579:- I came across this discussion via an avenue that's unusual for me (i.e. I didn't just find it here where I usually hang out), I found it via a page on another project that linked to meta that linked to the project that was tagged for deletion. A quick check of some of the templates tagged for deletion as part of this project shows that they are used a very large number of template pages to show what other projects the same templates are used on. I think this project needs definite clean up and revamping - there is too much junk. But wholesale deletion is a very bad idea. Many of the templates could be combined and with work they could also feed into cats re what projects are NOT yet using the tagged template. For example, I have found several projects lately that didn't yet have the SUL user templates; however, it would be nice to be able to have a project working on coordinating the creation of identical templates for all projects and developing procedures for GFDL compliance (transwiki protocol doesn't fit with templates). The particular template I am talking about has very complex documentation when it comes to moving it between projects. It seems this project should be coordinating such things. Now I know inactivity is part of the issue here, but inactivity is not the same as historicity. There is no reason to reinvent this project when interest can be found just because this one is currently dormant. I recommend we keep it and work on a comprehensive reworking of the entire scheme. I for one would be willing to work on making this project useful. I don't really see the problem with letting this remain as is, or disabling any really troublesome parts until it can be reworked. Let's kill this discussion and reconvene on the project's talk page to fix it. Ping me on my talk page or e-mail me if I don't respond immediately.--
625:? I think not. The worthy goal of increasing sisterproject collaboration and resource sharing is, IMO, best facilitated by dredging off the silt that this project has mired itself in, getting back down to earth in terms of actual priorities, and starting afresh with a structure that more than one person wikimedia-wide can understand. In summary, I don't think our views are contradictory: where the project goes after we remove the mire of obfuscation that it's drawn around itself is outside the scope of this MfD, and I wish it all the best.
396:
some of the most convoluted and archaic code I have ever seen on wikimedia. Almost every template is broken to some degree; they use a spectacular range of deprecated, hardcoded, unappealing styles that may port well to sister projects, but which look godawful next to our local templates. The vast majority of the pages above serve only to organise (and in many cases perpetuate) the work of the WikiProject itself; that work is now finished here (project talk page has not been edited since June 2007),
651:, dismantle its structures, and separate from the rubble the few pages and links that deserve to be integrated into Knowledge (XXG)'s local content. If Happy-melon is willing to take on such a challenge, s/he should be supported. This may be a good way to get a solid and efficient foundation for sharing content. Once Happy-melon implements a comprehensive reworking of the entire scheme, then others could modify Happy-melon's work as needed. This position is consistent with
688:- Given the numerous pages tagged by Happy-melon to give notice of this MfD, that this MfD has been open for 20 days (!), and the few people actually showing up to comment, there seems to be little interest one way or another in the WikiProject or its' templates and categories. This further supports giving Happy-melon the requested mandate. Other than Happy-melon and Doug, who really is going to step forward and fix this problem? --
395:
and the structures it has created, I have spent a considerable time trying to understand the interlocking mess of templates and categories it has created here and elsewhere. I have not succeeded; the project pages are actively confusing, its documentation utterly incomprehensible, its templates use
538:
and its talk page) receive that mark in preference to deletion. The main issue is the vast collection of templates and categories that the project has spawned; it is not customary for us to mark such pages as historical. I don't think this issue can be resolved by just tagging everything in sight
420:
be unilaterally deleted; doing so would cause a huge amount of disruption and the loss of those few useful links. What I am proposing is a mandate to 'wind up' this project, dismantle its structures, and separate from the rubble the few pages and links that deserve to be integrated into our local
442:
There's a lot to look into here, so I'm not entirely sure where I stand. I'd say mark as historical. Most templates break over time anyways, as software updates, and templates that the other templates might use get changed. But I might not be understanding the full concern here (hence, only a
608:
to co-ordinate interwiki links. But try explaining to me how this system as a whole functions, and I will bow down and worship if you can manage it. The backend of this system is so needlessly complicated, so deliberately obscure, and in many cases so actively disruptive (see
457:, for instance, I mean WTF?!?) that it really does need to be cleaned up. I think marking the main project pages as historical would be sensible, as you say, but the outlying structures have a wide-ranging, and extremely negative, effect on the 'middle levels' of en.wiki.
452:
Indeed, it's a hugely (and entirely unnecessarily) complicated system that mainly serves to perpetuate itself. Unravelling it without damaging other things is going to be a delicate business, but it's making such a mess of various places already (check out
62:
The consensus below (including the nominator) is that there is at least some of this which is salvagable, and that the "problems" seem to be the (currently mired) implementation, not the intended goal(s).
415:
The mess of categories, templates, code and structure listed above (probably not a complete list, I will work on finding more pages) contains a few gems, useful links to sister project pages. It should
109:
621:
it has created. A template containing sisterproject links, yes. A project to maintain those links, yes. A structure sufficiently complicated as to require a dozen documentation pages like
87:
539:
with the historical template. What are your views on the deletion of these structures, which contain no useful discussion history but which are making mayhem on a large number of pages?
55:
MfD may or may not have been the best venue for this, since the nomination seems to suggest that the goal seems mostly to be to refactor this scheme/system's "backend". But, per
663:
positions. Also, please note there is no objection to Happy-melon fixing the WikiProject and its structure, so I think consensus agrees with Happy-melon's request above. --
701:
676:
637:
583:
569:
551:
521:
496:
469:
447:
433:
70:
92:
556:
Tagging historical would mean deactivating the WikiProject and its category and template structure, which cannot be done for reasons mentioned in the nomination. --
134:
59:, let's not be overly concerned about the specific venue, this one is not that far afield for such a discussion (especially since deletion may indeed be involved).
97:
104:
66:
In short, mark any project pages historical, and fix/refactor/merge/redirect/delete/etc. templates and categories, as appropriate to the cleanup/fix. -
119:
648:
535:
392:
82:
610:
149:
144:
114:
617:, in my opinion. You say yourself "this project needs definite clean up and revamping"; I can deduce no possible use for a good 95% of the
401:
139:
17:
159:
154:
124:
397:
405:
129:
250:
233:
592:
appropriate for this collection of structures. There is as you point out a lot that is useful and valid, and some of the
255:
245:
240:
265:
164:
718:
622:
228:
41:
412:; none of the pages listed above have been substantially edited within the 30-day length of the recentchanges table.
260:
191:
517:
174:
350:
408:(April 07), etc etc. As best I can tell, the only editor who has been active on the project in the last year is
335:
310:
223:
218:
213:
208:
203:
198:
186:
181:
603:
380:
340:
169:
330:
320:
717:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a
385:
305:
295:
275:
40:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a
325:
315:
290:
285:
300:
280:
34:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below.
632:
546:
513:
464:
428:
270:
421:
content. All the pages above should be deleted, redirected, or marked as historical, as appropriate.
345:
529:
507:
492:
375:
370:
365:
360:
355:
454:
409:
56:
692:
667:
655:(but where Happy-melon is the one mandated to fix), so I think it consistent with the above
626:
560:
540:
480:
458:
422:
488:
444:
483:'s proposal to clean and tidy up the mess, using redirects, marking as historical,
689:
664:
557:
135:
Category:Knowledge (XXG) categories matching with
Wikimedia Commons categories
580:
67:
596:
of this project's work are extremely beneficial. We need a template that
588:
As I said above, I fully agree with you that "wholesale deletion" is
110:
Knowledge (XXG) talk:WikiProject template sharing/Page
Differences
711:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
120:
Category:Templates shared with
English sisterprojects by project
611:
Category:Interwiki templates varying on other sister projects
150:
Category:Interwiki templates varying on other sister projects
88:
Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject template sharing/Tfd record-Tfd2
613:- what does that look like in your browser?) as to warrant
145:
Category:Exported templates used only on
Wikimedia Commons
526:
It is the intention of the proposal that pages to which
115:
Category:Shared templates used only on
Wikimedia Commons
400:(never even got off the ground, only edit in Feb 07),
140:
Category:Knowledge (XXG) category redirect (commons)
93:
Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject template sharing/extract
160:
Category:Interwiki template-links-tagging templates
44:). No further edits should be made to this page.
27:
WikiProject template sharing and related structures
155:Category:WikiProject template sharing subtemplates
125:Category:Interwiki templates on all sisterprojects
98:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject template sharing/to do
105:Knowledge (XXG) talk:WikiProject template sharing
721:). No further edits should be made to this page.
479:. In the absense of any objection, I support
130:Category:Interwiki template sharing categories
8:
649:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject template sharing
536:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject template sharing
393:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject template sharing
83:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject template sharing
251:Template:Interwikitmp-grp header box End
487:where there is nothing salvageable. --
18:Knowledge (XXG):Miscellany for deletion
234:Template:Interwikitmp-grpNN usage/doc
7:
256:Template:Interwikitmp-grp ineligible
246:Template:Interwikitmp-grp exceptions
241:Template:Interwikitmp-grp edit group
266:Template:Interwikitmp-grps see also
165:Template:Interwikitmp-grps see also
77:Full list of pages under discussion
24:
645:Support a mandate for Happy-melon
229:Template:Interwikitmp-grpNN usage
261:Template:Interwikitmp-grp usage
192:Template:Interwikitmp-grp1/doc
49:The result of the debate was
1:
702:12:01, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
677:01:32, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
638:21:43, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
584:20:24, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
570:01:48, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
552:17:15, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
175:Template:Interwikitmp-grp/doc
71:16:18, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
522:01:21, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
497:07:56, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
470:00:07, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
448:02:30, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
434:19:11, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
351:Template:Macroregister usage
738:
311:Template:CommonscatInfobox
224:Template:Interwikitmp-grpD
219:Template:Interwikitmp-grp6
214:Template:Interwikitmp-grp5
209:Template:Interwikitmp-grp4
204:Template:Interwikitmp-grp3
199:Template:Interwikitmp-grp2
187:Template:Interwikitmp-grp1
182:Template:Interwikitmp-grp0
381:Template:WPTSP loose ends
336:Template:Commonscat show2
170:Template:Interwikitmp-grp
714:Please do not modify it.
341:Template:Commonscategory
331:Template:Commonscat left
321:Template:CommonscatUsage
37:Please do not modify it.
615:carefull deconstruction
276:Template:Commonscat/doc
386:Template:WPTSP cathead
306:Template:Commonscat4Ra
296:Template:Commonscat1Ra
686:Further on my support
326:Template:Commonscat 2
316:Template:CommonscatNo
291:Template:Commonscat1R
286:Template:Commonscat1A
271:Template:Commonscat-N
346:Template:Commonscats
301:Template:Commonscat4
281:Template:Commonscat1
391:After encountering
455:Category:Structure
729:
716:
697:
672:
607:
604:interwikitmp-grp
565:
533:
514:Tohd8BohaithuGh1
511:
481:User:Happy-melon
51:Fix the problems
39:
737:
736:
732:
731:
730:
728:
727:
726:
725:
719:deletion review
712:
698:
695:
673:
670:
601:
566:
563:
527:
505:
42:deletion review
35:
29:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
735:
733:
724:
723:
707:
706:
705:
704:
694:
680:
679:
669:
642:
641:
640:
574:
573:
572:
562:
554:
534:is suited (eg
499:
474:
473:
472:
389:
388:
383:
378:
373:
368:
363:
358:
353:
348:
343:
338:
333:
328:
323:
318:
313:
308:
303:
298:
293:
288:
283:
278:
273:
268:
263:
258:
253:
248:
243:
238:
237:
236:
226:
221:
216:
211:
206:
201:
196:
195:
194:
184:
179:
178:
177:
167:
162:
157:
152:
147:
142:
137:
132:
127:
122:
117:
112:
107:
102:
101:
100:
95:
90:
79:
78:
74:
47:
46:
30:
28:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
734:
722:
720:
715:
709:
708:
703:
700:
699:
691:
687:
684:
683:
682:
681:
678:
675:
674:
666:
662:
658:
654:
650:
647:to 'wind up'
646:
643:
639:
636:
635:
630:
629:
624:
620:
616:
612:
605:
599:
595:
591:
587:
586:
585:
582:
578:
575:
571:
568:
567:
559:
555:
553:
550:
549:
544:
543:
537:
531:
525:
524:
523:
519:
515:
509:
503:
500:
498:
494:
490:
486:
482:
478:
475:
471:
468:
467:
462:
461:
456:
451:
450:
449:
446:
443:comment). --
441:
438:
437:
436:
435:
432:
431:
426:
425:
419:
413:
411:
407:
403:
399:
394:
387:
384:
382:
379:
377:
374:
372:
369:
367:
364:
362:
359:
357:
354:
352:
349:
347:
344:
342:
339:
337:
334:
332:
329:
327:
324:
322:
319:
317:
314:
312:
309:
307:
304:
302:
299:
297:
294:
292:
289:
287:
284:
282:
279:
277:
274:
272:
269:
267:
264:
262:
259:
257:
254:
252:
249:
247:
244:
242:
239:
235:
232:
231:
230:
227:
225:
222:
220:
217:
215:
212:
210:
207:
205:
202:
200:
197:
193:
190:
189:
188:
185:
183:
180:
176:
173:
172:
171:
168:
166:
163:
161:
158:
156:
153:
151:
148:
146:
143:
141:
138:
136:
133:
131:
128:
126:
123:
121:
118:
116:
113:
111:
108:
106:
103:
99:
96:
94:
91:
89:
86:
85:
84:
81:
80:
76:
75:
73:
72:
69:
64:
60:
58:
53:
52:
45:
43:
38:
32:
31:
26:
19:
713:
710:
693:
685:
668:
660:
656:
653:Keep but fix
652:
644:
633:
627:
618:
614:
597:
593:
589:
576:
561:
547:
541:
501:
485:and deletion
484:
476:
465:
459:
439:
429:
423:
417:
414:
404:(April 07),
390:
376:Template:WVY
371:Template:WQT
366:Template:WPD
361:Template:WDY
356:Template:MTA
65:
61:
54:
50:
48:
36:
33:
594:end results
504:and tag as
619:structures
530:historical
508:historical
406:wiktionary
489:SmokeyJoe
445:Ned Scott
410:Fabartus
661:Support
477:Support
440:Comment
402:Commons
398:at meta
57:WP:BURO
690:Suntag
665:Suntag
558:Suntag
634:melon
628:Happy
600:like
598:looks
581:Doug.
548:melon
542:Happy
466:melon
460:Happy
430:melon
424:Happy
16:<
659:and
657:Keep
623:this
577:Keep
518:talk
502:Keep
493:talk
68:jc37
590:not
418:not
606:}}
602:{{
532:}}
528:{{
520:)
512:.
510:}}
506:{{
495:)
696:☼
671:☼
631:‑
564:☼
545:‑
516:(
491:(
463:‑
427:‑
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.