Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2014 April 23



Template:YouTube Top 20 Subscribed

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

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ (talk) 03:20, 3 May 2014 (UTC)
 * YouTube Top 20 Subscribed

Duplicate of Template:YouTube most subbed, additional content violates WP:INDISCRIMINATE & WP:NOTDIRECTORY. We already have List of the most subscribed channels on YouTube. Otterathome (talk) 20:03, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Don't really mind or care that the template is being considered for deletion. But don't say it's a duplicate. The difference between this template and the other one is that this one is a template that serves to navigate between the current top 20 most subscribed YouTube channels (with the intention of being updated monthly). The other template's purpose is to navigate between YouTube channels that have achieved the status of being the #1 most subscribed channel on the entire website. And yes, I'm aware that We already have List of the most subscribed channels on YouTube because I created that article. Thanks. Have a splendid day. Bobcatwaterlion (talk) 04:58, 24 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete a trivial list of YouTube channels. One of which changes constantly, isn't filled with links, and there's no need to have these articles link to each other, WP:CLN. 117Avenue (talk) 05:23, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
 * delete Frietjes (talk) 16:37, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOTDIRECTORY. — Indian: BIO'  · [ ChitChat  ] 08:44, 28 April 2014 (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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Workpage

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

The result of the discussion was no consensus Plastikspork ―Œ (talk) 13:06, 3 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Workpage

This template clearly meets WP:T2 (although an administrator has declined to perform the speedy deletion, citing a reason not mentioned in the criterion) by not only contradicting WP:FAKEARTICLE by not even mentioning a time limit but also not even guiding users towards moving such content to the user namespace. (Note that Template:Userspace draft can simply be used instead, so no template merger is necessary for use on those pages that do not in fact violate WP:FAKEARTICLE.) In short, it is my understanding of policy that workpages outside of userspace are prohibited, and if using portions of articles, may only be stored for a limited time even in userspace. Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 01:31, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep.
 * Request for speedy deletion
 * Request denied
 * Dogmaticeclectic's entire argument rests upon one unwarranted assumption; that all workpages are userspace drafts of articles. As you can see from examining my own workpage, I use my workpage as a collection of material and work in progress that may or may not be incorporated into an article. In one case I used it to save some snippets of editing text without any formatting or Wikimarkup processing, which I later used while editing a page. In another case I used my workpage to publish a sorted list of 1000 article feedback IDs chosen at random using my hardware RNG, which we used during an RfD, and finally I used  my workpage as a central location to gather user evaluations of article feedback comments. All were material used to further legitimate Wikipedia work, and none had the slightest resemblance to an article. --Guy Macon (talk) 03:03, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * User:Guy Macon, it is my understanding of policy (please provide a link if you think this understanding is incorrect) that workpages outside of userspace are prohibited. Indeed, that very page you linked to is in your own userspace! Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 09:27, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Wikiprojects have workspages, I fail to see why you say collaborative workpages are prohibited, since a user's workpage is for a single user, while collaborative workpages are for multiple users. Indeed Templates have workpages in TemplateSpace, as common practice, sho saying that they are disallowed outside of userspace is wrong. Indeed many controversial articles have workpages where things are hashed out before being implemented. Where's your policy link for this being forbidden? -- 65.94.43.240 (talk) 05:34, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Dogmaticeclectic has been indefinitely blocked and thus cannot respond, but the answer is that it isn't forbidden, which means that the major argument for deleting this template has fallen apart at the seams. --Guy Macon (talk) 13:37, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Gallery pages/work,
 * WikiProject Stagecraft/Sandbox,
 * WikiProject Dyslexia/Proposed organization.
 * --Guy Macon (talk) 20:35, 29 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Strong keep it clearly marks areas for gathering data as a talkspace subpage, projectspace subpage, or userspace subpage and work area, and not for demarcating articles. Marking a scratchspace is a good idea. How is it a fakearticle if it's not meant to look like an article at all, but just places to determine formatting and gather information? Userspace draft clearly cannot be used if the stratchpage is not in userspace (and why should we expect all workpages to be in userspace? ) and if they're not draft articles, then it doesn't even make sense. -- 70.24.250.192 (talk) 05:07, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * It is my understanding of policy (please provide a link if you think this understanding is incorrect) that workpages outside of userspace are prohibited. Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 09:27, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * You appear to have misunderstood the concept of burden of proof. It is not my job to show where something is allowed. It is yours to show that it is prohibited. If this concept still eludes you, it is my understanding of policy (please provide a link if you think this understanding is incorrect) that usernames that containing 16 characters and start with "Dog" are prohibited. And BTW, please stay off of my talk page. You clearly do not understand the difference between a misleading edit summary and an edit summary that you disagree with, and thus your warning templates on the subject are not welcome. --Guy Macon (talk) 10:28, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * There clearly isn't a need for another template of this type. If userspace draft causes problems by not referring to things outside of userspace (and Dogmaticeclectic's assertion that such things are verboten holds: personally I think the latter is plainly incorrect, because template sandboxes fall into this category) then it could be merged with draft. I don't see any point whatsoever to Guy Macon's insistence that there is a semantic difference between a "work page" and a draft. Nobody is going to deleted people's userspace test code regardless of how it's labelled, and userspace is the only place (other than the project sandbox) where pages are ever going to be used for random dicking about without the explicit goal of producing a particular work. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 13:33, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * My workpage might look like "random dicking about without the explicit goal of producing a particular work" or it might look exactly like an article, depending on where I am in my workflow. Thus the message
 * "This is not a Wikipedia article: This is a workpage, a collection of material and work in progress that may or may not be incorporated into an article. It should not necessarily be considered factual or authoritative."''
 * is appropriate, and the message
 * "This is not a Wikipedia article: It is an individual user's work in progress page, and may be incomplete and/or unreliable. For guidance on developing this draft, see Wikipedia:So you made a userspace draft."
 * is not. BTW, Dogmaticeclectic has been indefinitely blocked. --Guy Macon (talk) 17:42, 23 April 2014 (UTC)--Guy Macon (talk) 17:42, 23 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete pointless template, we already have Template:Userspace draft which serves the same purpose. So redirect to that.--Otterathome (talk) 20:39, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Please explain how a template that contain the phrase "this draft" is appropriate for pages that are not in any way drafts. --Guy Macon (talk) 01:00, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
 * (...Sound of Crickets...) --Guy Macon (talk) 13:37, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Please explain why you care that your random tests and other userspace junk is specifically not labelled as a "draft", and how that benefits the encyclopedia. Sheesh. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 14:48, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't want to label non-drafts as drafts because doing so would be a lie. Telling the truth benefits the encyclopedia by making it more trustworthy. This template has been transcluded 4380 times, so it appears that telling the readers the truth is a rather popular concept. --Guy Macon (talk) 20:35, 29 April 2014 (UTC)


 * keep. in my opinion the template should be kept, although it is obvious that it is not a Wikipedia article, still it is useful so that some users not so familiar with Wikipedia may not be misled. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 888gowinda (talk • contribs) 16:30, 2 May 2014 (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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.