This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Adjectives in your recommendations page. |
|
Essays Low‑impact | ||||||||||
|
If this essay is going to be in the project space it should probably be re-written to not be in first person without the signature, so others are more free to edit it as they see necessary. Camaron · Christopher · talk 12:05, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
I agree, I find those adjectives annoying as well. I have a few suggestions for the essay:
Neutral I find a bit odd, it's almost an adjectival version of comment. A comment is probably suggesting keeping or deletion where the commenter is treating AfD as a discussion and WP:NOTAVOTE, but if someone is truly "neutral," why bother commenting? meta:Don't vote on everything and follow WP:SILENCE; i.e. add a comment or recommendation if you disagree with either the nomination or an argument made against the nomination, but if you don't have anything to say, don't say anything at all.
I sometimes see Snowball used as an adjective. Keep/Delete: WP:SNOWBALL is perhaps a somewhat better formulation. Quite pathetic when it is one of the first few responses to the nomination, more logical when it follows quite a few. Such a WP:VAGUEWAVE isn't especially good, an "argument without an argument," but if in fact it is obvious to everyone but the most clueless what the outcome is going to be, Snowball Keep/Delete is essentially an understandable call for an early close. Though oddly, I see WP:EARLY is a failed proposal - but it still gets done, doesn't it? Шизомби (Sz) ( talk) 18:37, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
I have given this essay some much needed improvement and expansion. I have removed the first person style of the original (see my earlier comment above), which was not really appropriate for a project space essay, given that essays present in this namespace should be editable by others, per
WP:ESSAYS. The essay is also at a rather generic title, but was rather one sided, so I have added an alternative viewpoint with a neutral introduction added. Furthermore, the arguments of this essay do not just apply to deletion discussions, but also to discussion elsewhere such as at
WP:RFA, so I have changed the essay tag from {{
Deletion essay}}
to {{
Essay}}
.
CT Cooper ·
talk 16:48, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
Good essay and it makes sense, if only parts of it didn't contradict so much with WP:NOTAVOTE. -- œ ™ 21:08, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
It also contradicts a lot of history. These things have been around for roughly three quarters of a decade. See this edit from 2004 documenting existing practice. Uncle G ( talk) 04:48, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
What if we were to do something like this:
Or alternatively:
The idea here is that someone can express the "strength" of their position but simply "bolding" the position at the same time. It also allows for easy glance and more full expressions.
Comments?-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 01:35, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
Since it has been suggested previously and the issue of the title seems to come up on most discussions on this essay, I have moved it to the title suggested above. CT Cooper · talk 23:27, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Adjectives in your recommendations page. |
|
Essays Low‑impact | ||||||||||
|
If this essay is going to be in the project space it should probably be re-written to not be in first person without the signature, so others are more free to edit it as they see necessary. Camaron · Christopher · talk 12:05, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
I agree, I find those adjectives annoying as well. I have a few suggestions for the essay:
Neutral I find a bit odd, it's almost an adjectival version of comment. A comment is probably suggesting keeping or deletion where the commenter is treating AfD as a discussion and WP:NOTAVOTE, but if someone is truly "neutral," why bother commenting? meta:Don't vote on everything and follow WP:SILENCE; i.e. add a comment or recommendation if you disagree with either the nomination or an argument made against the nomination, but if you don't have anything to say, don't say anything at all.
I sometimes see Snowball used as an adjective. Keep/Delete: WP:SNOWBALL is perhaps a somewhat better formulation. Quite pathetic when it is one of the first few responses to the nomination, more logical when it follows quite a few. Such a WP:VAGUEWAVE isn't especially good, an "argument without an argument," but if in fact it is obvious to everyone but the most clueless what the outcome is going to be, Snowball Keep/Delete is essentially an understandable call for an early close. Though oddly, I see WP:EARLY is a failed proposal - but it still gets done, doesn't it? Шизомби (Sz) ( talk) 18:37, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
I have given this essay some much needed improvement and expansion. I have removed the first person style of the original (see my earlier comment above), which was not really appropriate for a project space essay, given that essays present in this namespace should be editable by others, per
WP:ESSAYS. The essay is also at a rather generic title, but was rather one sided, so I have added an alternative viewpoint with a neutral introduction added. Furthermore, the arguments of this essay do not just apply to deletion discussions, but also to discussion elsewhere such as at
WP:RFA, so I have changed the essay tag from {{
Deletion essay}}
to {{
Essay}}
.
CT Cooper ·
talk 16:48, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
Good essay and it makes sense, if only parts of it didn't contradict so much with WP:NOTAVOTE. -- œ ™ 21:08, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
It also contradicts a lot of history. These things have been around for roughly three quarters of a decade. See this edit from 2004 documenting existing practice. Uncle G ( talk) 04:48, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
What if we were to do something like this:
Or alternatively:
The idea here is that someone can express the "strength" of their position but simply "bolding" the position at the same time. It also allows for easy glance and more full expressions.
Comments?-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 01:35, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
Since it has been suggested previously and the issue of the title seems to come up on most discussions on this essay, I have moved it to the title suggested above. CT Cooper · talk 23:27, 26 February 2011 (UTC)