User talk:Woohookitty: Difference between revisions
Woohookitty (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
→Mitsubishi Motors templates: new section |
||
Line 38: | Line 38: | ||
==No content in [[:Category:Warcraft character infobox templates]]== |
==No content in [[:Category:Warcraft character infobox templates]]== |
||
[[Image:Information_icon.svg|left]]Hello, this is a message from [[User:CSDWarnBot|an automated bot]]. A tag has been placed on [[:Category:Warcraft character infobox templates]], by {{#ifeq:{{{nom}}}|1|[[User:{{{nominator}}}|{{{nominator}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{nominator}}}|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/{{{nominator}}}|contribs]]),}} another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be [[Wikipedia:Speedy deletions|speedily deleted]] from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because [[:Category:Warcraft character infobox templates]] has been empty for at least four days, and its only content has been links to parent categories. ([[WP:CSD#C1|CSD C1]]).<br><br>To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting [[:Category:Warcraft character infobox templates]], please affix the template <nowiki>{{hangon}}</nowiki> to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at [[WP:WMD]]. Feel free to contact the [[User:CSDWarnBot|bot operator]] if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that '''this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself.''' [[User:CSDWarnBot|CSDWarnBot]] 06:00, 11 November 2007 (UTC) |
[[Image:Information_icon.svg|left]]Hello, this is a message from [[User:CSDWarnBot|an automated bot]]. A tag has been placed on [[:Category:Warcraft character infobox templates]], by {{#ifeq:{{{nom}}}|1|[[User:{{{nominator}}}|{{{nominator}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{nominator}}}|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/{{{nominator}}}|contribs]]),}} another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be [[Wikipedia:Speedy deletions|speedily deleted]] from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because [[:Category:Warcraft character infobox templates]] has been empty for at least four days, and its only content has been links to parent categories. ([[WP:CSD#C1|CSD C1]]).<br><br>To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting [[:Category:Warcraft character infobox templates]], please affix the template <nowiki>{{hangon}}</nowiki> to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at [[WP:WMD]]. Feel free to contact the [[User:CSDWarnBot|bot operator]] if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that '''this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself.''' [[User:CSDWarnBot|CSDWarnBot]] 06:00, 11 November 2007 (UTC) |
||
== Mitsubishi Motors templates == |
|||
Please consider recreating and repopulating this category. Despite your comments that ''"4 templates isn't enough for one cat"'', it served several purposes (not least of all keeping the [[:Category:Mitsubishi Motors|parent category]] more organized). |
|||
Further, from what I can see at [[WP:OCAT]], there's no fixed number (the exact words are "avoid categories that will never have more than a few members"), and past discussions seem to disagree with your judgement. According to [[User:jc37]], ''"It was determined from several CfD discussions that "4" was the minimum number for a stand-alone category."''[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Overcategorization&diff=167456965&oldid=167350166] Further, the implication at [[Wikipedia talk:Overcategorization/Archive 5#Question about Small with no potential for growth]] is that it's acceptable for small categories to exist where they tidy parent categories (see [[User:Dr. Submillimeter]]'s comment that ''"I really do not see the problem with having small categories that are part of a larger scheme"''. |
|||
Finally, the existence of the [[Mitsubishi Motors Australia]] and [[Mitsubishi Motors Europe]] articles could follow [[Mitsubishi Motors North America]], which uses the {{tl|Mitsubishi Motors North America timeline}}, That's two more regional timelines, and the existence of [http://www.mitsubishi-motors.com/corporate/ir/share/pdf/e/fact2005.pdf this document] (see pp.26–27) allows for a (sourced) third timeline, of the Japanese market; seven potential templates in all, a healthier number, and potential for growth. |
|||
Regards, ''--[[User:DeLarge|DeLarge]] 22:01, 11 November 2007 (UTC)'' |
Revision as of 22:01, 11 November 2007
Note: I'm going to be on a Wikibreak from appx. November 15th to the 25th. It's the first break I've been on really since I started here. Don't go anywhere!
This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
AFD
Should this article have been undeleted without following the deletion review process? Level Spirit 02:17, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi— I noticed your template categorization work, so thought I'd ask the following. Since becoming involved in Wikipedia, I've mostly found myself working with templates and soon found Category:Wikipedia templates. I don't find this category particularly inviting, however, not least because its top level already looks pretty convoluted. Instead, the sort of thing I had in mind is here. It can also be frustrating looking for templates and/or categories that are tucked away in "navigational boxes", "infoboxes" and other such categories; I'm wondering just how user-friendly this classification by template design really is. Do you have any views on all this? Sardanaphalus 12:54, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for your response. Once I've found the kind of category I'm after, I guess I've found it a bit tiresome to have to delve into infobox/navigation subcategories as well as look through the templates in the parent category. I suppose I'd rather scan through one longer list and find out by clicking whether or not a template is infobox or navigation style. First, though, I'm thinking the more subject-orientated approach (the example appearance I linked) would need to be implemented. If I began to do this, do you think or know anyone who would mind? Sardanaphalus 12:10, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
- I understand what you mean about subdivision, whether infobox/navigation or another way, and suspect that ultimately it probably is a good thing. (One improvement might be if the names of these categories remained consistent and also used the word "templates", i.e. "...navigation templates" and "...infobox templates".) Is it possible to have Wikipedia stop people placing templates in a parent category rather than an infobox/navigation/inline/bar-type/etc category? That might be useful, assuming there isn't something I haven't thought of. I'll look around the innards of Wikipedia templates some more and try creating the User:Sardanaphalus/"Wikipedia templates" page appearance when I've a bit more time to devote to it. Thanks for your speedy reply! Sardanaphalus 12:43, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
- I recently discovered Wikipedia:Village pump, so do you think Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) is as good a place as any to ask about this "category control" idea? I have to go soon so sorry if no further reply for a while. Thanks for your time. Sardanaphalus 12:54, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
- I understand what you mean about subdivision, whether infobox/navigation or another way, and suspect that ultimately it probably is a good thing. (One improvement might be if the names of these categories remained consistent and also used the word "templates", i.e. "...navigation templates" and "...infobox templates".) Is it possible to have Wikipedia stop people placing templates in a parent category rather than an infobox/navigation/inline/bar-type/etc category? That might be useful, assuming there isn't something I haven't thought of. I'll look around the innards of Wikipedia templates some more and try creating the User:Sardanaphalus/"Wikipedia templates" page appearance when I've a bit more time to devote to it. Thanks for your speedy reply! Sardanaphalus 12:43, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
No content in Category:Warcraft character infobox templates
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Category:Warcraft character infobox templates, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Category:Warcraft character infobox templates has been empty for at least four days, and its only content has been links to parent categories. (CSD C1).
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Category:Warcraft character infobox templates, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. CSDWarnBot 06:00, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
Mitsubishi Motors templates
Please consider recreating and repopulating this category. Despite your comments that "4 templates isn't enough for one cat", it served several purposes (not least of all keeping the parent category more organized).
Further, from what I can see at WP:OCAT, there's no fixed number (the exact words are "avoid categories that will never have more than a few members"), and past discussions seem to disagree with your judgement. According to User:jc37, "It was determined from several CfD discussions that "4" was the minimum number for a stand-alone category."[1] Further, the implication at Wikipedia talk:Overcategorization/Archive 5#Question about Small with no potential for growth is that it's acceptable for small categories to exist where they tidy parent categories (see User:Dr. Submillimeter's comment that "I really do not see the problem with having small categories that are part of a larger scheme".
Finally, the existence of the Mitsubishi Motors Australia and Mitsubishi Motors Europe articles could follow Mitsubishi Motors North America, which uses the {{Mitsubishi Motors North America timeline}}, That's two more regional timelines, and the existence of this document (see pp.26–27) allows for a (sourced) third timeline, of the Japanese market; seven potential templates in all, a healthier number, and potential for growth.
Regards, --DeLarge 22:01, 11 November 2007 (UTC)