Category talk:Templates needing talk links and other improvements

Evil cleanup guy Rursus is responsible for this category. Said: Rursus ☺ ★ 08:04, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

I was on the Verifiability and sources where most of the offensively used templates reside. The collection works will go on from there. Thereafter cleanups. Said: Rursus ☺ ★ 11:05, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

:Now all templates in Wikipedia:Template_messages/Cleanup are revised. Cleanup under consideration. Said: Rursus ☺ ★ 13:46, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

It appears that this all started with Rursus building then tagging templates with :Category:Unreasonable nagging templates that was not well received See talk then going from there to :Category:Templates needing talk links and other improvements. I am not completely sure what the goal is here other then to tag all the templates that Rursus does not agree with. I would suggest that if Rursus wants to instill change in Wikipedia at the template level start here Template_talk:Unreferenced#editprotected and go from there. Rursus you get points for being bold but you are also being disruptive, you appear to be making a global attack on templates, without assuming good faith on the part of every editor who has been involved in the growth of the templates to where they are now. As pointed out in Template_talk:Unreferenced#editprotected some of your arguments leave room for improvement such as offering Alice's Adventures in Wonderland [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template_talk%3AUnreferenced&diff=142436488&oldid=142435142 Diff 10:58, 4 July 2007 ] as an example of poor usage of {{tl|unreferenced}} when it had in fact been replace (correctly) with {{tl|refimprove}} a week prior [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Alice%27s_Adventures_in_Wonderland&diff=141067719&oldid=141065418 Diff 27 June 2007]. Before practicing Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle read the approach then, try it on one place at one time. This shotgun approach is likely to be unmanageable as you attempt to discuss multiple issues on multiple talk pages. I would suggest you might want to undo several of your recent edits before they are challenged and try to address the ones that are being challenged. Jeepday (talk) 15:05, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

:But, but. I have used {{editprotected}}!? I have sort of "attacked" the templates, yes. Mostly those that don't link to the talk page of the articles. Regarding Alice's Adventures in Wonderland, it might be fixed now, but then I remember something about Stargate SG-1 being tagged likewise. If I'm going to help fix articles and add citations, the citation requests must be motivated. Now my raid certainly started with :Category:Unreasonable nagging templates (not my irritation that started way before), but then I decided to make something more constructive from it, so now instead the :Category:Templates needing talk links and other improvements exists. Do you wish to remove this category from one template? Then we'll speak about it, maybe I can be of assistance now when I've gotten your attention ;-). Said: Rursus ☺ ★ 16:05, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

:: My main concern about your approach is that it is so broad and fractured. It will be challenging for you to address all the comments, I would strongly suggest approaching changes to the templates one at a time or through Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) as single approach. All you need to do to get my attention and the attention of several editors was post a comment the templates you would like to change. Jeepday (talk) 16:54, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

:::Ahh, good advice, I'll take that. I'll take responsibility for not fracturing the efforts, too. Said: Rursus ☺ ★ 17:00, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

:::: How are you going to be responsible for not fracturing the efforts? As you can see here User_talk:Jeepday#Pardon you and I are talking about your efforts on multiple pages right now. How are you going to pull it together when 5, 10 or 50 more editors are trying to talk to you on the 16 different templates currently on :Category:Templates needing talk links and other improvements (list below) plus the templates that I have already removed the category from?

* Template:Fictionlist

* Template:Fictionrefs

* Template:Generalize

* Template:Indiscriminaterefs

* Template:MOSLOW

* Template:Newinfobox

* Template:Peacock

* Template:RRevised

* Template:Refimprove

* Template:Reqimageother

* Template:Reqmap

* Template:Reqphoto

* Template:Reqphotoin

* Template:Unreliable

* Template:Update

* Template:Weasel

Signed Jeepday (talk) 17:22, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

::What?! This page has a category page; from there I'm going to poll all this editing together. And so, this page exists. Said: Rursus ☺ ★ 17:39, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

:::Three responses, one remove. Said: Rursus ☺ ★ 17:46, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

It's a little ironic that the example on this page of a "perfect template" is being considered for deletion. Maybe a different template should be chosen as an example?

Liam987 10:44, 17 February 2012 (UTC)