Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Lua/To do

 __NOINDEX__
 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was keep. The arguments presented below show that "to do" lists exist elsewhere, most specifically utilizing To do. (non-admin closure)  Steel1943  (talk) 18:08, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Lua/To do


Delete. We don't do "todo" commands at wikipedia. Also, it introduces a secondary talkpage for a topic already at the talkpage. Such lists tend to be skipped (by good sense), because it is a forum splitting/duplication by definition. DePiep (talk) 23:51, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep as creator. Having an organised list of modules to be converted is more useful than the talk-page format of Lua/Requests, as you can see things that need converting at a glance. Also, we do use to-do lists: for example, see Template:To do which has 7500 transclusions. — Mr. Stradivarius  ♪ talk ♪ 06:01, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes To do is fine, and to be used on talkpages, which nicely prevents splitting a topic over multiple pages. For example if you propose to Luafy, that's adding a section WP:Lua/Requests with the To do template. (And maybe add the target template to a category). It occurs to me that activity on the /To do page is low, which can indicate that this is not the (only) goto page, i.e. todo lists are maintained elsewhere too. -DePiep (talk) 11:55, 22 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep as per Mr. Stradivarius. Rationale for deletion is flawed, page is useful to Lua project and in use. It is not a talk page, and quite distinct in it's use and purpose. --Jules (Mrjulesd)  09:30, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
 * How 'flawed'? When I write 'introducing multi-forum splits the discussion' (and that's not about heated talk strategies, but simply about template/module development progress), I'm clear. For example, the module:String series were Lua-fied without such a todo list. Because it is not our work-process route. We also do not have a page "To do: articles that are not FA". DePiep (talk) 21:04, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
 * But it's not a discussion page, it's a task list. Almost all wikiprojcts have similar task lists, it's an established practice. As for FA look at Featured article candidates, a similar concept. --Jules (Mrjulesd)  21:21, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Whatever. Fourth time: splitting discussions over multiple pages does not work. Bye. -DePiep (talk) 00:24, 23 May 2015 (UTC)


 * keep. I don't see any other page that covers this. Maybe one day it will be empty and new tasks will come up sporadically and so can be handled on the talk page but now I think it has a purpose.-- JohnBlackburne wordsdeeds 02:21, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.