![]() | This template was considered for deletion on 2008 April 21. The result of the discussion was "keep". |
![]() | This template was considered for deletion on 2008 April 23. The result of the discussion was "keep". |
![]() | Conservatism Template‑class | ||||||
|
Where exactly was the previous TFD debate which prompted this speedy deletion? ViperSnake151 17:22, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
It seems clear that {{ RonPaul}} is in spirit a repost of the deleted version of this template. I propose we redirect that page here as there is nothing I can see worth merging. Skomorokh 02:47, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
Done
Skomorokh 21:10, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Meseems the template "RonPaul" was created as a content fork of this one, and that discussion and consensus has not taken time to gel as both templates have been recommended for deletion. Merge proposal is the obvious solution. The questions are:
It appears there have been long and short article lists vying in an editing "cold war". Let's agree on a list here. Thanks! JJB 02:49, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
I think the vertical template is unnecessary, and that it has no useful content to be merged with the horizontal. The main reason for my saying this is the lack of the staple "Ron Paul movement" article. If there is a "Ron Paul movement" in the future and it has its own symbol or flag then the template should be reassessed, but this is far too early to be tacking the vertical template onto articles, especially if good content at the top of the article is removed to make room. If the result of the discussion is keep [the vertical], then I suggest the template developers make some aesthetic changes to have it dominate less of the article. Having a show/hide format can help, see Template:Anarchism sidebar.
MantisEars ( talk) 17:06, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
Chiming in rather late, but I support the horizontal version with a limited number of articles, and letting the TfD's run their course. Skomorokh 16:21, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
I've merged them as the sidebar was only being used in two articles, both of which also had the footer. Skomorokh 21:10, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
User:Vissud has repeatedly altered the template so that the legislation and or campaigns of Paul are appended with "failed". That they were not successful is, as Vissud remarks, a matter of fact. However, including this information in the template does not seem to be in keeping with neutral point of view. {{ Hillary Rodham Clinton}} does not describe her campaign as failed. This template is intended as a navigational aid only; it does not seem to be in keeping with the purpose of directing readers to Paul-related articles to include this "failed" comment. Thoughts? Skomorokh 21:36, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
![]() | This template was considered for deletion on 2008 April 21. The result of the discussion was "keep". |
![]() | This template was considered for deletion on 2008 April 23. The result of the discussion was "keep". |
![]() | Conservatism Template‑class | ||||||
|
Where exactly was the previous TFD debate which prompted this speedy deletion? ViperSnake151 17:22, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
It seems clear that {{ RonPaul}} is in spirit a repost of the deleted version of this template. I propose we redirect that page here as there is nothing I can see worth merging. Skomorokh 02:47, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
Done
Skomorokh 21:10, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Meseems the template "RonPaul" was created as a content fork of this one, and that discussion and consensus has not taken time to gel as both templates have been recommended for deletion. Merge proposal is the obvious solution. The questions are:
It appears there have been long and short article lists vying in an editing "cold war". Let's agree on a list here. Thanks! JJB 02:49, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
I think the vertical template is unnecessary, and that it has no useful content to be merged with the horizontal. The main reason for my saying this is the lack of the staple "Ron Paul movement" article. If there is a "Ron Paul movement" in the future and it has its own symbol or flag then the template should be reassessed, but this is far too early to be tacking the vertical template onto articles, especially if good content at the top of the article is removed to make room. If the result of the discussion is keep [the vertical], then I suggest the template developers make some aesthetic changes to have it dominate less of the article. Having a show/hide format can help, see Template:Anarchism sidebar.
MantisEars ( talk) 17:06, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
Chiming in rather late, but I support the horizontal version with a limited number of articles, and letting the TfD's run their course. Skomorokh 16:21, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
I've merged them as the sidebar was only being used in two articles, both of which also had the footer. Skomorokh 21:10, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
User:Vissud has repeatedly altered the template so that the legislation and or campaigns of Paul are appended with "failed". That they were not successful is, as Vissud remarks, a matter of fact. However, including this information in the template does not seem to be in keeping with neutral point of view. {{ Hillary Rodham Clinton}} does not describe her campaign as failed. This template is intended as a navigational aid only; it does not seem to be in keeping with the purpose of directing readers to Paul-related articles to include this "failed" comment. Thoughts? Skomorokh 21:36, 9 July 2008 (UTC)