Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia talk:Spoiler/old template   (2nd nomination)

:{{pagelinks|Wikipedia talk:Spoiler/old template}}

To quote my last MFD: "What the heck do we need this for? It's not linked from anywhere. It's a copy of the old {{tl|spoiler}} template deleted ages ago." There is no reason to archive this whatsoever. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 18:29, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

• Keep but remove everything but the {{tl|historical}} again. No need to delete history. As far as being linked, it could be usefully referenced from Wikipedia:Spoiler. Anomie⚔ 22:38, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
• Delete No utility whatsoever. We simply don't need to archive other peoples very old reverts to some old template. jni ^(delete)_{...just not interested} 12:32, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
• Delete. I can't find anything in the history. WP:CSD#G8 might apply. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 10:17, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

:*The page was deleted in April 2013 under WP:CSD#G8, but undeleted by {{user|Anomie}}, who wrote "G8 'excludes any page that is useful to Wikipedia', such as this which is an archive of the old deleted template for historical reference. Also, it already was not deleted at MfD, which again makes it ineligible for speedy deletion." (See [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=Wikipedia+talk%3ASpoiler%2Fold+template the page's logs for the deletion and undeletion].) Cunard (talk) 10:18, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

• Keep but remove everything but the {{tl|historical}} again per {{user|Anomie}}.

  I endorse Anomie's comment at the previous MfD in May 2012: Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia talk:Spoiler/old template:

  {{xt|The only reason this is kept at all is for the history of the template, to illustrate the evolution of the template along with the evolution of the community's attitude towards spoiler warnings.}}

  The [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Spoiler/old_template&offset=&limit=500&action=history page history] dates back to {{tl|spoiler}}'s creation on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Spoiler/old_template&oldid=4106552 6 December 2003]. {{tl|spoiler}} was a divisive template; see its discussion history:
  1. Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 May 4#Template:Spoiler – closed as Speedy keep per WP:SNOW
  2. Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2007 May 16#Template:Spoiler – closed as Move discussion to Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Wikipedia policies and guidelines/Wikipedia:Spoiler warning
  3. Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2007 November 8#Template:Spoiler – closed as Delete
  4. Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 November 14 – closed initially as Overturn and close as no consensus [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ADeletion_review%2FLog%2F2007_November_14&diff=172340548&oldid=172320648 here]. Closer [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ADeletion_review%2FLog%2F2007_November_14&diff=172350780&oldid=172340548 self-reverted] after discussion at Wikipedia talk:Spoiler/old template talk#DRV finished. deletion overturned for now. Relisting optional (he had participated in a previous discussion: see Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 November 14/Admins).

     Closed as Deletion endorsed by an uninvolved admin who said that although the argument that the TfD closer probably shouldn't have closed the discussion had merit (see Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 November 14/COI), the result was "the only one that could be reasonably made".

  Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Wikipedia policies and guidelines/Wikipedia:Spoiler warning was featured in the Signpost at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2007-05-21/Spoilers:

  {{xt|Even casual Wikipedia readers are likely aware of the epic battle over the use of spoiler warnings that erupted last week. If one has recently seen {{tl|spoiler}}, which is linked to by thousands of pages, it is known that it carried a message tempting a visit to this request for comment, which is nearly 100,000 words long.}}

  I agree with Anomie that the page can be usefully referenced from Wikipedia:Spoiler. The page was [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk%3ASpoiler%2Fold_template&diff=206595883&oldid=192315927 moved] from {{tl|spoiler}} to Wikipedia talk:Spoiler/old template by {{user|CesarB}} in April 2008 "[t]o keep the old history". The spoiler template's talk page at Wikipedia talk:Spoiler/old template talk (formerly at Template talk:Spoiler) was nominated for deletion at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia talk:Spoiler/old template talk and kept. An older archive with commentary from 2003 is at Wikipedia talk:Spoiler/old template talk/Archive 1.

  An editor [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk%3ASpoiler%2Fold_template_talk&diff=172893659&oldid=172891418 wrote] regarding the spoiler template's talk page at Wikipedia talk:Spoiler/old template talk#Speedy or merge?:

  {{xt|This page has an appreciable history and documents the gradual evolution of thought about spoiler tagging from an initial standpoint of 100% agreement that it is necessary and beneficial right through to the controversy about the mass removal of tags, and the final successful tfd. It should remain.}}

  I agree.

  This should also apply to Wikipedia talk:Spoiler/old template, which contains the revision history of {{tl|spoiler}} from its creation in 2003 until its deletion in 2007. Cunard (talk) 10:18, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

: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.