- Straus Park, Duke Ellington Blvd 106th St
- Ansonia, Verdi Park, 72nd St
- Lincoln Center, San Juan Hill, 66th St
- Columbus Circle, 59th St
- Times Square, 42nd St
- Herald Square, 34th St
- Flatiron District, Madison Square Park, 23rd St
- Union Square, 14th St
{{reflist|2}}
UWT:
bad-faith 1st edit, {{blatant vandal}}, {{welcome-anon-vandal}} (very soft) good-faith; no edit summary -- {{uw-delete1}} (not good-faith enough, more concentration of edit summary omission/unclear summary) first edit text deletion, no edit summary
{{uw-unsourced1}} -- no trivia sections i remember being very confused by the name UTM, prefer UWT
{{VCRW}} (Do not remove verified content from pages without reason) {{Vandalblock}} (your account is only being used for vandalism, so it has been blocked indefinitely) {{Vww}} (Please don't accuse editors of vandalism unless you're absolutely sure)
{{uw-error1}} assumes good-faith the wrong way, that the misinformation was a test, instead of an accident, maybe {{Verror-m}} is better
{{uw-thankyou}}--why two uses? (cleanup, apology); i dont like having a template, too impersonal, seeing as the apology was probably by hand (or do we have an apology template?)
de-categorise, don't mass MfD UTM's in the user namespace
i like {{Anon vandal}}
{{Userfied}} cute
keep the welcome pages, becuase people have favorites, support bc having too-many/duplicate/non-uniformly-named UWT is confusing
{{Welcome-anon-vandal}} {{User-OR}}
Template:user has a bunch of good templates
2007 Natural Calendar (Booklet)
Ideas:
- Recessions of the 1990s article series
- UWT for bad-faith first edits; {{blatant vandal}}?, had to use welcome anon-vandal (too soft)
- UWT for good-faith edits with no edit summary
- UWT for first edit, text deletion with no edit summary (ie, libel, incorrect)
replace "--" and " - " with "—"
WPSW: List of Manhattan neighborhoods, HCHS (yet to do)
Some useful Wikipedia project pages:
- WP:UWT—User warning templates
Some userful Wikipedia project policy pages:
- WP:TRIV—no trivia sections (we need a {{uw-triv1}} including welcome for new users plus higher UWTs)
- WP:CONTEXT—don't go crazy with the wikilinks
My Immediatist tenancies: if an article is four pages long, extremely well written, nuanced, encyclopedic, neutral, and has 60 footnotes, it should be given the benefit of the doubt for Notability (and to a lesser extent, WP:OR) because as an article, it makes Wikipedia look good in the eyes of the public! Notability was originally invented to keep out Physics cranks. Usually non-notable articles are crap, and notability is used as the (good) excuse to delete it.
Maybe each UWT could be corresponded with a WP policy page
I agree with that admin (who i can't remember) that hates cleanup templates in some ways. For example, {{trivia}} should never be used—integrate the trivia yourself, or if the section is too big, delete the trivial (haha) content and then integrate, or if you're really short of time, add a invisible note, perhaps in huge uppercase letters, but DONT just add {{trivia}} because it may just sit there for months