Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2009 February 22

< February 21	February 23 >

February 22

Template:Welcomeunclesam

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. JPG-GR (talk) 23:28, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Welcomeunclesam (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

While this is certainly one of the more creative welcome templates we have, I don't think it's appropriate to use a modified version of Flagg's Uncle Sam recruitment poster to welcome new users. My main concern is that it presents a US-centric image of Wikipedia to new users. A second concern is that some people may react negatively to being welcomed with an image of Uncle Sam, particularly in light of the militaristic connotations of Flagg's poster (it was, after all, a military recruitment poster). –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 07:09, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep with a smile. If a user used the Mona Lisa, would that be Italo-centric? The image is well known worldwide, and it is not considered particularly "militaristic" at this point. Collect (talk) 11:25, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- While the image of "Uncle Sam" has changed over time, it is still being used in the context of discussions about American imperialism, nationalism, and militarism. See, for example, [1][2]. By the way, I'm not suggesting that I either agree or disagree with these viewpoints; my only goal is to point out that they are held by some people. –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 20:14, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep astatine-210 ^{discovered elements ∞ what am I?} 20:49, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Could you please provide a reason for your "strong keep"? Deletion debates do not function as votes, but rather as discussions involving an exchange of rationales. Thank you, –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 22:36, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I think it's amusing, and it is after all a parody of the recruiting poster, not a serious expression of US imperialism. --Uncia (talk) 02:26, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- My concern is not that the template was intended as an expression of militarism or American nationalism, but rather that it could be perceived as such by new users. After all, there's nothing to prevent a new user from perceiving a welcome message (usually the first message on their talk page) as some sort of official message from Wikipedia. While some will consider the image to be amusing and some will simply ignore it, some people may take offense. Wikipedia is, after all, an international encyclopedia with users from all over the world.
  Perhaps a thought experiment may help: How might a Palestinian user feel about a welcome message that contained an image of an Israeli national symbol? How might an Israeli user feel about a welcome message that contained one of the symbols of the PNA or Hamas? How might an Armenian user feel about a welcome message that contained an image of a Turkish national symbol? How might an American user feel about a welcome message that contained an image of one of the symbols of the Taliban?
  My point is that national symbols are, in any conflict, used to arouse passions and emotions on both sides: devotion to one's nation's symbols and enmity toward the opponent's. We should not do anything that gives the impression that we represent one side or another. –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 22:34, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per thorough explanation of Black Falcon. As it happens, I personally find the Uncle Sam poster quite amusing and not offensive in the least. But it's just not appropriate for use in a welcome message to new users. Cgingold (talk) 03:48, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
How about retaining it as a welcome template for WP:USA (assuming that they're interested)? That should help to make sure that it goes on the right talk pages. PC78 (talk) 17:07, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- That's an innovative idea, and it led me to discover Category:Project-specific Welcome templates. There's still a chance that the template could be placed on the 'wrong' talk pages (after all, non-Americans do edit US-related articles) but it would be significantly diminished. Of course, they might not want it since they would probably need to rewrite much or most of the text, but I can't speak on their behalf. –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 19:49, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - I've left the project a message regarding this template and discussion. Personally I'm torn between thinking you have a point and thinking that it's just over cautious political correctness, so I shall refrain from making a !vote either way. Perhaps an admin could relist this discussion rather than close it? PC78 (talk) 20:08, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Locobot (talk) 01:35, 21 May 2009 (UTC) - JPG-GR (talk) 19:02, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete if the template does not present any new reasons for creating an account. The image is a tad by menacing and could be misconstrued by people outside of the United States. If any new reasons for creating an account are listed, merge those reasons with a main "create an account" template and get rid of this one. LA (T) @ 06:13, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep The template is being used across wikipedia to welcome new users by people who use Friendly. In addition to the enumerated red links that would suddenly pop up, it is a pretty useful template, recreating the WW I experience... Cheers. Imperat§ r^(Talk) 22:38, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- For what it's worth, there are only 20 incoming links to the template (see whatlinkshere), of which only 5 need to be removed. I'm willing to do cleanup of the incoming links if there is consensus to delete. –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 04:28, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Has a small but not negligible chance of getting a reaction opposite of the desired one. - Nabla (talk) 02:01, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Seems harmless to me. If an annon on the English Wikipedia would have such as strong negative reaction to seeing Uncle Sam on a talk page with such a friendly greeting, he or she is probably not capable of WP:NPOV and we wouldn't miss 'em. bahamut0013^words_deeds 12:30, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Would you feel the same way about a friendly greeting accompanied by the flag of Hezbollah? If not you, then how might an Israeli user feel? I know that the two symbols are different in many ways, and I personally don't feel the same about them, but they are similar in one important respect: just as the flag of Hezbollah draws negative reactions from some people, the image of Uncle Sam—which is still used in the context of discussions/allegations of American imperialism, nationalism, and militarism (see my reply to Collect)—also draws negative reactions from some. My concern is not to coddle POV-pushers who throw a fit at the sight of a particular image; rather, for me it is an issue of how neutrally we want to portray Wikipedia to a new user. Thank you, –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 18:16, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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:AFL 2008 Rounds

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 - Nabla (talk) 01:50, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:AFL 2008 Rounds (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This is an unused template which serves no purpose as all rounds results are available at 2008 AFL season. Nearly all rounds are redlinked, and the couple that aren't redirect to 2008 AFL season. All the finals series results are located at 2008 AFL finals series except the Grand Final which is at 2008 AFL Grand Final - Allied45 (talk) 03:45, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete As per Allied45; the template, in addition to having an overwhelming amount of red links, is redundant. To top that, it isn't even in use. Cheers. Imperat§ r^(Talk) 22:40, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete While it may be useful later in the year there wouldn't so many red links, I don't believe it has been announced what games will be taking place for the later rounds. ^BlackManta 09:16, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: The template is for last season which concluded 5 months ago, and clearly has not been useful. - Allied45 (talk) 11:28, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.