User:BrownHairedGirl/reduser

Boilerplated notice for use when editors object to the removal of a redlinked category from their userpage. To use:

Your redlinked category

 * (Sigh). Here we go again.
 * This isn't complicated: per WP:REDNOT, don't put redlinked categories on pages, and don't retain   on a page after Category:Foo has been deleted.
 * This is because all redlinked categories (on articles, userpages, or any other namespace) are listed together in cleanup lists such as Special:WantedCategories (which is where I found this one). Those cleanup lists are supposed to be (wait for it!) cleaned up, not filled with permanent entries because some editors decide to ignore a CFD consensus.
 * If there's some point which an editor wants to make on their userpage, there are many other ways to do it: userboxes, text, pictures, whatever. Make it humorous, whimsical, polemical or whatever. But categories either exist or they don't: placing a page in a redlinked category throws an error which impedes the work of others. No matter how screamingly funny or wise anyone thinks the redlinked category is, it's still impeding cleanup.
 * And yes, there are many many other things to be cleaned up on en.wp. That's why I think it's a huge pity that so much of the time spent by those of us who clean up Special:WantedCategories is taken up by the tiny number of editors who seem to think that their unique sense of humour or justified indignation or whatever entitles them to ignore both a consensus and WP:REDNOT and make work for others.  All the time spent on dealing with that drama could spent on other editing, or on life joys such as watching children, playing with cats, etc.
 * That's why Category:Wikipedians who retain deleted categories on their userpages was created as a kludge. Re-creating the category page as a hard redirect using    gets the thing out of cleanup lists, and allows the editors involved to feel v proud (or whatever) that they disregard a consensus decision and have apparently no reservations about impeding the encyclopedic maintenance work done by others. If you're happy to join that set, then do it and all is sorted. Personally, I'd not want to be in that group, but YMMV.
 * I made a template for this reply, because it's a regular issue, tho only with a v small number of editors. Amazingly, 99.99% of editors manage to express all their talents and humour and considered views and beliefs and allegiances without trying to populate deleted usercats. They just post a thank-you notification when their page is fixed. Odd, that: how can the 99.99% be so wildly out of step with everyone else?