I am Tbone55, and have a few Userboxes, I wanted to know how to migrate them.
thanks.
--' â¢Tbon e 55⢠(Talk) (Contribs) (UBX) 17:05, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
Test case number 2 has also resulted in a speedy keep. See Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:The Gerg/Userboxes/User Republican for the full discussion. - Royalguard11( Talk· Desk· Review Me!) 21:01, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
Next test case (or not). {{ user browser}} was nominated for MFD (yes, MFD) at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:User browser. So, I told them to renominate at TFD, but I'll ask here if anyone wants to adopt it in the meantime. I personally think this one might be one of the more useless userboxes (like the food ones), so I'm not going to adopt it. - Royalguard11( Talk· Desk· Review Me!) 02:21, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
I have been thinking about this subject and have posted some ideas at User:Flutefluteflute/AWB, RETF & UBM. Please give your comments on the talk page of that page. Flutefluteflute Talk Contributions 13:52, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
I added a new type of userbox migration to the main article. It is called "UserPage to UserPage Userbox Migration" and can be used for moving userboxes from one userpage to another. I hope you guys like it!
Masky 23:42, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
This recently created project seems to overlap somewhat with this page; I though a link might be a good idea. Cheers. - GTBacchus( talk) 01:51, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
theres a girl named scepia and all she did was take my user boxes so now i have too delete them and find new ones-- Masterl auryn 23:48, 8 January 2007 (UTC)masterlauryn
(clearing the dust off the page)The userbox Template:User kkk has been nominated for deletion. It appears that it's heading for a "userfied" consensus. The problem: who would like to adopt the box? I have already said that I refuse to on principle. So, I guess that if no one wants it, we can safely delete it then. - Royalguard11( Talk· Desk· Review Me!) 18:52, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
Houston, we have a problem... I'm trying to migrate two userboxes using the {{User UBM UBX to}} template, but ran into a problem. The userbox templates are improperly named, as they don't start with the word "User ", therefore, the migration template doesn't QUITE work correctly. How can I still move them? I'm not familiar enough with templates to use subst:. Any hints, tips, solutions? Thanks. 0cm 01:30, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:MiraLuka/Userboxes/User onemanonewoman is at MFD. The userfied box is {{ User:UBX/onemanonewoman}}. The difference between this and other times that userfied boxes have been up for deletion is that this one has several recommendations of delete! I also think that the deletion of this box would basically be a rejection of TGS/GUS/UBM and all the work that has been done here. The rejection of UBM is basically calling for the Userbox Wars to restart. - Royalguard11( Talk· Desk· Review Me!) 18:44, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
I've stated a page with all the TFD/MFD/DRV decisions involving userfied userboxes that I can find/remember at User:Royalguard11/userboxes/precedents. If anyone finds anything, or if I've missed anything, feel free to add to it. I know that there are a few TFD cases that had results of defer to MFD, but I can't remember months/days. This should make it easier to refer to past decisions and precedents, and it will make them easier to find. - Royalguard11( Talk· Desk· Review Me!) 23:52, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Has anyone seen this page? I think we need to implement a solution. you take a look at User talk:Scepia where hate has been generated over "ownership" of content that no one has ownership of. Can we move all of them to UserBox's userspace? It puts them in the User Name space, and no one has ownership. Can we do something like this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mckaysalisbury ( talk • contribs)
See User:UBX for another version of this approach that was created by an admin with a bot. Rfrisbie 16:27, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
"All controversial and divisive userboxes, including those currently in Wikipedia:Userboxes will be migrated out of template space into userspace or an appropriate subpage, such as a corresponding WikiProject."
Scratching me head here guys... what's so disturbing about Judo? -- Mal 18:37, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for taking the time to reply RG. A pretty obvious reason really, now that I rememmber all the hassle regarding userboxes while back. I was just momentarily bedazzled and confuddled when I went to look for the explaination - it was scant, and the creator of the template (me) wasn't informed of the change. As a matter of fact, it came on the tail of my nice wee animated GIF, that I had uploaded for the userbox, having been deleted. I was about to investigate, then I noticed the box itself had gone soon after! Boy I could've crushed a grape that day, I can tell ya!
Anyway, what I did find irritating was the lack of edit history after the move .. thus I can't find the history (or name of) the animated Gif which had been deleted, to find out why it had been deleted. I had wondered if I included a source reference when I uploaded the image. If you're an admin, and you've got a spare five mins, I'd be mightily grateful if you could investigate for me. In any case, cheers. :) -- Mal 20:09, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
Am I the only one who finds it curious that MetsBot ( talk · contribs) and DyceBot ( talk · contribs) are busily migrating userboxes to UBX ( talk · contribs) ( current listing)? Is this just flying under the radar? Is it because Metsbot's daddy is Mets501 ( talk · contribs), an admin? Maybe I just missed the memo. This certainly looks like a missed opportunity for a rousing round of wikidrama. Could someone clue me in? I'm so out of touch, I might as well herd my herd over to UBX and retire from the boxen wrangling business. ;-) Rfrisbie 16:17, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
Whoa! Hold it a minute with the harsh words for admins. :-) This has erupted in mass confusion and controversy, while all I have been trying to do is satisfy all parties. Please forgive me for the confusion, which I think many of you are caught up in. I have explained what User:UBX is for fully on the user page ( User:UBX). Thanks again. â METS501 ( talk) 23:38, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
I have decided the time is ripe for me to divest myself from hosting userboxes and userbox directories. If anyone would like to host User:Rfrisbie/Userboxes and its accompanying subpages, please let me know. Rfrisbie 02:17, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks Mets501! All of these directories now can be found at User:UBX/Userboxes. :-) Rfrisbie 21:28, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
Does anyone else disagree with the userbox migration? I find it very unnecessary seeing as putting {{User ....}} is easier than {{User:User/lala/lala/Userbox}}. This is just a stupid idea. -23 PatPeter* â 02:13, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
I did a bit of Kuzdu trimming on the userpage (shifting some wording, removing some striken-trough or obsolete parts, the usual stuff) - feel free to comment, change or revert. Charon X/ talk 14:23, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
There's a new attempt to purge controversial userboxed even from userspace, and even an attempt to add a new CSD criterion. See for instance
— Ashley Y 21:54, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
Why can we not simply move userboxes to the namespace http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UserBox/? Userboxes do not belong on user pages because they are used by everyone, and do not belong in templates because they are not that kind of thing. They are their own catagory and should be dealt with as such. If all the user boxes were moved to a place like that, everyone would be happy (other than those who want them all gone, which isn't going to happen any time soon). The userboxes would have their own place at Wikipedia, and would be out of the way of anyone not wanting to deal with them. If you don't want them to come up in searches, uncheck that namespace. If you want to search only userboxes, go ahead. It makes everything simple. There are a lot of user boxes, and many duplicates. It is a very poor system as it is. Also, the same kind of thing could be done with other pages that are their own catagory but don't really have a place yet; such as to seperate tools from article page templates. SadanYagci 18:23, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
This seems to have become a guideline, particularly considering the results of most of the above. I think guidelines can be recognised from existing practice.
What do you think, is this now a guideline? — Ashley Y 05:39, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
I've marked it as a guideline as it seems to have consensus, has been stable for awhile, and is mentioned in the policy WP:CSD. — Ashley Y 05:26, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Looks good so far, no major userbox-related flareup for a while (except that bit of trouble with a T1 deletion during a MfD four weeks agi, but that one was quickly overturned and the MfD resumed and properly finished). A week ago a box got deleted via MfD (I though it was a borderline case, but thats what consensus finding is for) and another box is heading for an overwhelming keep right now. Ahhh, tranquility and entire lack of wikidrama. 84.145.195.64 00:44, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Any reason it's not a guideline? Over the last year, it has been accepted by the majority of the community, and many userboxes have been migrated according to UBM. It has become a de facto guideline, so why not just call it what it has become? - Royalguard11( T· R!) 18:17, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
To be fair, T1 was never a solution, it was a clique of admins unanimously deciding what is and isn't allowed on wiki. And the bots really just got involved this year, while most of the work was actually done Summer-Fall 2006. The consensus at that time was that all the politically charged boxes, religion, philosophy, ect boxes should be moved. The only people mad were the ones who couldn't find a userbox (and some people did actually complain about "their" userbox being moved). I'm not sure the consensus has swung full 180 back to all boxes in template space yet (most politics boxes are still in userspace). I know that Tony is mostly inactive, Cyde left the userbox debate a while ago along with Mackenson, and I'm not sure Doc's been involved for a long time, so the anti-userbox people have mostly moved on. If you need to see where WP:UBM has been cited, you can look at User:Royalguard11/userboxes/precedents. Most of those have ended the way they did because of UBM. - Royalguard11( T· R!) 23:53, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Moved the discussion here for transparency. Feel free to join in, or to continue the discussion below, obviously. - jc37 19:01, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
What happened here? All the sudden "hate" is an evil word and MFD's about? If I wanted a userbox to say "I hate the Edmonton Eskimos", that's ok. Someone can just as easily create a "I hate the Saskatchewan Roughriders" userbox. Banning the word "hate" is a horrible idea. How about "I hate rapists"? Under your rules, I can't even say I hate the lowest scum of the earth (FYI, don't defend rapists). - Royalguard11( T· R!) 18:14, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
I am Tbone55, and have a few Userboxes, I wanted to know how to migrate them.
thanks.
--' â¢Tbon e 55⢠(Talk) (Contribs) (UBX) 17:05, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
Test case number 2 has also resulted in a speedy keep. See Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:The Gerg/Userboxes/User Republican for the full discussion. - Royalguard11( Talk· Desk· Review Me!) 21:01, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
Next test case (or not). {{ user browser}} was nominated for MFD (yes, MFD) at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:User browser. So, I told them to renominate at TFD, but I'll ask here if anyone wants to adopt it in the meantime. I personally think this one might be one of the more useless userboxes (like the food ones), so I'm not going to adopt it. - Royalguard11( Talk· Desk· Review Me!) 02:21, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
I have been thinking about this subject and have posted some ideas at User:Flutefluteflute/AWB, RETF & UBM. Please give your comments on the talk page of that page. Flutefluteflute Talk Contributions 13:52, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
I added a new type of userbox migration to the main article. It is called "UserPage to UserPage Userbox Migration" and can be used for moving userboxes from one userpage to another. I hope you guys like it!
Masky 23:42, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
This recently created project seems to overlap somewhat with this page; I though a link might be a good idea. Cheers. - GTBacchus( talk) 01:51, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
theres a girl named scepia and all she did was take my user boxes so now i have too delete them and find new ones-- Masterl auryn 23:48, 8 January 2007 (UTC)masterlauryn
(clearing the dust off the page)The userbox Template:User kkk has been nominated for deletion. It appears that it's heading for a "userfied" consensus. The problem: who would like to adopt the box? I have already said that I refuse to on principle. So, I guess that if no one wants it, we can safely delete it then. - Royalguard11( Talk· Desk· Review Me!) 18:52, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
Houston, we have a problem... I'm trying to migrate two userboxes using the {{User UBM UBX to}} template, but ran into a problem. The userbox templates are improperly named, as they don't start with the word "User ", therefore, the migration template doesn't QUITE work correctly. How can I still move them? I'm not familiar enough with templates to use subst:. Any hints, tips, solutions? Thanks. 0cm 01:30, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:MiraLuka/Userboxes/User onemanonewoman is at MFD. The userfied box is {{ User:UBX/onemanonewoman}}. The difference between this and other times that userfied boxes have been up for deletion is that this one has several recommendations of delete! I also think that the deletion of this box would basically be a rejection of TGS/GUS/UBM and all the work that has been done here. The rejection of UBM is basically calling for the Userbox Wars to restart. - Royalguard11( Talk· Desk· Review Me!) 18:44, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
I've stated a page with all the TFD/MFD/DRV decisions involving userfied userboxes that I can find/remember at User:Royalguard11/userboxes/precedents. If anyone finds anything, or if I've missed anything, feel free to add to it. I know that there are a few TFD cases that had results of defer to MFD, but I can't remember months/days. This should make it easier to refer to past decisions and precedents, and it will make them easier to find. - Royalguard11( Talk· Desk· Review Me!) 23:52, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Has anyone seen this page? I think we need to implement a solution. you take a look at User talk:Scepia where hate has been generated over "ownership" of content that no one has ownership of. Can we move all of them to UserBox's userspace? It puts them in the User Name space, and no one has ownership. Can we do something like this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mckaysalisbury ( talk • contribs)
See User:UBX for another version of this approach that was created by an admin with a bot. Rfrisbie 16:27, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
"All controversial and divisive userboxes, including those currently in Wikipedia:Userboxes will be migrated out of template space into userspace or an appropriate subpage, such as a corresponding WikiProject."
Scratching me head here guys... what's so disturbing about Judo? -- Mal 18:37, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for taking the time to reply RG. A pretty obvious reason really, now that I rememmber all the hassle regarding userboxes while back. I was just momentarily bedazzled and confuddled when I went to look for the explaination - it was scant, and the creator of the template (me) wasn't informed of the change. As a matter of fact, it came on the tail of my nice wee animated GIF, that I had uploaded for the userbox, having been deleted. I was about to investigate, then I noticed the box itself had gone soon after! Boy I could've crushed a grape that day, I can tell ya!
Anyway, what I did find irritating was the lack of edit history after the move .. thus I can't find the history (or name of) the animated Gif which had been deleted, to find out why it had been deleted. I had wondered if I included a source reference when I uploaded the image. If you're an admin, and you've got a spare five mins, I'd be mightily grateful if you could investigate for me. In any case, cheers. :) -- Mal 20:09, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
Am I the only one who finds it curious that MetsBot ( talk · contribs) and DyceBot ( talk · contribs) are busily migrating userboxes to UBX ( talk · contribs) ( current listing)? Is this just flying under the radar? Is it because Metsbot's daddy is Mets501 ( talk · contribs), an admin? Maybe I just missed the memo. This certainly looks like a missed opportunity for a rousing round of wikidrama. Could someone clue me in? I'm so out of touch, I might as well herd my herd over to UBX and retire from the boxen wrangling business. ;-) Rfrisbie 16:17, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
Whoa! Hold it a minute with the harsh words for admins. :-) This has erupted in mass confusion and controversy, while all I have been trying to do is satisfy all parties. Please forgive me for the confusion, which I think many of you are caught up in. I have explained what User:UBX is for fully on the user page ( User:UBX). Thanks again. â METS501 ( talk) 23:38, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
I have decided the time is ripe for me to divest myself from hosting userboxes and userbox directories. If anyone would like to host User:Rfrisbie/Userboxes and its accompanying subpages, please let me know. Rfrisbie 02:17, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks Mets501! All of these directories now can be found at User:UBX/Userboxes. :-) Rfrisbie 21:28, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
Does anyone else disagree with the userbox migration? I find it very unnecessary seeing as putting {{User ....}} is easier than {{User:User/lala/lala/Userbox}}. This is just a stupid idea. -23 PatPeter* â 02:13, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
I did a bit of Kuzdu trimming on the userpage (shifting some wording, removing some striken-trough or obsolete parts, the usual stuff) - feel free to comment, change or revert. Charon X/ talk 14:23, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
There's a new attempt to purge controversial userboxed even from userspace, and even an attempt to add a new CSD criterion. See for instance
— Ashley Y 21:54, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
Why can we not simply move userboxes to the namespace http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UserBox/? Userboxes do not belong on user pages because they are used by everyone, and do not belong in templates because they are not that kind of thing. They are their own catagory and should be dealt with as such. If all the user boxes were moved to a place like that, everyone would be happy (other than those who want them all gone, which isn't going to happen any time soon). The userboxes would have their own place at Wikipedia, and would be out of the way of anyone not wanting to deal with them. If you don't want them to come up in searches, uncheck that namespace. If you want to search only userboxes, go ahead. It makes everything simple. There are a lot of user boxes, and many duplicates. It is a very poor system as it is. Also, the same kind of thing could be done with other pages that are their own catagory but don't really have a place yet; such as to seperate tools from article page templates. SadanYagci 18:23, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
This seems to have become a guideline, particularly considering the results of most of the above. I think guidelines can be recognised from existing practice.
What do you think, is this now a guideline? — Ashley Y 05:39, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
I've marked it as a guideline as it seems to have consensus, has been stable for awhile, and is mentioned in the policy WP:CSD. — Ashley Y 05:26, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Looks good so far, no major userbox-related flareup for a while (except that bit of trouble with a T1 deletion during a MfD four weeks agi, but that one was quickly overturned and the MfD resumed and properly finished). A week ago a box got deleted via MfD (I though it was a borderline case, but thats what consensus finding is for) and another box is heading for an overwhelming keep right now. Ahhh, tranquility and entire lack of wikidrama. 84.145.195.64 00:44, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Any reason it's not a guideline? Over the last year, it has been accepted by the majority of the community, and many userboxes have been migrated according to UBM. It has become a de facto guideline, so why not just call it what it has become? - Royalguard11( T· R!) 18:17, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
To be fair, T1 was never a solution, it was a clique of admins unanimously deciding what is and isn't allowed on wiki. And the bots really just got involved this year, while most of the work was actually done Summer-Fall 2006. The consensus at that time was that all the politically charged boxes, religion, philosophy, ect boxes should be moved. The only people mad were the ones who couldn't find a userbox (and some people did actually complain about "their" userbox being moved). I'm not sure the consensus has swung full 180 back to all boxes in template space yet (most politics boxes are still in userspace). I know that Tony is mostly inactive, Cyde left the userbox debate a while ago along with Mackenson, and I'm not sure Doc's been involved for a long time, so the anti-userbox people have mostly moved on. If you need to see where WP:UBM has been cited, you can look at User:Royalguard11/userboxes/precedents. Most of those have ended the way they did because of UBM. - Royalguard11( T· R!) 23:53, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Moved the discussion here for transparency. Feel free to join in, or to continue the discussion below, obviously. - jc37 19:01, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
What happened here? All the sudden "hate" is an evil word and MFD's about? If I wanted a userbox to say "I hate the Edmonton Eskimos", that's ok. Someone can just as easily create a "I hate the Saskatchewan Roughriders" userbox. Banning the word "hate" is a horrible idea. How about "I hate rapists"? Under your rules, I can't even say I hate the lowest scum of the earth (FYI, don't defend rapists). - Royalguard11( T· R!) 18:14, 23 October 2007 (UTC)