- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the discussion was no consensus to delete. ··· 日本穣 ? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 05:50, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
User:Jax 0677/Show Dog-Universal Music
Deleted at this TFD, then promptly userfied. User has not touched this since, and has a nearly disruptive history of crapping out large amounts of templates with dubious usefulness. Whenever such a template is deleted, the user will always argue "X does not link directly to Y, nor Y to Z, therefore, this template is useful" even though X and Y only have tangential correlation. (For instance, none of the artists on this template have ever collaborated with each other, and have no common bonds besides their label, so there would be no reason to interlink.) Beyond the user's intents, this is a clear cut WP:STALEDRAFT since all they're doing is hoarding it in userspace. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 09:03, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
Plan to implement on
Show Dog-Universal Music page with the four employees currently shown in the template -
Only a few of the hundreds of templates that I have created have ever been deleted. Articles in templates often have tangential relation, for musical artists and ensembles included. That being said, I would like to focus this discussion on whether the current navbox should be implemented in
Show Dog-Universal Music. --
Jax 0677 (
talk) 16:27, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
- Which then puts it short of WP:NENAN since it only navigates four articles. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 23:09, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
- So far as I can see, we don't have navboxes on record labels in general. That would seem to be a general consensus that this isn't appropriate. As an aside, it's disappointing that Jax has taken to hoarding these.
Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (
talk) 10:39, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
- Reply - Not true, see
Template:Virgin Records and
Template:Warner Music Group. --
Jax 0677 (
talk) 13:23, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
- "In general" does not preclude exceptions, but a random sample of fifteen articles on labels of a similar size to the nom resulted in zero matches. So the existence of a single example of a label navbox not created by yourself, which is for a vastly bigger organisation, does not do much to contradict the hypothesised rule.
Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (
talk) 15:07, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
- Those would be appropriate arguments in a TFD discussion. This, however, is an MFD discussion - about whether the content is suitable for userspace. Content may well be unsuitable for template space yet fine in userspace. In my view, so long as they are not transcluded in articles or linked to from template space, navboxes can exist in userspace even if they fail WP:NENAN, even if they are drafts, even if they are bring stored there for future use, etc. — This, that and the other (talk) 08:37, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
- "In general" does not preclude exceptions, but a random sample of fifteen articles on labels of a similar size to the nom resulted in zero matches. So the existence of a single example of a label navbox not created by yourself, which is for a vastly bigger organisation, does not do much to contradict the hypothesised rule.
Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (
talk) 15:07, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
- Reply - Not true, see
Template:Virgin Records and
Template:Warner Music Group. --
Jax 0677 (
talk) 13:23, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
- Keep. This is a user subpage that is directly connected with encyclopedic content (i.e. not a violation of WP:NOTWEBHOST etc), and which is less than a year old. That is enough for me. I take a very open-minded view of what should be allowed in userspace, and this falls well within my definition of what's OK. — This, that and the other (talk) 10:54, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
Reply - Thank you This, that and the other! -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 13:36, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the discussion was no consensus to delete. ··· 日本穣 ? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 05:50, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
User:Jax 0677/Show Dog-Universal Music
Deleted at this TFD, then promptly userfied. User has not touched this since, and has a nearly disruptive history of crapping out large amounts of templates with dubious usefulness. Whenever such a template is deleted, the user will always argue "X does not link directly to Y, nor Y to Z, therefore, this template is useful" even though X and Y only have tangential correlation. (For instance, none of the artists on this template have ever collaborated with each other, and have no common bonds besides their label, so there would be no reason to interlink.) Beyond the user's intents, this is a clear cut WP:STALEDRAFT since all they're doing is hoarding it in userspace. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 09:03, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
Plan to implement on
Show Dog-Universal Music page with the four employees currently shown in the template -
Only a few of the hundreds of templates that I have created have ever been deleted. Articles in templates often have tangential relation, for musical artists and ensembles included. That being said, I would like to focus this discussion on whether the current navbox should be implemented in
Show Dog-Universal Music. --
Jax 0677 (
talk) 16:27, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
- Which then puts it short of WP:NENAN since it only navigates four articles. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 23:09, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
- So far as I can see, we don't have navboxes on record labels in general. That would seem to be a general consensus that this isn't appropriate. As an aside, it's disappointing that Jax has taken to hoarding these.
Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (
talk) 10:39, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
- Reply - Not true, see
Template:Virgin Records and
Template:Warner Music Group. --
Jax 0677 (
talk) 13:23, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
- "In general" does not preclude exceptions, but a random sample of fifteen articles on labels of a similar size to the nom resulted in zero matches. So the existence of a single example of a label navbox not created by yourself, which is for a vastly bigger organisation, does not do much to contradict the hypothesised rule.
Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (
talk) 15:07, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
- Those would be appropriate arguments in a TFD discussion. This, however, is an MFD discussion - about whether the content is suitable for userspace. Content may well be unsuitable for template space yet fine in userspace. In my view, so long as they are not transcluded in articles or linked to from template space, navboxes can exist in userspace even if they fail WP:NENAN, even if they are drafts, even if they are bring stored there for future use, etc. — This, that and the other (talk) 08:37, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
- "In general" does not preclude exceptions, but a random sample of fifteen articles on labels of a similar size to the nom resulted in zero matches. So the existence of a single example of a label navbox not created by yourself, which is for a vastly bigger organisation, does not do much to contradict the hypothesised rule.
Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (
talk) 15:07, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
- Reply - Not true, see
Template:Virgin Records and
Template:Warner Music Group. --
Jax 0677 (
talk) 13:23, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
- Keep. This is a user subpage that is directly connected with encyclopedic content (i.e. not a violation of WP:NOTWEBHOST etc), and which is less than a year old. That is enough for me. I take a very open-minded view of what should be allowed in userspace, and this falls well within my definition of what's OK. — This, that and the other (talk) 10:54, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
Reply - Thank you This, that and the other! -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 13:36, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.