Jump to content

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Unused userbox template

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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: keep . Consensus shows that users will eventually find a use for these userboxes. (non-admin closure)  Nova Crystallis (Talk) 18:03, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unused userbox templates

[edit]
249 other similar templates

All 250 of these are unused. No reason to keep around in the Template namspace. Userfy to User:UBX Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 19:37, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion
[edit]
Nope userboxes come to MfD. There is a rule about that somewhere. This is the correct venue. Legacypac (talk) 19:45, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Struck. UnitedStatesian (talk) 19:49, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If all or mostly from the same user a topic ban might be in order. No creating userboxes? Legacypac (talk) 19:52, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Legacypac: these were created over a decade ago. Even if it was all the same user, I don't see any benefit of attempting to punish someone for something from 2007. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 20:00, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Given the age of creation, of course not. Userfying therefore makes no sense. If someone feels strongly they cN bring one of these into use they can copy the code to their userspace now. Legacypac (talk) 20:51, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Not seeing any valid reason for deletion. People across a whole lot of Wikimedia projects use these kinds of userboxes. That there is nobody right now who wishes to say that they are a native speaker of Maltese, what in the world benefit to the project is it to remove it? Mt-N and Mt-5 are nominated, but we're going to keep mt-3 because we happen to have someone who's a level 3 Maltese speaker? I suppose if they improved their skills to 5, they'd have to just recreate it? What is the point of this? That's not to say there aren't userboxes that could be deleted, if that's something you want to spend your time on, but it should be ones that are not in use and very unlikely to be used (the language series would all be excluded, as would anything connected to a wikiproject, etc., among others). — Rhododendrites talk \\ 22:28, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - A userbox should not be deleted solely on the basis that it is unused. See also Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:User qwh-0, which applies to some of the nominated templates. No prejudice against considering these individually or in smaller groups that share different commonalities. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 04:09, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep the entire language series, per Rhododendrites, and the project ones as well. Also, why are we trying to delete {{Example}}? If I want to point to an example template in a conversation or something, might as well use that one. The rest can be judged on their own merits, although many of them are part of a set, and would have to be considered in that context, not in isolation. I would say that deleting them just because someone isn't using them right now seems unnecessary. We've always had obscure userboxes lying around that don't get much attention until someone wanders along and finds a neat one they decide to add to their userpage. Why not just move the rest to User:UBX? — AfroThundr (u · t · c) 04:10, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • The language ones which are part of the series should probably be kept, even if unused, however, others like {{User Wiiwant}} and {{User visited the Bahamas}} are exactly what WP:NOTBLOG says not to do and should probably be renominated in a more focused smaller batch. --Gonnym (talk) 10:32, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, at least as a general proposition. Deleting random language level userboxes because no one happens to be using them right now is crazy. If you proposed to delete all the language level userboxes or to condense them into one fancy template/Lua script that would be something else. Also note the potential appearance of ethnic discrimination if you attack resources about some languages that seem "obscure". Wnt (talk) 12:10, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Procedural keep all - this nomination should be re-done with some rational grouping of the userboxes. The Babel userboxes should not be deleted, they are important for various internal functions, and for example it's worthwhile as a statistic that we have no editors identifying as intermediate speakers of Ossetian. In fact we should create {{User os-4}} and so on to complete the series, even if they're not used. There are others here (per Gonnym and others) that should probably be UBX-userfied, not deleted, but someone should have done the work identifying which are which before listing them all here. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 13:21, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Rhododendrites. --Ahecht (TALK
    PAGE    ) 14:14, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Rhododendrites, Ivanvector, Wnt and AfroThundr3007730. Thryduulf (talk) 15:48, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
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.


Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/Unused_userbox_template&oldid=1035878002"