (EST)

  1. delete - never got off the ground etc. -- ϑanceϑanceℜevolution 03:46, 22 April 2011 (BST)
  2. Keep - This is both history, a group that existed(and we don't delete disbanded groups just 'cause), and also a page stuffed full of content when context is shown. We killed crit 12 for a reason. --Karekmaps 2.0?! 03:52, 22 April 2011 (BST)
  3. Keep. Its well linked. --Rosslessness 11:04, 22 April 2011 (BST)
    My arse. it has like 8 and you made half of them years ago and only because they mentioned the dead? -- ϑanceϑanceℜevolution 12:07, 22 April 2011 (BST)
    Sorry, its referred to as part of the did you know section of the wiki, I don't know why Clint doesn't just use The Living --Rosslessness 12:28, 22 April 2011 (BST)
  4. Keep. As Ross. You don't have to get rid of that page to create The Living. And we could also add a disambiguation notice on top of the page to refer to the older/newer group respectively. -- Spiderzed█ 12:47, 22 April 2011 (BST)
    This^. Especially since they're both unique pages and the stats page links by caps(like the whole wiki). --Karekmaps 2.0?! 13:42, 22 April 2011 (BST)
  5. Keep - As Above.-- | T | BALLS! | 13:46 22 April 2011(UTC)
  6. Delete Just another of those "exists only on paper" kind of groups with no real content, the kind of which we deleted hundreds of. -- Cat Pic.png Thadeous Oakley Talk 13:59, 22 April 2011 (BST)
  7. Delete - this page doesn't stop you using the capital L space... and anyway, afaik, this one is just a reactionary page to The Dead... puppy tears, and all that, y'know Tongue :P -- boxy 15:08, 22 April 2011 (BST)
    He'll find it difficult to do as that The Living is now in use. --Akule Maker of fine, hand-crafted UDWiki sass since 2006 -- Akule School's back in session™ 21:38, 25 April 2011 (BST)
  8. Keep -- Asheets 16:15, 22 April 2011 (BST)
  9. Keep SHUT THE FUCK UP!. i loled.--  bitch 16:19, 22 April 2011
  10. Delete - get out. --Karloth Vois ¯\(°_o)/¯ 17:50, 22 April 2011 (BST)
  11. Keep - this is a filibuster vote – Nubis NWO 23:57, 23 April 2011 (BST)
  12. Keep - Sure, why not - Serious Post Please do not silly. You rated this wiki '1'! Great job, go hog wild!|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| DealWithIt.gif 15:27, 24 April 2011 (BST)
  13. Keep - We're already deleting the living from the game, why not have a reminder they once existed here? --Laughing Man 15:44, 24 April 2011 (BST)
  14. Weak Keep - As Karek and Ross, but weaker. Linkthewindow  Talk  16:18, 24 April 2011 (BST)
  15. Keep - As Karek and Ross. --Akule Maker of fine, hand-crafted UDWiki sass since 2006 -- Akule School's back in session™ 21:38, 25 April 2011 (BST)
  16. Keep - As Spiderzed.--Yonnua Koponen T G P ^^^ 17:40, 26 April 2011 (BST)

Kept with 12 Keeps and 4 Deletes. ~Vsig.png 06:17, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Bookmarks

I wanted to make a page under my username, but instead made this. I already remade the page under my user-name, here, so I would like for you to delete this page (somebody else may want to use Bookmarks in the future, and I don't want to waste space).--ShadowScope'the true enemy' 02:33, 1 May 2011 (BST)

EDIT: Also requesting a Speedy Delete, if that is all possible.--ShadowScope'the true enemy' 02:34, 1 May 2011 (BST)
Scheduled – Speedy, Crit 7 by proxy. All gone. Happy ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 03:56, 1 May 2011 (BST)

Archive

Deletions Archive
2005 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2006 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2007 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2008 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2009 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2010 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2011 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2012 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Q3 Q4
2013 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
2014 Jan-Jun Jul-Dec
Years 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Retrieved from "http://wiki.urbandead.com//index.php?title=UDWiki:Administration/Deletions/Archive/2011_06&oldid=2065374"