Template talk:Article for deletion/Archive 7

Technical hitch
If I preview any deleted article with afd subtituted at the top, all I see is "This template must be substituted. Replace AFD with subst:AFD". In large red bold text. Which makes reviewing deleted content a bit tricky at times :-) Guy 13:41, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I've been bugged by this for a while... I have no idea how to fix it, but the two obvious workarounds are to preview an older version or copy a version without the AfD tag to your sandbox. --W.marsh 13:42, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Colour
Can we change this to a less distracting colour than the grey it is now? Something like a light yellow or cream would look a lot less ugly (in my very humble opinion). Voretus talk  16:21, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
 * In the original discussion, the plan was to make the background, and therefore the template, stand out even on LCD screens that don't show contrast very well. --ais523 17:33, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Why? Voretus  talk  21:28, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Here's the original discussion: Template talk:Afd/Archive01. It doesn't seem as though there was that much discussion about the background colour. --ais523 08:36, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Add a note?
We should probably add some kind of note here that for low-quality or unsourced articles, if you want it not to be deleted, it may be more productive to improve the article than to argue on the AFD page. The latter seems to happen a lot but the former is preferable. ( Radiant ) 16:00, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree with this in theory, but unfortunately it seems as though the people who write low-quality articles tend not to read all the text on the AfD tag anyway... --ais523 13:51, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Remove parameter about wrong namespace
Could we remove the parameter that says about wrong namespace from it - the reason being that I've been trying to create a version of this template in a sandbox in my userspace, and when I subst it, it comes up with a wrong namespace error - can we remove this?? Thanks, --SunStar Net 01:22, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
 * You can copy the template code from this page, remove that part and paste it on your sandbox. —Centrx→talk &bull; 02:49, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Red link in the second row
I'm trying to replace the redlink in the second row with a temporary link to preload the discussion, but there might be a coding error, so I autoreverted. Can anyone look this over:

Supposedly the "Click this" redlink (3rd variable in the #ifexist bracket should be replaced with the "You may share" line (2nd variable) as soon as the discussion is created, but for some reason it didn't work. It might've been a browser cache problem though, so there might not actually be a coding error in there. ~ trialsanderrors 23:03, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
 * There was some disagreement about the preloaded-debate link when it was added (it was reverted by someone who wanted to use the older method of copying-and-pasting the Afd2 text that appears at the bottom of the template); the current version is a compromise solution added at the same time as WP:AFDC that makes both the preload and copy-afd2 methods possible. This change would remove the old copy-afd2 method and so might infuriate people who still use it. Apart from that, it looks pretty good, except that it would make a symmetrical mass nomination (where the debate page name is different from all the article names) harder to do (because the preload method doesn't work in such cases). There is also the confusion for new users that would be created due to the #ifexist not changing until the article page was edited or purged; there would be a 'create a discussion page' link even after the page had been created, until the next edit or purge (and how many new users know about purging a page). This is probably the 'browser cache' problem that trialsanderrors is referring to (I think it's a server rather than a browser cache problem, which would be quite hard to correct without some sort of purge backlink from Afd2, which would complicate the process rather than simplifying it). So: technically correct, but probably a bad idea anyway. --ais523 12:56, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Interwiki for Interlingua
Dear administrator, please add the following interwiki:

ia:Patrono:Vpd

Thank you in advance, Julian Mendez 15:56, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Done. -- JLaTondre 16:27, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Edit Request
Propose to have the phrase "Articles for Deletion page" in the second line wiki-linked to Articles_for_deletion. Cheers - PocklingtonDan 19:22, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Hm. I'm not sure, but putting the two links so close together might cause confusion (newcomers might ask "which link do I click?"). But in general, a link like that might be helpful. Worth running this past the village pump, perhaps, to see whether the link to Guide to deletion at the end is sufficient, or if some other solution can be reached. Luna Santin 20:26, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
 * See Village pump (proposals). Luna Santin 20:31, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Request filled. Viridae Talk 09:09, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Simplify source
I'd like to see a template that works like something like this:

User types:

Template substs

<!- The next line relates to the discussion about deleting this article. Do not remove until the discussion is finished. -> <!- The above line relates to the discussion about deleting this article. Do not remove until the discussion is finished. ->

Readers see the normal boiler plate.

This would really make the code more readable, and less susceptiable to accidental breakage. Comments?

Rich Farmbrough, 11:59 14 January 2007 (GMT).

Afd source would be something like at testafd

Rich Farmbrough, 22:53 16 January 2007 (GMT).
 * Already done at AfDU last year.  Just use  .  Uncle G 19:45, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Auto link to log proposal
I wanted to propose this version of AfD. The difference is that the last link, to the log, automatically adds the {subst:afd3|pg=Lucasbfr/Sandbox}} text at the bottom of the list (of course that changes with the page you put the AfD template on ;). The idea is just to ease the AfD listing, maybe less people will forget the 3rd step. Tell me if you find any issue but I think I have the exact same behavior than the current AfD template. -- lucasbfr talk 08:38, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The template does not currently automatically click on submit since I didn't want to force that kind of behavior. But it can be done the way Lupin's tool does it. -- lucasbfr talk 08:44, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Autoedit doesn't work for anyone who doesn't use popups (or Lupin's autoedit separately), so this isn't portable (it's a feature of popups IIRC, not anywhere in the MediaWiki namespace). --ais523 08:49, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * After tests, I can confirm that this doesn't work with popups turned off. Removing editprotected. --ais523 08:53, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Woops... I completly forgot that part. After removing all my add ons that is no longer working... That might explain why the change was never done... If I am correct that would need an other Afd2 starter like template... Gonna dig the media wiki doc. -- lucasbfr talk 09:03, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Moved documentation
I've moved the documentation for this template to the Template:Afd/doc subpage, as recommended by WP:DOC. Please modify the template to (you may want to copy from source to avoid any Wiki->HTML conversion conflicts):  This article is being considered for deletion in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy.

You may share your thoughts on the matter at this article's entry on the Articles for deletion page.

Please improve the article if possible, but the article must not be blanked, and this notice must not be removed, until the discussion is closed. For more information, particularly on merging or moving the article during the discussion, read the guide to deletion.

Steps to list an article for deletion: • Preloaded debate OR''  ~ •  [ log]

Thanks! +mwtoews 21:11, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Done. --CBD 22:51, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Minor modifications
Does anyone object to either of these modifications of mine? Picaroon 21:34, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * People don't seem to like it, so I self-reverted. Oh well. Picaroon 03:42, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

a simple, usable template
I find this template a lil on the confusing side, and I've been editing over a year. Perhaps it could be formatted more like the commons version, with a simple 1, 2, 3 step sort of flow. Simple and easy, perhaps attracting more users into help? — Jack · talk · 18:28, Wednesday, 4 April 2007


 * You mean like this version? Sorry, it was done and changed back to the current version because the template takes up many lines when subst'ed, and even more when longer instructions are added. &mdash;Resurgent insurgent 2007-04-17 14:49Z 


 * The cheat sheet for what to do after adding can still be found in . It's the same cheat sheet as in the version of this template I linked to. &mdash;Resurgent insurgent 2007-04-17 14:51Z 

Hard-coded URI
editprotected

This template currently uses a hard-coded URI. This is a problem for users using the semi-secure proxy. Please change

Preloaded debate

to

[ Preloaded debate]

—Remember the dot (talk) 19:33, 16 April 2007 (UTC)


 * ✅ Done Harryboyles 00:59, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

editprotected

Someone changed it back. Please redo the edit. —Remember the dot (talk) 15:44, 9 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I made the change, which is at template:AfDM now. Please let me know if it needs to be reverted for any reason, I'll be around for a little while. CMummert · talk 21:21, 9 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks. —Remember the dot (talk) 17:07, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Getting rid of subst
Please see, Template_talk:Afd above. --Gmaxwell 18:45, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Unbalanced syntax
editprotected

The small text at the bottom starts with " ''..." , but those opening italics don't appear to be terminated explicitly. Can that be fixed. John Vandenberg 17:07, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * ✅ Done --ais523 17:10, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Div Spacing
editprotected

Please someone add a space below the afd box so it does not lie directly against other boxes below it. Many other boxes have this padding below and above them; it will improve aesthetic consistency. --Remi 02:02, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
 * ✅ Done. (By the way, don't subst the editprotected template.) --ais523 13:12, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

No warning for non-subst template
Due to a recent change, this template does not show the big red message if used without "subst:". Could that be added back (I never quite understood how that works)? Tizio 11:44, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * The purpose of changing the template was to allow it not to be subst'ed. Resurgent insurgent 10:28, 4 June 2007 (UTC) Scratch that... users who don't subst this will quickly discover there's no way they can complete the nomination. All the links will be broken. And so they will learn not to try it again. Resurgent insurgent 10:38, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
 * As you see in User:DumbBOT/IncompleteAfD, they just don't complete the nominations at all... Tizio 13:02, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
 * We could put the "bold red text" code back in, but I'm wondering if adding a category exclusively for non-subst'ed vfds would be helpful - something like Category:Pages improperly nominated for deletion (We could use this to catch mis-added prods too)? Resurgent insurgent 13:54, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, the red bold text was what I was thinking about. A partial list of incorrect noms is at User:DumbBOT/IncompleteAfD. However, catching all possible problems is hard. There is also User:DumbBOT/TimeSortedAfD: articles that have been in Category:Articles for deletion for a month or more are certainly problematic. Tizio 14:39, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
 * One problem with the old YOU HAVEN'T SUBSTED THIS warning is that it remains in the wikicode after substing, which sort of defeats the point of using AfDM. Maybe there's some way to transfer the warning into that template through some sort of param that only shows up when not substed, using the optional subst trick? --ais523 14:41, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I thought of the same thing and tried something on test.wiki without success (see the latest IP edits there for what I did). What I tried was the equivalent of adding |subst= yes to AfDM... but it always shows up in the article as if subst=yes . Resurgent insurgent 15:03, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
 * It is possible: see User:ais523/Sandbox, User:ais523/Sandbox2, and this revision of the main Sandbox (representing afd, AfDM, and the article respectively). --ais523 15:09, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Hmm... that'll mean one more template to protect, perhaps. Since the setup needs a blank template with only if I'm right. Resurgent insurgent 15:22, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
 * You can get the extra markup as short as (with the current versions of my sandboxes); that's just one extra character. ns:0 is a magic word, and so doesn't need protecting. (This has to be in first-param position, but AfDM has no numbered parameters.) --ais523 15:25, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Works fine! Thanks you both. Tizio 16:43, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
 * OK I made it so that was used as the check parameter (Uncle G later corrected it to ) and if an article has just  on, it will be dumped into Category:Articles for deletion using wrong syntax. Someone may want to change the check param to a more correct name but my template-fu is insufficient for this... dunno if it will cause the category to fill up by mistake again. Resurgent insurgent 17:31, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I've changed it to use " " (vs. " ") as the key parameter, which should probably be less misleading than " ". —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 21:07, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Extra comment for second noms
I've tweaked the template so that if no optional parameter is given and the default nomination page already exists, the following additional comment will be included in the substed source:

Having watched some editors struggle with second nominations, I think this may be useful. Feel free to improve the wording. I didn't want to make the message any more conspicuous (such as by making it visible on the rendered page) because, even though it appears only under certain rather specific circumstances, it might end up being included needlessly if some editors (or scripts) are using a "backwards" workflow where they create the nomination page before adding the tag.

Somewhat related to this, I also fixed Template:AfDM so that the "Preloaded debate" link shows up only if the nomination page has the standard name and doesn't exist yet, since using it with a differently-named nomination page would produce incorrect links in the nomination, and trying to use the link when the page already exists won't work at all. I also fixed the model text for the second step so that the value of the  parameter to Template:Afd2 will always be the actual name of the page being nominated. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 05:33, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

This template and Template:Afdx
I've proposed to change so that it uses this template. Please see details and comment at template talk:afdx. Resurgent insurgent 10:55, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Add afd3 to top of list
As of the beginning of June 2007, the afd3 template is supposed to be added to the top of the AFD log. However, many people add it to the bottom. I propose adding:
 * (Add to the top of the list) or (Add to top of list)

after the word "Log" on the bottom line of the template. Flyguy649 talk contribs 14:57, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Edit request for above
Please add the following to the afd template, bottom line, following the word "Log":
 * wikicode: (Add to top of list) (will display as: (Add to top of list) )

This is to reflect the relatively recent changes in AfD nomination procedure. Thanks. Flyguy649 talk contribs 17:31, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Yes check.svg|20px]] Done. Cheers. --MZMcBride 19:27, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

To encourage editing while afd is in progress
I propose that "Feel free to edit the article, but the article must..." be changed to "Feel free to edit the article to improve it, but it must...". --Victor falk 05:22, 25 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Isn't the current wording better? It's more concise, which is a good thing in templates. Nihiltres ( t .l ) 13:14, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Consensus; then editprotected. Cheers. --MZMcBride 00:16, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

For Admin
Please adding Japanese Wikipedia to Delete templates.--Naohiro19 (Talk Page/Contributions/Do you send mail for me?) 05:56, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
 * ✅. Should be showing up shortly. Tito xd (?!? - cool stuff) 06:35, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Talk:PAGENAME
The line "Unregistered users placing this tag on an article cannot complete the deletion nomination and should leave detailed reasons for deletion on Talk:PAGENAME." is not picking up the pagename automatically, which rather defeats the point. --Rumping 12:11, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I can't find the line you refer to. Where is it? --ais523 09:26, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I think I fixed it at 12:37 the same day following a notice on ANI -- lucasbfr talk 12:09, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Indeed. Your edit was  - thanks.  It has since been changed again.--Rumping 21:33, 11 October 2007 (UTC)