This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Welcome-delete template. |
|
Articles for creation Template‑class | ||||||||||
|
The template usage documentation says "Used to warn new editors that they have blanked a page or removed content without stating a reason and/or gaining consensus". However, the message delivered to end users when the template is left on their talk page just says "We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your recent contributions have removed content without an explanation", linking "an explanation" to the edit summary help page. This doesn't seem to me to really cover the case in which a reason has been stated, but it does not follow consensus - for instance, "removing content that's wrong" as an edit summary when removing content that's controversial but well referenced. Having a template use case to deal with this would be really helpful - maybe it could be a parameter included at the point of transclusion of this template?
The idea would be to replace the "without an explanation" bit with something like "without a good reason to do so. If information is verifiable and its inclusion follows Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, it should stay part of the encyclopedia, even if you disagree with it. Instead of removing such information, you should consider expanding the article with notable and verifiable information of your own, citing reliable sources when you do so."
Thoughts? All best, Naypta ☺ | ✉ talk page | 21:46, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
br
(bad reason), which would produce this sort of message. You can see examples of its use
in the testcases. I'd appreciate any thoughts, feedback or refinements people have.
Naypta ☺ |
✉ talk page |
20:58, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Welcome-delete template. |
|
Articles for creation Template‑class | ||||||||||
|
The template usage documentation says "Used to warn new editors that they have blanked a page or removed content without stating a reason and/or gaining consensus". However, the message delivered to end users when the template is left on their talk page just says "We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your recent contributions have removed content without an explanation", linking "an explanation" to the edit summary help page. This doesn't seem to me to really cover the case in which a reason has been stated, but it does not follow consensus - for instance, "removing content that's wrong" as an edit summary when removing content that's controversial but well referenced. Having a template use case to deal with this would be really helpful - maybe it could be a parameter included at the point of transclusion of this template?
The idea would be to replace the "without an explanation" bit with something like "without a good reason to do so. If information is verifiable and its inclusion follows Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, it should stay part of the encyclopedia, even if you disagree with it. Instead of removing such information, you should consider expanding the article with notable and verifiable information of your own, citing reliable sources when you do so."
Thoughts? All best, Naypta ☺ | ✉ talk page | 21:46, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
br
(bad reason), which would produce this sort of message. You can see examples of its use
in the testcases. I'd appreciate any thoughts, feedback or refinements people have.
Naypta ☺ |
✉ talk page |
20:58, 7 May 2020 (UTC)