Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2018 August 20

< August 19	August 21 >

August 20

Template:Open draft

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).

The result of the discussion was Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 07:07, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Open draft (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

I feel this template is rather redundant. All drafts are open, so flagging one as particular open seems to create two classes of drafts. We should simply update the language in {{Draft}} if it's not considered welcoming enough (discussion). Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 18:47, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 19:10, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 ^{talk to me | my contributions} 09:14, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Regardless of how we think drafts ought to work, the truth is that most of us wouldn't mess around with other people's drafts unless explicitly invited. This template provides precisely this sort of invitation, a functionality that is not provided by the related template {{Draft}}, even after the proposed change suggested by the nom. I don't think the use of this template creates "two classes of drafts" rather than marking up a diffrence that's already there: some people create tentative drafts for whose completion they need and expect external input, while others – probably a majority – start drafts whose completion they already have in the pipeline. Also noting that this was discussed three months ago: Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2018 April 28#Template:Open draft. – Uanfala (talk) 14:58, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Drafts explicitly mentions that drafts can be edited by everyone, as does {{Draft}}. If you object to drafts being a collaborative space, you should take it to WT:DRAFTS and start an RFC. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} —Preceding undated comment added 15:16, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Of course I'm not objecting to the draftspace being collaborative. Mentioning the trite fact that a given draft – like all drafts – is editable by anyone is a different thing from encouraging people to contribute to it. – Uanfala (talk) 15:26, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Uanfala: How about we add |join-in= to {{Draft}}? See Template:Draft article/doc#Invite others to join in.Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 20:15, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate it that you're trying to make an accommodation (especially now that the !vote tally makes it quite likely for your deletion proposal to pass), but I think this is an awkard solution: {{draft}} and {{open draft}} produce rather different outcomes and it will be counter-intuitive to tack them on to a single template. – Uanfala (talk) 20:41, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Uanfala: Compare before and after. Not sure what the 'different outcomes' you refer to are, or how any of it is counter intuitive. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 20:45, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The outcome of one of the templates is a small box with a brief and specific message. The outcome of the other template is a massively detailed generic box, which – if a certain parameter is set to "yes" – would also include, at the end of it all, a message with a similar intention. That's what I mean by "different outcomes". – Uanfala (talk) 21:01, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Coffeeandcrumbs:, since you're the last person that used this template, how do you feel about before and after? Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 20:47, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete wording on {{Draft}} specifically states that all drafts are open making {{Open draft}} redundant. Kadane (talk) 07:03, 22 August 2018 (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).

Template:Hull Stingrays

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).

The result of the discussion was delete. (non-admin closure) Galobtter (pingó mió) 10:00, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Hull Stingrays (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Not used. 1 link and 12 redlinks (one is to a previously deleted non-notable article) EdwardUK (talk) 15:03, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nominator....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 10:36, 22 August 2018 (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).

Template:Ua league table row

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).

The result of the discussion was Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 07:07, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Ua league table row (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Ua league start (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

redundant to {{fb cl2 team}} (which is being deleted and replaced by Module:sports table) Frietjes (talk) 13:41, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - per nom. 21.colinthompson (talk) 00:08, 29 August 2018 (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).