Template talk:Delete

Mark said: Also, I think I would like the template more if it were to say that adminstrators were going to delete the page in the next month or so...

Mark, it sounds like you're looking for another template, which is what I was trying to suggest about temporary pages. To me it doesn't make sense to make something for deletion unless the idea is to delete it. If we want to mark something as temporary (a scratch space, or a placeholder that we're willing to hold for some time, but not longer), then I think we need different tags for those functions. No need to be one size fits all. TedErnst | talk 16:41, 27 Mar 2006 (EST)

I guess I don't agree. Obviously, what's new right? :-) I am looking for the WikiIsSlow nature of the WikiWay. I am not comfortable with quick deletions, except for blatently obvious spam. I want to give more space to others for them to explore. I am not sure if it feels like a Meatball:ColdBlanket or what, but it doesn't feel right to me. Also, I am interested in a KISS philosophy, why have two pages for deletion when one will do. (this concern also has to do with talk pages)

• off topic, I am excited to get the Meatball: interlink - but not sure how or why it is happening. anyone? MarkDilley

Yes, what's new. :-) But now we have two different ways to delete, which doesn't make sense to me. I don't have a problem not deleting stuff immediately, if that's how we want to work things. I wasn't aware that's the conversation we were having. If we're talking about temp pages, they shouldn't be deleted until the work they're there for is done. And how do I know that if I'm just looking at stuff marked with DeletedPage? This whole procedure feels not-well-thought-out. Maybe you're bringing a procedure here from another wiki. If that's the case, please say so and explain how it works. By the way, I'd much rather change the rules for how we use this template than use the DeletedPage tag. Heck, change the text on this template if you like. The DeletedPage tag just doesn't make any sense to me. TedErnst | talk 00:05, 4 Apr 2006 (EDT)

and I would much rather use the DeletedPage tag... :-) again our collaboration is foiled!! Damn yee wiki... my experience is with it at Meatball:DeletedPage. We used it even before it became automated. To me it is a much more WikiWay to operate. The templates are cool and I like their use (limited though), I am trying to keep my use of wiki as simple as possible. This conversation will have to go somewhere else, but here are some things I was thinking. We are using MediaWiki software for this wiki. I have heard Wikipedia people say they don't know why anyone would use it if the weren't building an encyclopedia. I also agree with CommunityWiki that MediaWiki interfers with TheoryBuilding (in that there is discussion/talk page available for each page). We, and many people on the internet, are using MediaWiki because they have done a good job and made it the easiest wiki to install, amoung many other features. I am glad to be working on this project on a MediaWiki, but that doesn't mean I want to throw out what I know as wiki. There was a conversation early on about FreeLinks and CamelCase - it was set up as an either or ... I suggested it as both. As far as I am concerned, having both options hurts nothing here. Kinda goes along with my ideas of Versioning. As you have suggested before, we are not want for space. MarkDilley