![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
The {{
db-t3}}
template currently has
15 transclusions in Template space, but those pages are not appearing in any of the
CSD categories. --
Redrose64 (
talk) 14:15, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
|page=Foo
which has the HTML comment "CIRCUMVENT BLACKLIST" after it. Not sure why that is necessary but it wasn't a problem until an editor stopped categorising in non-template space. — Martin (
MSGJ ·
talk) 14:31, 3 December 2011 (UTC)![]() | This
edit request to
Template:db-g4 has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please replace the following code (at the beginning of a line)
<small>''See this page's {{#if:{{{1|}}}|[[{{{1}}}|AfD]]|
with the code
<small>''See this page's {{#if:{{{1|}}}|[[{{{1}}}|deletion discussion]]|
, since it does not have to exclusively be an AfD that is linked to (could be an RfD log page, etc.) — This, that, and the other (talk) 00:48, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
Frequently I come across speedy deletions with the message "This page was last edited by ... 1 second ago" (or occasionally even "... in 1 seconds time"), i.e. the page hasn't been purged since it was tagged. Yes, it's easy to click the time to purge it, but with a slow connection it does take a few moments. I propose this is changed to (e.g.) "This page was last edited by ... at 07:59 UTC (xx minutes ago)", with the purge link still retained. Purging the page will update the "xx minutes ago", but the time of last editing will be unaltered. If there's consensus for this change, I'm happy to try to work out the necessary code. Any thoughts? An optimist on the run! 08:03, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
As per Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Forced to enter a captcha each time I tag something for speedy deletion, This recent change to this template appears to have had the side effect of requiring anonymous editors to enter a CAPTCHA when tagging an article with a speedy deletion template. Is there some means of changing the added external link so that this side effect no longer occurs? -- Allen3 talk 23:46, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
Thank you guys for dealing with this issue. 69.59.200.77 ( talk) 00:33, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
{{
db-c1}}
So, after I found out that I should use {{
db-c1}}
for the reason I had, I had to find out how to use {{
db-c1}}
. Being a 30k editor, I entered my reasoning straight as parameter one: {{
db-c1|my reasoning}}
. You know, I do a speedy once a month, so I have a good intuitive guess on how to do it. Afterwards, somewhere I read that I was right (param 1=reasoning) -- sorry I cannot recall where I read that.
Then on the deletable page I saw a page with seven or ten lines in bold, and not my reasoning. Now that is strange, not? Where did my resoning go? Anyway, we all understand that seven bold lines is the best way to clarify a SPEEDY. At leasty to a 30k+ editor. Who needs a reasoning anyhow? -
DePiep (
talk) 01:25, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
I noticed on page Db-g7 that there was a deletion tag. I would like to vote against this tag, as I believe it sort of violates Assume good faith. I also believe the template is very useful. These matters seem important to discuss.
Walex03. Talking, working, friending. 20:06, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
{{
db-g7}}
- {{
db-g7}}
is the deletion tag. It's visible so that people can see what it looks like before they put it on other pages. --
Redrose64 (
talk) 20:39, 22 March 2012 (UTC)This is the last test edit! If you want to experiment, use the sandbox. The deletion tag, ( which I believe should not be here as well}} is not being previewed, and right now it is filled with false wiki code. I shall make this edit now.
Walex03. Talking, working, friending. 20:16, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
The above request I am making so that users do not have to follow the link to know what it is. Thanks. 75.53.218.81 ( talk) 01:47, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
Could someone make "Note to administrators: this template has content on its talk page which should be checked prior to deletion." bold? It doesn't stand out that well. -- Tomtomn00 ( talk • contributions) 17:04, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
For a couple days now, placing the db-copyvio tag wipes the entire content of the page (except for the tag itself). Is this a bug or a "feature"? Hairhorn ( talk) 17:30, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
I've just noticed that the recent introduction of the blanking tag to {{
db-g12}} breaks {{
db-multiple}}. Specifically, passing the G12 parameter to {{
db-multiple}} makes the courtesy blanking notice appear inside the template, and the text of the article does not actually get blanked. (This is because the core part of the template, {{
db-multiple/item}}, calls {{
db-g12}} itself to set the text of the notice and include the appropriate categories.) It seems to me that the best way to fix this would be to move the blanking tag to {{
db-meta}} and just pass it through {{
db-multiple}} and {{
db-multiple/item}} as a parameter, like |blanked = {{{blanked|}}}
. I've already got the blanking code working in
Template:db-meta/sandbox, which was just a matter of copying the code over from {{
db-g12}} and tweaking it a little. Could someone update the live template so that I can put the rest of the fixes in place? Best —
Mr. Stradivarius (
have a chat) 00:47, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
|blanked=yes
to {{
db-g10}} and {{
db-multiple}} at the same time. In this case, the "blanked" parameter displays the "this page has been blanked as a courtesy" notice, but it doesn't add the page-blanking div tag. In {{
db-g12}}, though, until I reverted it, the "blanked" parameter added both the blanking notice and the page-blanking div tag. So, we need to be careful to specify what behaviour we want. I think that for now it would make sense to update {{
db-meta}} so that the blanking notice appears at the bottom of the template, and not in the middle, as now happens with {{
db-multiple}}. The page-blanking div tag needs more discussion, though, I think. (Also see my post at
Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion#DB-G10 template.) —
Mr. Stradivarius (
have a chat) 04:59, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
This morning I discovered a bug in the code mentioned in the section above. What I thought was the end of the mbox code was actually the end of an #if: statement used by |raw=
. So at the moment, the code {{
db-meta|raw=yes|blanked=yes}} includes a blanking notice, when it should not. I've fixed this in the sandbox - try {{
db-meta/sandbox|raw=yes|blanked=yes}}. I've also commented/indented the code so that it's easier to read (for me, at least). As far as I know this isn't breaking anything at the moment, but I won't be able to fix {{
db-multiple}} while the bug is still in there. Could someone check that I haven't done anything (else) silly, and update the main template from the sandbox, please? —
Mr. Stradivarius (
have a chat) 04:07, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
I have sugesstion on Template:Db-G2 Criteria. "If you want to make test edit, use the Sandbox instead". So that the new user can understand where to do test edit. Thanks. -- Dede2008 ( talk) 16:18, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
{{
db-test-notice}}
, which is the note that should be posted to the talk page of the relevant user. This message is likely to persist long enough to be read, whereas the message on {{
db-g2}}
only exists until an admin deletes the page - which may be mere minutes, and so may not be long enough to be read by the user who created the page. --
Redrose64 (
talk) 17:50, 4 July 2012 (UTC)I ran into an interesting issue with {{ db-multiple}}, I tagged an article G6 and G7, with a rationale for the G6, this caused the rationale to appear both for the G6 reason and for the G7 in red. Is there a way to tweak the templates to better deal with this situation? Monty 845 19:39, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
|category=
|url=
|source=
|rationale=
|blanked=
|filename=
|article=
|bot=
|divblank=
. Each of these applies to every positional parameter - there is no means for making any of them apply to just one. --
Redrose64 (
talk) 15:26, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
|g6-rationale=
, |g7-rationale=
, and |g8-rationale=
(or whatever names we choose) would be more trouble than having the occasional doubling up that Monty saw. —
Mr. Stradivarius (
have a chat) 16:14, 8 September 2012 (UTC)The page for Template:Db-inc (and I suppose the other Db-___ templates whose talk pages redirect here) recommends
{{subst:db-notability-notice|Template:Db-inc|header=1}} ~~~~
Substituted as it stands, it warns the author that Template:Db-inc has been nominated for deletion, not the page that actually has been nominated. -- Thnidu ( talk) 05:55, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
Moved to start discussion at Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion -- Lexein ( talk) 16:45, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
The page Grace Barberry was closed delete at a redirects for discussion ( Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2012 October 28#Grace Barberry), but the link to the discussion doesn't work because the template adds "Wikipedia:Articles for deletion" to the front of the link. Besides, won't most user copy and paste the name of the page with the deletion discussion, which includes the "Wikipedia:Articles for deletion"? Ego White Tray ( talk) 13:09, 7 November 2012
The button label "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" assumes the viewer is using a mouse or similar pointing-device interface. Minor accessibility issue as someone browsing the page through a screen reader wouldn't "click", but activate navigation differently. Suggest to change to "Contest this speedy deletion" for simplicity as well as moving the viewers focus to the action, rather than the mechanics of how they interact with it. Cander0000 ( talk) 08:11, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Template:No content on page. Since you had some involvement with the Template:No content on page redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). 70.24.247.127 ( talk) 02:36, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
Is there a way to specify multiple URLs? -- SMS Talk 18:56, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please implement this change to allow reliable styling of the template. Keφr 14:39, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
I request that
should be added in the "See also"-section, because Template:Delete redirects to this page, but may have been typed when wanting to reach other deletion templates. I think this is an easier solution than making Template:Delete a disambiguation page and subsequently fixing all the "What links here". Mikael Häggström ( talk) 09:36, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
British Rail Class 472 request to delete a document.
Train is not actually planning to introduce.
Searching but can not on other sites.
Request to be removed is false information.
(* Web site: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_472 *)
For some reason, the {{ db-xfd}} cites WP:CSD#G6, but I see no reasons to label any deletion which was previously discussed (and approved) as a "speedy" one. I propose to drop any mentioning of Criteria for speedy deletion from {{db-xfd}} template. See also Wikipedia talk: Criteria for speedy deletion #Slight revision to G4 and G6. Incnis Mrsi ( talk) 19:37, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
{{
db-xfd}}
. I don't think that it is necessary either for this edgecase to be spelled out in painful detail in
WP:CSD, or for the notification template to link to a CSD criterion to 'make deletion legal'. As such, I think we're singing from the same songsheet.
Happy‑
melon 16:09, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Whether we call this speedy deletion or not is completely irrelevant, and there really is no reason to care. I did add the following text to its doc page: "Administrators deleting pages with this template should give the articles for deletion discussion for their deletion summary rather than listing it as G6." I think that this should address any concerns. Ego White Tray ( talk) 22:12, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
Per this discussion [ [1]] A7 has been expanded to include organized events. I was asked to notify the people who maintain Twinkle and csd templates so we can make the nec changes. If this is not the correct place can you let me know where it is? Hell In A Bucket ( talk) 14:36, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
This part of the CSD template, visible on those db- tags that suggest that the creator contests the deletion, has bothered me ever since it was introduced:
It is really verbose and difficult for newbies to understand. How about:
I think that is a lot clearer and lacks all the nested subordinate clauses of the old message. Should we implement it? — This, that, and the other (talk) 23:13, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
{{
editprotected}}
Let's have it, then. Thanks in advance, friendly admin who answers this request. —
This, that, and
the other (talk) 10:23, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Should the {{ db-disambig}} template include any page that only list one Wikipedia article? Obviously if there is only one article listed, there is nothing to disambiguate. Ego White Tray ( talk) 03:56, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
Take a look at how I revised it, feel free to revert if it still needs changes. Ego White Tray ( talk) 23:20, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Whilst I fully agree with the principle of hiding the text of attack pages from everyday readers once a db-attack tag has been added, it can be a bit of a pain for admins to have to go back and view the history of the page to check the content before deletion. I have a suggestion that would make our jobs a bit easier (and speed up deletion of the page). Firstly, replace <div id="AttackPage" style="display:none">
with <span class="sysop-show">
(which hides text from non-admins - see
my sandbox. Also remove the instruction to "please blank this page", possibly replacing it with the comment "The following text is available to administrators only" after the sysop-show tag. Once this is done, begin to re-educate page reviewers not to blank the page, but to leave the original text intact.
I haven't done any testing on this template yet, though I don't see any reason why it shouldn't work in principle. If there's support for this idea, I'll do some further testing. What do people think? An optimist on the run! 22:49, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
<div id="AttackPage" style="display:none">
prevent Wikipedia and Google from displaying the wikitext in their searches? —
Mr. Stradivarius
♪ talk ♪ 10:49, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
<!-- -->
" or template parameters. This is the same as what appears in the HTML.
Peter James (
talk) 12:27, 5 February 2013 (UTC)I see that {{
db-multi}}
handles
WP:CSD#G8, but {{
subst:Db-notice-multiple}}
doesn't. I've not checked for other inconsistencies. For example, if I tag something {{
db-multi|G11|G2}}
, it offers
{{
subst:Db-notice-multiple|Template:DJ-Vaibhav Sawant|header=1|G11|G2}}
which works properly, see
User talk:Sawantvaibhav23#Speedy deletion nomination of Template:DJ-Vaibhav Sawant; however although {{
db-multi|G2|G8}}
similarly offers
{{
subst:Db-notice-multiple|Talk:Dj Vaibhav Sawant|header=1|G2|G8}}
which is correct, but when this is saved to a user talk page, only the G2 notice is shown, see User talk:Sawantvaibhav23#Speedy deletion nomination of Talk:Dj Vaibhav Sawant. Is there a reason for this omission, or is it an oversight? -- Redrose64 ( talk) 13:23, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
{{
db-multi}}
. I had looked at
WP:CSD, and decided that both G2 and G8 applied to the page in question; and checking {{
db-multi}}
I saw both G2 and G8 marked "Yes", so I used {{
db-multi|G2|G8}}
. It then displayed a {{
subst:Db-notice-multiple}}
(exactly as above, but appended with four tildes), and so (as I normally do) I copied it verbatim to the user's talk page. It simply didn't occur to me that I needed to re-check compatibility before doing so - I assumed that what was valid in one would automatically be valid in the other. --
Redrose64 (
talk) 18:18, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
Is this a new policy? I am wondering when it came into action, I don't recall reading that before. Ranze ( talk) 02:47, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
Hello. The template {{ db-catempty}} places categories into Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as empty categories after four days, but this does not appear to happen automatically. For example, Category:2010 NCAA Division III football season is supposed to appear in Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as empty categories, but the latter category is empty. Purging does not appear to work. Can anyone explain why this is happening? It's possible that other categories eligible for CSD C1 are not being processed. Edge3 ( talk) 04:07, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
This is not a job queue issue, but a known bug: category membership simply isn't updated when pages are re-rendered. Instead of a null edit, you can also do action=purge&forcelinkupdate=1. You could have a bot do that on all pages transcluding appropriate templates. https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5382 Matma Rex talk 09:57, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
I note that this matter has been resolved, as per the successful BRFA on Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Joe's Null Bot 5. Thanks, everyone, for your help! Edge3 ( talk) 23:50, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I just wanted to mention that this template isn't working right. When Empty categories are submitted they should be going into Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as empty categories and this category does show in the category list at the bottom of the category submitted. But when I look at that category, nothing is in it. There is a very large backlog of empty categories for deletion that isn't getting worked because they aren't appearing. Here are some examples I submitted: Category:Wikipedia articles needing editing for flag use from May 2013, Category:Wikipedia categories needing cleanup from May 2013, Category:Wikipedia laundry list cleanup from May 2013 and Category:Wikipedia templates needing cleanup from May 2013 and there are also a lot with a system generated message like Category:Cleanup tagged articles without a reason field from April 2013 Kumioko ( talk) 14:52, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
{{
db-c1}}
. Empty categories shouldn't be G6-ed simply for being empty. --
Redrose64 (
talk) 19:35, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I would like "The page to be moved to this name is [[{{{1}}}]]." (third line on my screen) changed to "The page to be moved to this name is [[:{{{1}}}]].", see this edit for justification.
Laun chba ller 11:09, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
Please delete Category:Tactical development on the Western Front in 1917 created in error. Keith-264 ( talk) 12:33, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
I've noticed that whenever users contest a speedy deletion, they almost always leave the (your reason here) text alone and put their reason at the very end of the new section. Is there any way Template:Hangon preload generic could be changed to make it less likely users will do this? -- 71.199.125.210 ( talk) 16:48, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Requesting the following:
{{pagetype|subjectspace=yes}}
to be changed to:
{{talk other|talk page|{{pagetype|subjectspace=yes}}}}
so that when you tag a talk page for deletion, it won't appear as "this page/template/file may meet the criteria..." but "this talk page may meet..."
Note that there are three instances of this code in the db-meta template, so if you're going to change it, change them all.
Ginsuloft (
talk) 15:02, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
Could someone add "hoax" to the supported list of reasons in {{
db-multiple}}
? Thanks. — Preceding signed comment added by
Cymru.lass (
talk •
contribs) 22:23, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:Db-meta has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I'm requesting that {{ Db-meta}} be modified as follows to employ the new shortcuts for the CSD criterion:
| See [[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#{{uc:{{{criterion}}}}}|CSD {{uc:{{{criterion}}}}}]].
| See [[CSD:{{uc:{{{criterion}}}}}]].
[[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#{{{CRITERION}}}|CSD {{{CRITERION}}}]]
that needed changing to [[CSD:{{{CRITERION}}}]]
.
Technical 13 (
talk) 14:31, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I think that the following:
You can also [[{{TALKPAGENAME}}|visit the talk page]] to check if you have received a response to your message.
should be changed to
{{talk other|You can check back later to see|You can also [[{{TALKPAGENAME}}|visit the talk page]] to check}} if you have received a response to your message.
so that on talk pages nominated for speedy deletion, users are not advised to visit the talk page as though it is some separate entity. After all, talk pages don't have their own meta talk pages, so any messages left by the contester will be on the talk page itself — and that's the page they need to check back to. (also note the removal of an extraneous space.) ~
Boomur [
☎] 23:16, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
I used {{ db-move}} at the top of Miguel A. Catalán:
{{db-move|Miguel Ángel Catalán|Article misnamed ''and'' more commonly known with middle initial only; see note left for me at [http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=User_talk:Largoplazo&oldid=590791730#Miguel_.C3.81ngel_Catal.C3.A1n] and note the change made to the person's full name at the beginning of the article}}
The template correctly displayed the name of the article to be moved after the deletion, but instead of displaying the reason for the request, the template displayed "Error: reason for move missing". After I put an explicit "2=" in front of the reason, it worked. Why was it broken without the "2="? —Largo Plazo ( talk) 10:19, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
Is there any way to change this template so that it accepts the tag reason= as well as rationale=? It's not logical to me why only "rationale" is accepted. Thanks! Red Slash 18:09, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
|rationale=
and |wording=
- you want |reason=
added to that as well? Three different names for the same parameter seems a bit much to me, but I suppose. I noticed when I was looking at {{
db-u1}} that it seems not to have noticed that, being in the Template:
namespace, not User:
, it certainly doesn't qualify under CSD Uanything.
It Would Be Nice™ if {{
db-u1}}, {{
db-u2}}, and {{
db-u3}} would emit some sort of warning when used in the wrong namespace.
—
SamB (
talk) 22:30, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
Perhaps someone could explain this? The file is tagged with {{ db-delete}}, but for some reason the file isn't categorised in Category:Candidates for speedy deletion. Something seems wrong with the template code here. If people can tag pages with speedy deletion templates without the pages showing up in the speedy deletion category, this could potentially mean that lots of problematic files remain undiscovered by admins who evaluate CSD tags. -- Stefan2 ( talk) 21:28, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
{{
db-meta}}
, and since the latter is only intended for use within templates like {{
db-g1}}
, it follows that " Do not attempt to use this template directly on articles. For a generic speedy deletion template, see {{
db}}
" also applies to {{
db-delete}}
--
Redrose64 (
talk) 22:41, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
{{
db-meta}}
; for example, there is a legitimate transclusion in
Template:Db-f2, and that template must not be speedy-deleted. --
Redrose64 (
talk) 12:11, 11 February 2014 (UTC)![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
114.143.62.138 ( talk) 09:20, 16 April 2014 (UTC) The article A Way to Explore the Soul by Scientific Experimentation, by Ram Naresh Singh is a scholarly article dealing with the concepts of soul in various philosophies. In addition, it looks in to the properties of soul and proposes a model for soul which could be tested by designing a suitable experiment in future. Kindly restore the article on the Wikipedia site. Thanking you, Yours sincerely, Ram Naresh Singh, M.Sc., Ph.D., Retired Professor e.mail; nareshkusum@yahoo.com
{{
Db-meta}}
. Please make your request at the talk page for the article concerned. —
Mr. Stradivarius
♪ talk ♪ 09:45, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:Db-multiple has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please make it possible to allow more that one url when tagging for G12, it is possible using {{
db-g12}}
but not using this template.
(
t)
Josve05a (
c) 14:42, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
{{
Db-multiple}}
. When entering:{{Db-multiple|G13|G12|url=http://example1.com/|url2=http://example2.com/}}it only shows the first url...( t) Josve05a ( c) 18:11, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
sir can you please update the page bibek bhattarai — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bbkbhatt ( talk • contribs) 15:21, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
{{
Db-meta}}
. Please make your request at the talk page for the article concerned. — {{U|
Technical 13}} (
t •
e •
c) 16:33, 13 May 2014 (UTC)![]() | This
edit request to
Template talk:Db-g11 has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
First - I am submitting a Do Not Delete recommendation here because the appropriate button on the deletion comment page is not working. Second - this article is a set of direct and factual statements of the functions and capabilities of the SSDS system. I wrote the original operational specification for the SSDS, and this article closely matches what I said in 1996. It does not advertise for any company or commercial entity. /s/ Archer M. Macy, retired Navy.
65.207.21.186 ( talk) 11:56, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template talk:Db-person has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
<text of article in another language removed> 213.177.4.148 ( talk) 12:18, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
213.177.4.148 ( talk) 12:18, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
{{
Db-meta}}
. Please make your request at the talk page for the article concerned. --
Redrose64 (
talk) 12:44, 1 August 2014 (UTC)Like every other speedy deletion template I see, u1 and g7 is when the author or user requests deletion to his/her page. But there is one abnormality, they do not have to be such a legal or if I can say it phrase. I want the presentation of the templates to be softer. That is, they do not use 'speedy deletion' in a hard and fast style. I have a live preview here. That is how I want them to look like, both templates should be nice to everyone, not organised in a way that only administrators can really get the personality of those strict templates. Thanks! DSCrowned ( talk) 10:55, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
If you like this idea, please ask me about it on my talk page so I can change the template pages if requested. Thanks! DSCrowned ( talk) 12:11, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
{{
db-u1}}
or {{
db-g7}}
will be improperly used. For example, user A creates a template. User A later realises that it is not needed after all, and blanks the page: this can legitimately be tagged G7 by user B. However, if User C decides that this template is not needed and blanks the page, it cannot be tagged G7 by either user B or user C. --
Redrose64 (
talk) 12:05, 1 August 2014 (UTC)This page was last edited by a user other than the owner of the userspace in which it was used. Please make sure the page was tagged by the correct user before deleting.to the template and identifies that user. I see no argument above that contests that this is an improvement. --{{U| Elvey}} ( t• c) 16:11, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
The {{ Find sources}} template is used as part of an AfD nomination to make it easier to look up sources for an article at AfD. I would like to suggest that {{ Find sources}} be included in {{ db-a7}} to allow editors to check for sources in an article tagged for {{ db-a7}} with a single click. Eastmain ( talk • contribs) 03:09, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please edit this template so that we can use reason instead of rationale on all versions of these templates. For example, {{db-g6|reason=This page is junk}} and {{db-g6|rationale=This page is junk}} would both work and have the same result. Thank you, Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 22:46, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
{{
edit template-protected}}
template. I see no reason to add extra code to the template, which will make it slower for everyone, forever.
Jackmcbarn (
talk) 22:52, 18 September 2014 (UTC)Could someone point out to me where the consensus was to add the following wording to the template:
"...or from the Book: namespace to any other namespace."
...as this note doesn't even appear in the speedy deletion criterion's wording itself. If there was never consensus established for this wording, it would be best to remove it from the template. Steel1943 ( talk) 00:03, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
Speedy revise (so to speak) to match Criteria for Speedy Deletion. This isn't in the CSD page so it has no business being on a template. The template needs to be change to match CSD right now. Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 02:42, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
@ Headbomb: If you add the note about Book namespace to Criteria for Speedy Deletion itself and no one objects, we'll put it back in the template. However, the template absolutely must match the policy. Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 23:54, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template talk:Db-g11 has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I've written only one general sentence about soft solutions. Please advise what should be removed or replaced in order to be objective? Do you consider a definition an advertising? AA5577 ( talk) 07:46, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
{{
Db-meta}}
. Please make your request at the talk page for the article concerned. --
Redrose64 (
talk) 10:20, 19 October 2014 (UTC)When using {{ db-g12}}, it's possible to specify several URLs with urlN= parameters.
When using {{ db-multiple}} as recommended to avoid to request permission when other issues exist, it's not possible to specify such extra URLs. -- Dereckson ( talk) 03:16, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Should we expand the parameters of the a10 template to accommodate specifications of multiple copied articles? The current template, as well as WP:CSD states that this criterion applies to "article[s]...that [do] not expand upon, detail or improve information within any existing article(s)". This wording implies that it will also apply to newly created articles that copy multiple other ones. In addition, there have been cases where this has actually occurred with new articles. I thought that this template was capable of referencing more than one article that was copied. However, upon further inspection, I found that this was not the case. It would be much more convenient to be able to reference all duplicated articles with a single notice, as this obviously takes up less space than a separate tag for each duplicated article. Would it be advantageous to edit the template so this is possible? Eventhorizon51 ( talk) 05:15, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:Db-g10 has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
<<misplaced request removed>>
Civitatis International ( talk) 09:37, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
<<copied template code removed>>
{{
Db-meta}}
. Please make your request at the talk page for the article concerned. --
John of Reading (
talk) 10:02, 17 March 2015 (UTC)I think that template should blank pages as a courtesy just in case of serious copyright violations. -- TL22 ( talk) 17:34, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template talk:Db-a2 has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
HΛIAS-AYΓEPINOS
67.80.64.198 ( talk) 16:44, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
I have often used Twinkle to populate this template. I have noticed that adding multiple CV sources populates the template, but that it does not display. An example is
{{db-multiple|G11|G12|url=http://www.zhhlaw.com/E_zhonghao/aboutus.asp|url2=http://www.zhhlaw.com/E_zhonghao/show_Practice.asp?id=75|url3=http://www.zhhlaw.com/E_zhonghao/show_Practice.asp?id=73}}
I placed this on User:Zhonghao HK/sandbox, which will have been deleted already. Only one of the urls displays. I am entirely unable to work out how to correct this, and hope an expert will take a look. Fiddle Faddle 08:16, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
WP:CSD says there will be a button saying Contest this speedy deletion to allow someone to object to a deletion request. However, for G6, there is no such button. It was just pointed out to me that this is because the presence of the button was removed four years ago. Either the button should be put back in, or the instructions should be changed so they don't tell people to look for a non-existing button. If there is no button provided, the instructions should provide some alternative way that people can express an objection. — BarrelProof ( talk) 01:07, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
In my view the policy is correct and the template changed to match it. There is a need, in some cases (such as FPs) for local file description pages for images hosted on Commons. I would even support a change to the policy to remove from speedy any description page that contains any information not on the Commons description page (excluding nonsense, vandalism, copyright or attack page issues). Thryduulf ( talk) 11:08, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
When placing a multiple nomination today via Twinkle, I noticed that the template does not allow for multiple rationales to be entered. Twinkle doesn't know this and just puts multiple "rationale=" parameters into the template, and the template just repeats the last one for all of the criteria. The edit is here but of course may be deleted by the time you read this. Can this be fixed to allow multiple rationales? Ivanvector 🍁 ( talk) 14:14, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
{{db-multiple|G6|rationale=No such user.|G7|rationale=Botched page move; see [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 July 25#User:Sesotho kinship]]}}
{{
db-meta}}
or {{
db-multiple}}
) is ignoring multiple |rationale=
parameters, it's because of the way that the MediaWiki template parser works. If you use the same named parameter more than once (even if they have different values), all are ignored except the last one, this is normal behaviour for all templates. During preview, you get the message "Warning: (pagename) is calling
Template:(templatename) with more than one value for the "(parametername)" parameter. Only the last value provided will be used."; if you save it, the page is put in
Category:Pages using duplicate arguments in template calls. --
Redrose64 (
talk) 19:01, 28 July 2015 (UTC)Opinions are needed on the following matter: Wikipedia talk:Non-free content#Template:db-author and non-free content. A WP:Permalink for it is here. Flyer22 ( talk) 18:17, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
{{ db-a10}} explicitly references the possibility of flagged article being a duplicate of "existing article(s) on the subject", but I can't see any way to list multiple articles here. (Have been attempting to flag Microphone, speaker, megaphone, telephone, clearly a duplication of four different articles one after the other.) Is there an undocumented trick I'm missing? -- McGeddon ( talk) 09:52, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
The Google news search function appears to be broken:
[[tools:~mzmcbride/redirector/googlearchivesearch/{{PAGENAME}}|news]]
Result:
news
Any idea if this is the toolserver? Just me? Could we just change it to:
[https://www.google.com/search?#q={{PAGENAME}}&tbm=nws news]
Result:
3&tbm=nws news
I'm not sure of the details of how this would affect it.
Jujutacular (
talk) 02:21, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
tools:
is toolserver, which has been permanently down for fourteen months. --
Redrose64 (
talk) 09:19, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
"Rsd" seems a little more intuitive than "db" ("delete because"). The template comes up with "This template may meet Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion...". I already created {{ rsd}} as a redirect to here. What does everyone think? Facts707 ( talk) 08:13, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
{{
db}}
template isn't really intended for general use - if you can't find a suitably-specific template among the dozens listed at
WP:CSD, the chances are that the page doesn't qualify for speedy deletion anyway. --
Redrose64 (
talk) 16:36, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
{{
delete|some reason}}
being sometimes used by experienced editors from other wikis who see something that needs deleting but do not bother to find out what process they should use for it here (and local admins here can then use the appropriate process), so I think it is very useful to have a freeform deletion template. —
Kusma (
t·
c) 09:30, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
{{
ffd}}
. Every time that I've come across {{
delete}}
being used on English Wikipedia, it's on a file description page - and none of the
WP:CSD#Files criteria were applicable. --
Redrose64 (
talk) 19:52, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
{{
delete}}
by a user from another project who expects this to be a speedy deletion template. --
Stefan2 (
talk) 21:56, 1 November 2015 (UTC)When applying {{
db-attack}} with
Twinkle, the code {{db-attack|blanked=yes|help=off}}
is inserted and the rest of the page blanked. However, the page still displays a warning to blank the content. This doesn't happen if the code inserted is {{db-attack|blanked=yes}}
.
clpo13(
talk) 23:15, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template talk:Db-g5 has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I want to discuss the template, can the page be lowered to semi-protection? Krett12 ( talk) 04:53, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
I think we should remove the "This page was last edited" line. This line almost never gives useful information, unless yo have just purged the page, which I doubt most of the admins do. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 04:43, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
Can we add things like applications and video games to this? There are currently (AFAIK) no templates which include this, so I end up using this one for those types of articles. Anarchyte ( work | talk) 06:29, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
{{
db-web}}
template should not mention anything that is not covered by the relevant CSD criterion,
WP:CSD#A7. The CSD criteria drive the db- templates, not the other way around. --
Redrose64 (
talk) 12:21, 3 February 2016 (UTC)So I just tagged
EMPTrust for G12, which for once consisted of copied-and-pasted text from not one, not two, not three, but four entirely different URLs. Any chance of getting 4+, or even a more open-ended number of URL parameters? Or even a single parameter that takes a newline-and-bullet-delimited list of URLs? Cf. {{
plainlist}}
Any thoughts? —/
Mendaliv/
2¢/
Δ's/ 05:38, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
Does there exist either a parameter for the existing templates or a separate set of templates that place a CSD template on a page but do not automatically categorise it for deletion etc? I ask because I want to test how various templates work (especially {{ db-multi}}). Thanks! crh23 ( talk) 11:57, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
category=no
can be used for testing. --
John of Reading (
talk) 12:37, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
nocat=yes
, though the documentation doesn't mention it. If the test is only for a few minutes, then a message similar to
this version of my sandbox should be sufficient. Or, depending on what you are trying to do, you may find that previewing your test may be enough, without having to save the edit. --
John of Reading (
talk) 13:08, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
nocat=yes
does indeed work, thanks! -
crh23 (
talk) 17:43, 22 March 2016 (UTC)![]() | This
edit request to
Template talk:Db-band has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Jschauhan2016 ( talk) 14:28, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
I just revised Template:Db-c1 to change the empty period from four to seven days, as agreed by the community. I would appreciate if a technically minded person could check my edit and make sure I did things correctly. Thanks, Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 04:56, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template talk:Db-club has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The CUSWPC club is a 125 year old institution. I created this page to document the history and structure of the club and to document the results of the annual variety matches in the sport of swimming between the University of Oxford and the University of Cambridge. I would appreciate slightly more time before the page is repeated deleted before I can add the required information and citations.
Swimmingguy2016 ( talk) 23:42, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:Db-a9 has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In addition to "where no artists have an article", that text should also include "or where the artist's article is itself tagged for speedy deletion for lacking notability". GSMR ( talk) 14:28, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
{{
edit template-protected}}
template. The text you proposed doesn't agree with
WP:A9, so you should get consensus to change that wording before we change the template. --
Ahecht (
TALKI just noticed that {{ db-a2}} and {{ db-a5}} do not have their own subcategory in Category:Candidates for speedy deletion#Subcategories. Should they not have one (or two) as well? - HyperGaruda ( talk) 09:26, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
The {{ Db-g12}} template prominently displays a button, "Contest this speedy deletion" that doesn't work as I would expect. I expect that when I click it because I think "a page does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion", clicking should, among other things, "remove this notice". It doesn't do so. It should do so. After all the template instructs me: If I think "a page does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion", I should "remove this notice"! Agreed? IIRC, similar templates work or worked that way. Suggestions/help?-- Elvey( t• c) 01:08, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
{{
hang on}}
template,
like this. Much less noticeable, and indeed, often misused.{{
db-short}}
just a few minutes after creation, the creator might use the button to say "This page should not be speedily deleted because I am working on an offline draft which I am just about to paste in." --
Redrose64 (
talk) 08:35, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
The {{
db-t3}}
template currently has
15 transclusions in Template space, but those pages are not appearing in any of the
CSD categories. --
Redrose64 (
talk) 14:15, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
|page=Foo
which has the HTML comment "CIRCUMVENT BLACKLIST" after it. Not sure why that is necessary but it wasn't a problem until an editor stopped categorising in non-template space. — Martin (
MSGJ ·
talk) 14:31, 3 December 2011 (UTC)![]() | This
edit request to
Template:db-g4 has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please replace the following code (at the beginning of a line)
<small>''See this page's {{#if:{{{1|}}}|[[{{{1}}}|AfD]]|
with the code
<small>''See this page's {{#if:{{{1|}}}|[[{{{1}}}|deletion discussion]]|
, since it does not have to exclusively be an AfD that is linked to (could be an RfD log page, etc.) — This, that, and the other (talk) 00:48, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
Frequently I come across speedy deletions with the message "This page was last edited by ... 1 second ago" (or occasionally even "... in 1 seconds time"), i.e. the page hasn't been purged since it was tagged. Yes, it's easy to click the time to purge it, but with a slow connection it does take a few moments. I propose this is changed to (e.g.) "This page was last edited by ... at 07:59 UTC (xx minutes ago)", with the purge link still retained. Purging the page will update the "xx minutes ago", but the time of last editing will be unaltered. If there's consensus for this change, I'm happy to try to work out the necessary code. Any thoughts? An optimist on the run! 08:03, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
As per Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Forced to enter a captcha each time I tag something for speedy deletion, This recent change to this template appears to have had the side effect of requiring anonymous editors to enter a CAPTCHA when tagging an article with a speedy deletion template. Is there some means of changing the added external link so that this side effect no longer occurs? -- Allen3 talk 23:46, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
Thank you guys for dealing with this issue. 69.59.200.77 ( talk) 00:33, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
{{
db-c1}}
So, after I found out that I should use {{
db-c1}}
for the reason I had, I had to find out how to use {{
db-c1}}
. Being a 30k editor, I entered my reasoning straight as parameter one: {{
db-c1|my reasoning}}
. You know, I do a speedy once a month, so I have a good intuitive guess on how to do it. Afterwards, somewhere I read that I was right (param 1=reasoning) -- sorry I cannot recall where I read that.
Then on the deletable page I saw a page with seven or ten lines in bold, and not my reasoning. Now that is strange, not? Where did my resoning go? Anyway, we all understand that seven bold lines is the best way to clarify a SPEEDY. At leasty to a 30k+ editor. Who needs a reasoning anyhow? -
DePiep (
talk) 01:25, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
I noticed on page Db-g7 that there was a deletion tag. I would like to vote against this tag, as I believe it sort of violates Assume good faith. I also believe the template is very useful. These matters seem important to discuss.
Walex03. Talking, working, friending. 20:06, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
{{
db-g7}}
- {{
db-g7}}
is the deletion tag. It's visible so that people can see what it looks like before they put it on other pages. --
Redrose64 (
talk) 20:39, 22 March 2012 (UTC)This is the last test edit! If you want to experiment, use the sandbox. The deletion tag, ( which I believe should not be here as well}} is not being previewed, and right now it is filled with false wiki code. I shall make this edit now.
Walex03. Talking, working, friending. 20:16, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
The above request I am making so that users do not have to follow the link to know what it is. Thanks. 75.53.218.81 ( talk) 01:47, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
Could someone make "Note to administrators: this template has content on its talk page which should be checked prior to deletion." bold? It doesn't stand out that well. -- Tomtomn00 ( talk • contributions) 17:04, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
For a couple days now, placing the db-copyvio tag wipes the entire content of the page (except for the tag itself). Is this a bug or a "feature"? Hairhorn ( talk) 17:30, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
I've just noticed that the recent introduction of the blanking tag to {{
db-g12}} breaks {{
db-multiple}}. Specifically, passing the G12 parameter to {{
db-multiple}} makes the courtesy blanking notice appear inside the template, and the text of the article does not actually get blanked. (This is because the core part of the template, {{
db-multiple/item}}, calls {{
db-g12}} itself to set the text of the notice and include the appropriate categories.) It seems to me that the best way to fix this would be to move the blanking tag to {{
db-meta}} and just pass it through {{
db-multiple}} and {{
db-multiple/item}} as a parameter, like |blanked = {{{blanked|}}}
. I've already got the blanking code working in
Template:db-meta/sandbox, which was just a matter of copying the code over from {{
db-g12}} and tweaking it a little. Could someone update the live template so that I can put the rest of the fixes in place? Best —
Mr. Stradivarius (
have a chat) 00:47, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
|blanked=yes
to {{
db-g10}} and {{
db-multiple}} at the same time. In this case, the "blanked" parameter displays the "this page has been blanked as a courtesy" notice, but it doesn't add the page-blanking div tag. In {{
db-g12}}, though, until I reverted it, the "blanked" parameter added both the blanking notice and the page-blanking div tag. So, we need to be careful to specify what behaviour we want. I think that for now it would make sense to update {{
db-meta}} so that the blanking notice appears at the bottom of the template, and not in the middle, as now happens with {{
db-multiple}}. The page-blanking div tag needs more discussion, though, I think. (Also see my post at
Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion#DB-G10 template.) —
Mr. Stradivarius (
have a chat) 04:59, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
This morning I discovered a bug in the code mentioned in the section above. What I thought was the end of the mbox code was actually the end of an #if: statement used by |raw=
. So at the moment, the code {{
db-meta|raw=yes|blanked=yes}} includes a blanking notice, when it should not. I've fixed this in the sandbox - try {{
db-meta/sandbox|raw=yes|blanked=yes}}. I've also commented/indented the code so that it's easier to read (for me, at least). As far as I know this isn't breaking anything at the moment, but I won't be able to fix {{
db-multiple}} while the bug is still in there. Could someone check that I haven't done anything (else) silly, and update the main template from the sandbox, please? —
Mr. Stradivarius (
have a chat) 04:07, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
I have sugesstion on Template:Db-G2 Criteria. "If you want to make test edit, use the Sandbox instead". So that the new user can understand where to do test edit. Thanks. -- Dede2008 ( talk) 16:18, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
{{
db-test-notice}}
, which is the note that should be posted to the talk page of the relevant user. This message is likely to persist long enough to be read, whereas the message on {{
db-g2}}
only exists until an admin deletes the page - which may be mere minutes, and so may not be long enough to be read by the user who created the page. --
Redrose64 (
talk) 17:50, 4 July 2012 (UTC)I ran into an interesting issue with {{ db-multiple}}, I tagged an article G6 and G7, with a rationale for the G6, this caused the rationale to appear both for the G6 reason and for the G7 in red. Is there a way to tweak the templates to better deal with this situation? Monty 845 19:39, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
|category=
|url=
|source=
|rationale=
|blanked=
|filename=
|article=
|bot=
|divblank=
. Each of these applies to every positional parameter - there is no means for making any of them apply to just one. --
Redrose64 (
talk) 15:26, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
|g6-rationale=
, |g7-rationale=
, and |g8-rationale=
(or whatever names we choose) would be more trouble than having the occasional doubling up that Monty saw. —
Mr. Stradivarius (
have a chat) 16:14, 8 September 2012 (UTC)The page for Template:Db-inc (and I suppose the other Db-___ templates whose talk pages redirect here) recommends
{{subst:db-notability-notice|Template:Db-inc|header=1}} ~~~~
Substituted as it stands, it warns the author that Template:Db-inc has been nominated for deletion, not the page that actually has been nominated. -- Thnidu ( talk) 05:55, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
Moved to start discussion at Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion -- Lexein ( talk) 16:45, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
The page Grace Barberry was closed delete at a redirects for discussion ( Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2012 October 28#Grace Barberry), but the link to the discussion doesn't work because the template adds "Wikipedia:Articles for deletion" to the front of the link. Besides, won't most user copy and paste the name of the page with the deletion discussion, which includes the "Wikipedia:Articles for deletion"? Ego White Tray ( talk) 13:09, 7 November 2012
The button label "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" assumes the viewer is using a mouse or similar pointing-device interface. Minor accessibility issue as someone browsing the page through a screen reader wouldn't "click", but activate navigation differently. Suggest to change to "Contest this speedy deletion" for simplicity as well as moving the viewers focus to the action, rather than the mechanics of how they interact with it. Cander0000 ( talk) 08:11, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Template:No content on page. Since you had some involvement with the Template:No content on page redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). 70.24.247.127 ( talk) 02:36, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
Is there a way to specify multiple URLs? -- SMS Talk 18:56, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please implement this change to allow reliable styling of the template. Keφr 14:39, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
I request that
should be added in the "See also"-section, because Template:Delete redirects to this page, but may have been typed when wanting to reach other deletion templates. I think this is an easier solution than making Template:Delete a disambiguation page and subsequently fixing all the "What links here". Mikael Häggström ( talk) 09:36, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
British Rail Class 472 request to delete a document.
Train is not actually planning to introduce.
Searching but can not on other sites.
Request to be removed is false information.
(* Web site: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_472 *)
For some reason, the {{ db-xfd}} cites WP:CSD#G6, but I see no reasons to label any deletion which was previously discussed (and approved) as a "speedy" one. I propose to drop any mentioning of Criteria for speedy deletion from {{db-xfd}} template. See also Wikipedia talk: Criteria for speedy deletion #Slight revision to G4 and G6. Incnis Mrsi ( talk) 19:37, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
{{
db-xfd}}
. I don't think that it is necessary either for this edgecase to be spelled out in painful detail in
WP:CSD, or for the notification template to link to a CSD criterion to 'make deletion legal'. As such, I think we're singing from the same songsheet.
Happy‑
melon 16:09, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Whether we call this speedy deletion or not is completely irrelevant, and there really is no reason to care. I did add the following text to its doc page: "Administrators deleting pages with this template should give the articles for deletion discussion for their deletion summary rather than listing it as G6." I think that this should address any concerns. Ego White Tray ( talk) 22:12, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
Per this discussion [ [1]] A7 has been expanded to include organized events. I was asked to notify the people who maintain Twinkle and csd templates so we can make the nec changes. If this is not the correct place can you let me know where it is? Hell In A Bucket ( talk) 14:36, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
This part of the CSD template, visible on those db- tags that suggest that the creator contests the deletion, has bothered me ever since it was introduced:
It is really verbose and difficult for newbies to understand. How about:
I think that is a lot clearer and lacks all the nested subordinate clauses of the old message. Should we implement it? — This, that, and the other (talk) 23:13, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
{{
editprotected}}
Let's have it, then. Thanks in advance, friendly admin who answers this request. —
This, that, and
the other (talk) 10:23, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Should the {{ db-disambig}} template include any page that only list one Wikipedia article? Obviously if there is only one article listed, there is nothing to disambiguate. Ego White Tray ( talk) 03:56, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
Take a look at how I revised it, feel free to revert if it still needs changes. Ego White Tray ( talk) 23:20, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Whilst I fully agree with the principle of hiding the text of attack pages from everyday readers once a db-attack tag has been added, it can be a bit of a pain for admins to have to go back and view the history of the page to check the content before deletion. I have a suggestion that would make our jobs a bit easier (and speed up deletion of the page). Firstly, replace <div id="AttackPage" style="display:none">
with <span class="sysop-show">
(which hides text from non-admins - see
my sandbox. Also remove the instruction to "please blank this page", possibly replacing it with the comment "The following text is available to administrators only" after the sysop-show tag. Once this is done, begin to re-educate page reviewers not to blank the page, but to leave the original text intact.
I haven't done any testing on this template yet, though I don't see any reason why it shouldn't work in principle. If there's support for this idea, I'll do some further testing. What do people think? An optimist on the run! 22:49, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
<div id="AttackPage" style="display:none">
prevent Wikipedia and Google from displaying the wikitext in their searches? —
Mr. Stradivarius
♪ talk ♪ 10:49, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
<!-- -->
" or template parameters. This is the same as what appears in the HTML.
Peter James (
talk) 12:27, 5 February 2013 (UTC)I see that {{
db-multi}}
handles
WP:CSD#G8, but {{
subst:Db-notice-multiple}}
doesn't. I've not checked for other inconsistencies. For example, if I tag something {{
db-multi|G11|G2}}
, it offers
{{
subst:Db-notice-multiple|Template:DJ-Vaibhav Sawant|header=1|G11|G2}}
which works properly, see
User talk:Sawantvaibhav23#Speedy deletion nomination of Template:DJ-Vaibhav Sawant; however although {{
db-multi|G2|G8}}
similarly offers
{{
subst:Db-notice-multiple|Talk:Dj Vaibhav Sawant|header=1|G2|G8}}
which is correct, but when this is saved to a user talk page, only the G2 notice is shown, see User talk:Sawantvaibhav23#Speedy deletion nomination of Talk:Dj Vaibhav Sawant. Is there a reason for this omission, or is it an oversight? -- Redrose64 ( talk) 13:23, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
{{
db-multi}}
. I had looked at
WP:CSD, and decided that both G2 and G8 applied to the page in question; and checking {{
db-multi}}
I saw both G2 and G8 marked "Yes", so I used {{
db-multi|G2|G8}}
. It then displayed a {{
subst:Db-notice-multiple}}
(exactly as above, but appended with four tildes), and so (as I normally do) I copied it verbatim to the user's talk page. It simply didn't occur to me that I needed to re-check compatibility before doing so - I assumed that what was valid in one would automatically be valid in the other. --
Redrose64 (
talk) 18:18, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
Is this a new policy? I am wondering when it came into action, I don't recall reading that before. Ranze ( talk) 02:47, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
Hello. The template {{ db-catempty}} places categories into Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as empty categories after four days, but this does not appear to happen automatically. For example, Category:2010 NCAA Division III football season is supposed to appear in Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as empty categories, but the latter category is empty. Purging does not appear to work. Can anyone explain why this is happening? It's possible that other categories eligible for CSD C1 are not being processed. Edge3 ( talk) 04:07, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
This is not a job queue issue, but a known bug: category membership simply isn't updated when pages are re-rendered. Instead of a null edit, you can also do action=purge&forcelinkupdate=1. You could have a bot do that on all pages transcluding appropriate templates. https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5382 Matma Rex talk 09:57, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
I note that this matter has been resolved, as per the successful BRFA on Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Joe's Null Bot 5. Thanks, everyone, for your help! Edge3 ( talk) 23:50, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I just wanted to mention that this template isn't working right. When Empty categories are submitted they should be going into Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as empty categories and this category does show in the category list at the bottom of the category submitted. But when I look at that category, nothing is in it. There is a very large backlog of empty categories for deletion that isn't getting worked because they aren't appearing. Here are some examples I submitted: Category:Wikipedia articles needing editing for flag use from May 2013, Category:Wikipedia categories needing cleanup from May 2013, Category:Wikipedia laundry list cleanup from May 2013 and Category:Wikipedia templates needing cleanup from May 2013 and there are also a lot with a system generated message like Category:Cleanup tagged articles without a reason field from April 2013 Kumioko ( talk) 14:52, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
{{
db-c1}}
. Empty categories shouldn't be G6-ed simply for being empty. --
Redrose64 (
talk) 19:35, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I would like "The page to be moved to this name is [[{{{1}}}]]." (third line on my screen) changed to "The page to be moved to this name is [[:{{{1}}}]].", see this edit for justification.
Laun chba ller 11:09, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
Please delete Category:Tactical development on the Western Front in 1917 created in error. Keith-264 ( talk) 12:33, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
I've noticed that whenever users contest a speedy deletion, they almost always leave the (your reason here) text alone and put their reason at the very end of the new section. Is there any way Template:Hangon preload generic could be changed to make it less likely users will do this? -- 71.199.125.210 ( talk) 16:48, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Requesting the following:
{{pagetype|subjectspace=yes}}
to be changed to:
{{talk other|talk page|{{pagetype|subjectspace=yes}}}}
so that when you tag a talk page for deletion, it won't appear as "this page/template/file may meet the criteria..." but "this talk page may meet..."
Note that there are three instances of this code in the db-meta template, so if you're going to change it, change them all.
Ginsuloft (
talk) 15:02, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
Could someone add "hoax" to the supported list of reasons in {{
db-multiple}}
? Thanks. — Preceding signed comment added by
Cymru.lass (
talk •
contribs) 22:23, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:Db-meta has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I'm requesting that {{ Db-meta}} be modified as follows to employ the new shortcuts for the CSD criterion:
| See [[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#{{uc:{{{criterion}}}}}|CSD {{uc:{{{criterion}}}}}]].
| See [[CSD:{{uc:{{{criterion}}}}}]].
[[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#{{{CRITERION}}}|CSD {{{CRITERION}}}]]
that needed changing to [[CSD:{{{CRITERION}}}]]
.
Technical 13 (
talk) 14:31, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I think that the following:
You can also [[{{TALKPAGENAME}}|visit the talk page]] to check if you have received a response to your message.
should be changed to
{{talk other|You can check back later to see|You can also [[{{TALKPAGENAME}}|visit the talk page]] to check}} if you have received a response to your message.
so that on talk pages nominated for speedy deletion, users are not advised to visit the talk page as though it is some separate entity. After all, talk pages don't have their own meta talk pages, so any messages left by the contester will be on the talk page itself — and that's the page they need to check back to. (also note the removal of an extraneous space.) ~
Boomur [
☎] 23:16, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
I used {{ db-move}} at the top of Miguel A. Catalán:
{{db-move|Miguel Ángel Catalán|Article misnamed ''and'' more commonly known with middle initial only; see note left for me at [http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=User_talk:Largoplazo&oldid=590791730#Miguel_.C3.81ngel_Catal.C3.A1n] and note the change made to the person's full name at the beginning of the article}}
The template correctly displayed the name of the article to be moved after the deletion, but instead of displaying the reason for the request, the template displayed "Error: reason for move missing". After I put an explicit "2=" in front of the reason, it worked. Why was it broken without the "2="? —Largo Plazo ( talk) 10:19, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
Is there any way to change this template so that it accepts the tag reason= as well as rationale=? It's not logical to me why only "rationale" is accepted. Thanks! Red Slash 18:09, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
|rationale=
and |wording=
- you want |reason=
added to that as well? Three different names for the same parameter seems a bit much to me, but I suppose. I noticed when I was looking at {{
db-u1}} that it seems not to have noticed that, being in the Template:
namespace, not User:
, it certainly doesn't qualify under CSD Uanything.
It Would Be Nice™ if {{
db-u1}}, {{
db-u2}}, and {{
db-u3}} would emit some sort of warning when used in the wrong namespace.
—
SamB (
talk) 22:30, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
Perhaps someone could explain this? The file is tagged with {{ db-delete}}, but for some reason the file isn't categorised in Category:Candidates for speedy deletion. Something seems wrong with the template code here. If people can tag pages with speedy deletion templates without the pages showing up in the speedy deletion category, this could potentially mean that lots of problematic files remain undiscovered by admins who evaluate CSD tags. -- Stefan2 ( talk) 21:28, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
{{
db-meta}}
, and since the latter is only intended for use within templates like {{
db-g1}}
, it follows that " Do not attempt to use this template directly on articles. For a generic speedy deletion template, see {{
db}}
" also applies to {{
db-delete}}
--
Redrose64 (
talk) 22:41, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
{{
db-meta}}
; for example, there is a legitimate transclusion in
Template:Db-f2, and that template must not be speedy-deleted. --
Redrose64 (
talk) 12:11, 11 February 2014 (UTC)![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
114.143.62.138 ( talk) 09:20, 16 April 2014 (UTC) The article A Way to Explore the Soul by Scientific Experimentation, by Ram Naresh Singh is a scholarly article dealing with the concepts of soul in various philosophies. In addition, it looks in to the properties of soul and proposes a model for soul which could be tested by designing a suitable experiment in future. Kindly restore the article on the Wikipedia site. Thanking you, Yours sincerely, Ram Naresh Singh, M.Sc., Ph.D., Retired Professor e.mail; nareshkusum@yahoo.com
{{
Db-meta}}
. Please make your request at the talk page for the article concerned. —
Mr. Stradivarius
♪ talk ♪ 09:45, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:Db-multiple has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please make it possible to allow more that one url when tagging for G12, it is possible using {{
db-g12}}
but not using this template.
(
t)
Josve05a (
c) 14:42, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
{{
Db-multiple}}
. When entering:{{Db-multiple|G13|G12|url=http://example1.com/|url2=http://example2.com/}}it only shows the first url...( t) Josve05a ( c) 18:11, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
sir can you please update the page bibek bhattarai — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bbkbhatt ( talk • contribs) 15:21, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
{{
Db-meta}}
. Please make your request at the talk page for the article concerned. — {{U|
Technical 13}} (
t •
e •
c) 16:33, 13 May 2014 (UTC)![]() | This
edit request to
Template talk:Db-g11 has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
First - I am submitting a Do Not Delete recommendation here because the appropriate button on the deletion comment page is not working. Second - this article is a set of direct and factual statements of the functions and capabilities of the SSDS system. I wrote the original operational specification for the SSDS, and this article closely matches what I said in 1996. It does not advertise for any company or commercial entity. /s/ Archer M. Macy, retired Navy.
65.207.21.186 ( talk) 11:56, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template talk:Db-person has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
<text of article in another language removed> 213.177.4.148 ( talk) 12:18, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
213.177.4.148 ( talk) 12:18, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
{{
Db-meta}}
. Please make your request at the talk page for the article concerned. --
Redrose64 (
talk) 12:44, 1 August 2014 (UTC)Like every other speedy deletion template I see, u1 and g7 is when the author or user requests deletion to his/her page. But there is one abnormality, they do not have to be such a legal or if I can say it phrase. I want the presentation of the templates to be softer. That is, they do not use 'speedy deletion' in a hard and fast style. I have a live preview here. That is how I want them to look like, both templates should be nice to everyone, not organised in a way that only administrators can really get the personality of those strict templates. Thanks! DSCrowned ( talk) 10:55, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
If you like this idea, please ask me about it on my talk page so I can change the template pages if requested. Thanks! DSCrowned ( talk) 12:11, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
{{
db-u1}}
or {{
db-g7}}
will be improperly used. For example, user A creates a template. User A later realises that it is not needed after all, and blanks the page: this can legitimately be tagged G7 by user B. However, if User C decides that this template is not needed and blanks the page, it cannot be tagged G7 by either user B or user C. --
Redrose64 (
talk) 12:05, 1 August 2014 (UTC)This page was last edited by a user other than the owner of the userspace in which it was used. Please make sure the page was tagged by the correct user before deleting.to the template and identifies that user. I see no argument above that contests that this is an improvement. --{{U| Elvey}} ( t• c) 16:11, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
The {{ Find sources}} template is used as part of an AfD nomination to make it easier to look up sources for an article at AfD. I would like to suggest that {{ Find sources}} be included in {{ db-a7}} to allow editors to check for sources in an article tagged for {{ db-a7}} with a single click. Eastmain ( talk • contribs) 03:09, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please edit this template so that we can use reason instead of rationale on all versions of these templates. For example, {{db-g6|reason=This page is junk}} and {{db-g6|rationale=This page is junk}} would both work and have the same result. Thank you, Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 22:46, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
{{
edit template-protected}}
template. I see no reason to add extra code to the template, which will make it slower for everyone, forever.
Jackmcbarn (
talk) 22:52, 18 September 2014 (UTC)Could someone point out to me where the consensus was to add the following wording to the template:
"...or from the Book: namespace to any other namespace."
...as this note doesn't even appear in the speedy deletion criterion's wording itself. If there was never consensus established for this wording, it would be best to remove it from the template. Steel1943 ( talk) 00:03, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
Speedy revise (so to speak) to match Criteria for Speedy Deletion. This isn't in the CSD page so it has no business being on a template. The template needs to be change to match CSD right now. Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 02:42, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
@ Headbomb: If you add the note about Book namespace to Criteria for Speedy Deletion itself and no one objects, we'll put it back in the template. However, the template absolutely must match the policy. Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 23:54, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template talk:Db-g11 has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I've written only one general sentence about soft solutions. Please advise what should be removed or replaced in order to be objective? Do you consider a definition an advertising? AA5577 ( talk) 07:46, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
{{
Db-meta}}
. Please make your request at the talk page for the article concerned. --
Redrose64 (
talk) 10:20, 19 October 2014 (UTC)When using {{ db-g12}}, it's possible to specify several URLs with urlN= parameters.
When using {{ db-multiple}} as recommended to avoid to request permission when other issues exist, it's not possible to specify such extra URLs. -- Dereckson ( talk) 03:16, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Should we expand the parameters of the a10 template to accommodate specifications of multiple copied articles? The current template, as well as WP:CSD states that this criterion applies to "article[s]...that [do] not expand upon, detail or improve information within any existing article(s)". This wording implies that it will also apply to newly created articles that copy multiple other ones. In addition, there have been cases where this has actually occurred with new articles. I thought that this template was capable of referencing more than one article that was copied. However, upon further inspection, I found that this was not the case. It would be much more convenient to be able to reference all duplicated articles with a single notice, as this obviously takes up less space than a separate tag for each duplicated article. Would it be advantageous to edit the template so this is possible? Eventhorizon51 ( talk) 05:15, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:Db-g10 has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
<<misplaced request removed>>
Civitatis International ( talk) 09:37, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
<<copied template code removed>>
{{
Db-meta}}
. Please make your request at the talk page for the article concerned. --
John of Reading (
talk) 10:02, 17 March 2015 (UTC)I think that template should blank pages as a courtesy just in case of serious copyright violations. -- TL22 ( talk) 17:34, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template talk:Db-a2 has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
HΛIAS-AYΓEPINOS
67.80.64.198 ( talk) 16:44, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
I have often used Twinkle to populate this template. I have noticed that adding multiple CV sources populates the template, but that it does not display. An example is
{{db-multiple|G11|G12|url=http://www.zhhlaw.com/E_zhonghao/aboutus.asp|url2=http://www.zhhlaw.com/E_zhonghao/show_Practice.asp?id=75|url3=http://www.zhhlaw.com/E_zhonghao/show_Practice.asp?id=73}}
I placed this on User:Zhonghao HK/sandbox, which will have been deleted already. Only one of the urls displays. I am entirely unable to work out how to correct this, and hope an expert will take a look. Fiddle Faddle 08:16, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
WP:CSD says there will be a button saying Contest this speedy deletion to allow someone to object to a deletion request. However, for G6, there is no such button. It was just pointed out to me that this is because the presence of the button was removed four years ago. Either the button should be put back in, or the instructions should be changed so they don't tell people to look for a non-existing button. If there is no button provided, the instructions should provide some alternative way that people can express an objection. — BarrelProof ( talk) 01:07, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
In my view the policy is correct and the template changed to match it. There is a need, in some cases (such as FPs) for local file description pages for images hosted on Commons. I would even support a change to the policy to remove from speedy any description page that contains any information not on the Commons description page (excluding nonsense, vandalism, copyright or attack page issues). Thryduulf ( talk) 11:08, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
When placing a multiple nomination today via Twinkle, I noticed that the template does not allow for multiple rationales to be entered. Twinkle doesn't know this and just puts multiple "rationale=" parameters into the template, and the template just repeats the last one for all of the criteria. The edit is here but of course may be deleted by the time you read this. Can this be fixed to allow multiple rationales? Ivanvector 🍁 ( talk) 14:14, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
{{db-multiple|G6|rationale=No such user.|G7|rationale=Botched page move; see [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 July 25#User:Sesotho kinship]]}}
{{
db-meta}}
or {{
db-multiple}}
) is ignoring multiple |rationale=
parameters, it's because of the way that the MediaWiki template parser works. If you use the same named parameter more than once (even if they have different values), all are ignored except the last one, this is normal behaviour for all templates. During preview, you get the message "Warning: (pagename) is calling
Template:(templatename) with more than one value for the "(parametername)" parameter. Only the last value provided will be used."; if you save it, the page is put in
Category:Pages using duplicate arguments in template calls. --
Redrose64 (
talk) 19:01, 28 July 2015 (UTC)Opinions are needed on the following matter: Wikipedia talk:Non-free content#Template:db-author and non-free content. A WP:Permalink for it is here. Flyer22 ( talk) 18:17, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
{{ db-a10}} explicitly references the possibility of flagged article being a duplicate of "existing article(s) on the subject", but I can't see any way to list multiple articles here. (Have been attempting to flag Microphone, speaker, megaphone, telephone, clearly a duplication of four different articles one after the other.) Is there an undocumented trick I'm missing? -- McGeddon ( talk) 09:52, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
The Google news search function appears to be broken:
[[tools:~mzmcbride/redirector/googlearchivesearch/{{PAGENAME}}|news]]
Result:
news
Any idea if this is the toolserver? Just me? Could we just change it to:
[https://www.google.com/search?#q={{PAGENAME}}&tbm=nws news]
Result:
3&tbm=nws news
I'm not sure of the details of how this would affect it.
Jujutacular (
talk) 02:21, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
tools:
is toolserver, which has been permanently down for fourteen months. --
Redrose64 (
talk) 09:19, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
"Rsd" seems a little more intuitive than "db" ("delete because"). The template comes up with "This template may meet Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion...". I already created {{ rsd}} as a redirect to here. What does everyone think? Facts707 ( talk) 08:13, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
{{
db}}
template isn't really intended for general use - if you can't find a suitably-specific template among the dozens listed at
WP:CSD, the chances are that the page doesn't qualify for speedy deletion anyway. --
Redrose64 (
talk) 16:36, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
{{
delete|some reason}}
being sometimes used by experienced editors from other wikis who see something that needs deleting but do not bother to find out what process they should use for it here (and local admins here can then use the appropriate process), so I think it is very useful to have a freeform deletion template. —
Kusma (
t·
c) 09:30, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
{{
ffd}}
. Every time that I've come across {{
delete}}
being used on English Wikipedia, it's on a file description page - and none of the
WP:CSD#Files criteria were applicable. --
Redrose64 (
talk) 19:52, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
{{
delete}}
by a user from another project who expects this to be a speedy deletion template. --
Stefan2 (
talk) 21:56, 1 November 2015 (UTC)When applying {{
db-attack}} with
Twinkle, the code {{db-attack|blanked=yes|help=off}}
is inserted and the rest of the page blanked. However, the page still displays a warning to blank the content. This doesn't happen if the code inserted is {{db-attack|blanked=yes}}
.
clpo13(
talk) 23:15, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template talk:Db-g5 has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I want to discuss the template, can the page be lowered to semi-protection? Krett12 ( talk) 04:53, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
I think we should remove the "This page was last edited" line. This line almost never gives useful information, unless yo have just purged the page, which I doubt most of the admins do. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 04:43, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
Can we add things like applications and video games to this? There are currently (AFAIK) no templates which include this, so I end up using this one for those types of articles. Anarchyte ( work | talk) 06:29, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
{{
db-web}}
template should not mention anything that is not covered by the relevant CSD criterion,
WP:CSD#A7. The CSD criteria drive the db- templates, not the other way around. --
Redrose64 (
talk) 12:21, 3 February 2016 (UTC)So I just tagged
EMPTrust for G12, which for once consisted of copied-and-pasted text from not one, not two, not three, but four entirely different URLs. Any chance of getting 4+, or even a more open-ended number of URL parameters? Or even a single parameter that takes a newline-and-bullet-delimited list of URLs? Cf. {{
plainlist}}
Any thoughts? —/
Mendaliv/
2¢/
Δ's/ 05:38, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
Does there exist either a parameter for the existing templates or a separate set of templates that place a CSD template on a page but do not automatically categorise it for deletion etc? I ask because I want to test how various templates work (especially {{ db-multi}}). Thanks! crh23 ( talk) 11:57, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
category=no
can be used for testing. --
John of Reading (
talk) 12:37, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
nocat=yes
, though the documentation doesn't mention it. If the test is only for a few minutes, then a message similar to
this version of my sandbox should be sufficient. Or, depending on what you are trying to do, you may find that previewing your test may be enough, without having to save the edit. --
John of Reading (
talk) 13:08, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
nocat=yes
does indeed work, thanks! -
crh23 (
talk) 17:43, 22 March 2016 (UTC)![]() | This
edit request to
Template talk:Db-band has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Jschauhan2016 ( talk) 14:28, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
I just revised Template:Db-c1 to change the empty period from four to seven days, as agreed by the community. I would appreciate if a technically minded person could check my edit and make sure I did things correctly. Thanks, Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 04:56, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template talk:Db-club has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The CUSWPC club is a 125 year old institution. I created this page to document the history and structure of the club and to document the results of the annual variety matches in the sport of swimming between the University of Oxford and the University of Cambridge. I would appreciate slightly more time before the page is repeated deleted before I can add the required information and citations.
Swimmingguy2016 ( talk) 23:42, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:Db-a9 has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In addition to "where no artists have an article", that text should also include "or where the artist's article is itself tagged for speedy deletion for lacking notability". GSMR ( talk) 14:28, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
{{
edit template-protected}}
template. The text you proposed doesn't agree with
WP:A9, so you should get consensus to change that wording before we change the template. --
Ahecht (
TALKI just noticed that {{ db-a2}} and {{ db-a5}} do not have their own subcategory in Category:Candidates for speedy deletion#Subcategories. Should they not have one (or two) as well? - HyperGaruda ( talk) 09:26, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
The {{ Db-g12}} template prominently displays a button, "Contest this speedy deletion" that doesn't work as I would expect. I expect that when I click it because I think "a page does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion", clicking should, among other things, "remove this notice". It doesn't do so. It should do so. After all the template instructs me: If I think "a page does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion", I should "remove this notice"! Agreed? IIRC, similar templates work or worked that way. Suggestions/help?-- Elvey( t• c) 01:08, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
{{
hang on}}
template,
like this. Much less noticeable, and indeed, often misused.{{
db-short}}
just a few minutes after creation, the creator might use the button to say "This page should not be speedily deleted because I am working on an offline draft which I am just about to paste in." --
Redrose64 (
talk) 08:35, 21 September 2016 (UTC)