Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 May 13

< May 12	May 14 >

May 13, 2006 edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete. - Mailer Diablo 06:20, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Pokemonusermadeimages edit

Template:Pokemonusermadeimages (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
A template that is entirely redundant with placing the image page in Category:Pokémon User Made Images (which is on CFD anyway). Additionally, it is unused and more or less unnecessary. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 00:05, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. —MiraLuka 03:12, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Because it was new so it wasn't used yet — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iloveminun (talk • contribs)

Delete 100% usless and unused. --Dom thedude 0 0 1 21:24, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Ignore all these messages. It IS going to be used. It was requested for deletion about 5 minutes after it was created. --I Love Minun 17:33, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete All Pokémon characters (like characters from any other fictional work rely) are copyrighted so all images made by users of anyting "official" Pokémon related would be a copyvio anyway, and I don't see much call for images of unofficial Pokémon-ish fan made characters on Wikipedia. Keep this sort of things to the various fan sites dedicated to Pokémon instead. --Sherool (talk) 18:09, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Pokemon are copyrighted. Making images yourself doesn't circumvent this. So we don't need a template or category for such images, they should be deleted. - Mgm|^(talk) 09:29, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Man in Black and Sherool. John Reid 14:27, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not good. Eisenhower (at war or at peace) (Project) (U T C) 19:26, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete. - Mailer Diablo 06:20, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:ControversialArticle edit

Template:ControversialArticle (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Used as a disclaimer on Abortion (I have removed it until this discussion concludes). It isn't necessary to crowd articles with a disclaimer, just in case, people do not know what Wikipedia is about. If it is kept, at the very least it should be clarified it is not to be used in articles. - Roy Boy ⁸⁰⁰ 23:36, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete! expert? pfft Be bold! --Dom thedude 0 0 1 21:27, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete --mboverload @ 00:04, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=22122&dict=CALD Disclaimer: 1 FORMAL a formal statement saying that you are not legally responsible for something, such as the information given in a book or on the Internet, or that you have no direct involvement in it, 2 SPECIALIZED a formal statement giving up your legal claim to something or ending your connection with it

The box contains no claims about legal responsibility of wikipedia or editors, it is only a warning that the contents of the article can be changed at anytime by anyone. It is not redundant, as the disclaimer at the bottom of the page is purposely small, and there are errors, intentional disinformations (John Seigenthaler), and nationalist POVs (see Talk:Expulsion_of_Germans_after_World_War_II#Nonsense) not only used by people unexpecting the possibility that something that calls itself "encyclopedia" could be inaccurate, but also mirrored on other servers, therefore sending the nonsense info further to other audiences. I have explained the problem with nonsense / biased edits that go undetected for a long time on the talk page of this template. Please read the reasons there before you vote here. According to the definition provided (Cambridge dictionary), this box is not a disclaimer, therefore the Wikipedia:No disclaimer templates doesn't apply here. And the "just in case people don't know what Wikipedia is about" argument is the most silly thing I've ever heard, though a very popular argument among wikipedians - like the Seigenthaler scandal never happened. Do you really expect an average internet user who googles something once twice a week and google sends him to wikipedia (which calls itself "encyclopedia") to research and find out what Wikipedia actually is, at least for this type of articles - a big chatroom for people pushing their beliefs and geeks who want to prove to the world that they are "wise" somehow?

Disagree with the deletion. ackoz

00:13, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what you're smoking, but that's a damn disclaimer. --mboverload @ 01:05, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In answer to your question... yes I expect them to know what Wikipedia is when an edit tab is at the top of almost every page. Furthermore we aren't going to tailor the site for clueless users, we tailor it (as best we can) as an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia's do not have disclaimers at the top of controversial articles. - Roy Boy ⁸⁰⁰ 04:15, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. We can use {{controversial}} instead. —SHINING EYES 01:03, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No disclaimers. —MiraLuka 03:12, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This "warning" is unnecessary as Wikipedia:General disclaimer, which is linked to at the bottom of each page, already states "WIKIPEDIA MAKES NO GUARANTEE OF VALIDITY". It's not our responsibility to type that at the top of each article. If extra warning is deemed necessary, then there is {{controversial}}. -AED 03:55, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reference to the fact that I might be a drug addict, very kind of you Mboverload. No, it's not a disclamier, if you could read, you could read the definition above and as the text makes no claims about legal responsibility, it's not a disclaimer. Furthermore, if wikipedia was encyclopedia, the contents wouldn't be changing constantly with the current "consensus" of editors. I would provide consistent information. Which it doesn't. Those articles need a warning, because they are a public chatroom. ackoz

07:01, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Followed abortion for a while now and feel this is innapropriate, regardless of whether it is a disclaimer or not.

Ackoz - you say it is a warning, I think a warning about a page not being authoritative is a disclaimer, even if not explicitly legal. I also think your attempts to belittle the editors are pretty low and hypocritical. |→ Spaully°τ 17:17, 14 May 2006 (GMT)

Delete; there are other templates found at Wikipedia:Template messages/Disputes which deal more directly with the content of a diputed or controversial article and which address specifically what the problem(s) is. User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 22:19, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This template is on the verge of WP:BEANS, users should not be encouraged to edit articles unless they can improve the article.--M @r ē ino 14:52, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and Reword in it's current state it is pushing WP:BEANS, but it could be reworded along the lines of "the subject of this article is controversal" with that type of approach the template could be useful --T-rex 19:13, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. {{controversial}} does the job just fine. We can't go around sticking disclaimers on articles because people are too lazy too look them up on their own. It's the reader's responsibility to check on a site's credibility, not ours. - Mgm|^(talk) 09:37, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was moo?. What a mess. - Mailer Diablo 06:20, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yet more userboxes edit

{{User against haters}} thye are too useful. STOP THE HATE!!! DEATH TO THE SOVIETS!! 12:38, 19 May 2006 (UTC) Cyde has dropped another batch of boxes below. So here goes another batch voting. This section applies to all userboxes below, so move your votes upwards (from under #All userboxes below) to upgrade them to a wider range of templates and let's hope it's all for today. Misza 13 ^{T C} 22:33, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Userfy/subst: and delete per WP:ENC. With the exception of {{user firearm}}, for which it is keep-useful. Misza 13 ^{T C} 22:33, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If you delete, userfy them all --mboverload 22:57, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I feel that all these userboxes should not be grouped into one mass deletion, but be rather considered individually for best results. Some of these can, in fact, be used to describe oneself realistically. For example, a person could be a procrastinator and could be using the said user box not to be funny, but to describe himself in a quick and easy fashion. I know it'd take longer, but, in the end, its often better. -TwilightPhoenix 02:49, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First, how does having this in Userspace rather than Template space destroy the intent of what you're saying? It doesn't. Deleting these boxes and putting them in the Userspace as text hurts no one. Secondly (and more philosophically) consider how these even remotely help us edit an encyclopedia, either as text or tempate. They don't, and I (and Jimbo) discourage their use in any format. Nhprman 06:09, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See below comment in responce to Shining. It explains all. -TwilightPhoenix 19:05, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all. Why we don't focus on improve the Wiki instead of creating userboxes that permanently harm the server? —SHINING EYES 02:39, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment And how do they do that? If its storage, there are plenty of pictures that take up more space than a number of userboxes combined. -TwilightPhoenix 02:49, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you comparing an userbox with a picture? For God's sake, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and of course needs pictures for the articles, can you explain how an userbox can be as useful as them? —SHINING EYES 03:55, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have fully explained thier usefulness on my user page. Too long to post it here, so you'll have to go to my page. -TwilightPhoenix 21:09, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment how about you stop trying to kill the little fun there is on Wikipedia? Jesus christ, these things take about 1/4 of a kilobyte. --mboverload @ 03:02, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Trying to kill the little fun"?! Mboverload, if you didn't noticed before we have WP:FUN for that, since when an userbox is supposed to be funny? As of now Wikipedia has more than 2000 userboxes, sufficiently enough to permanently damage the servers; and that takes more than 1/4 of kilobyte. —SHINING EYES 03:55, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Permanently damage the servers???? Good grief ... even if userboxes were an incredible drain on resources, the damage wouldn't be permanent. And as far as resource hogs go, I've got to think that long TFD pages getting reloaded over and over would be more of a drain than userboxes. As of right now, the May 13 TFD page is 334 K. Every time this page gets viewed, that's 334K of bandwidth and that's not even counting generation time. BigDT 05:13, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The biggest problem of userboxes is their massive inclusion; TFD reviews DON'T APPEAR in every userpage, man! —SHINING EYES 08:18, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your argument is absurd. Sorry, but I really can't imagine a little box with words and a picture causing harm to a server. That would be pathetic. We're still here aren't we? Did this page really take that long for you to load? --Pilo t|guy 12:18, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not to be incivil, but ROFLMFAO. Even 2000 templates at .25KB each would add up to a whoping 500KB total, as of this posting, just THIS DAY's TFD discussion adds up to "This page is 208 kilobytes long." enough space to hold 832 boxes itself!. — xaosflux ^Talk 17:13, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure loading a single article is a bigger drain on resources than 30 user boxes on one page. These cannot possibly have any real effect on the servers, as I'm sure, given the likely number of visitors any given moment, Wikipedia servers are capable of handling at least several hundred megabytes of bandwidth at any moment.

Keep (not withstanding any specific argument I place at any below), these aren't hurting anything, Wikipedia is not paper. If you don't like them, don't use them. — xaosflux ^Talk 03:32, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On the contrary, I would say: "If you like them, then {{subst}} them on your userpage and stop consuming server resources" —SHINING EYES 08:47, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep all of them.Wandering Star 21:03, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This is just too much. honestly, I can understand deletions in some cases, but most of this is based upon the "unenecyclopedic" and "subjective humor" arguments. Userboxes are meant for userspace and just because a person doesn't find them funny doesn't mean they should be deleted. I extend this to every relevant mass-userbox vote below this point. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 04:29, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why can't people understand that THESE ARE NOT IN USER SPACE. They are in TEMPLATE SPACE with the articles, and are therefore not an appropriate use of Wikipedia. In User space, an argument can be made that they are completely acceptable, but NOT in Template space. Nhprman 06:09, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fine. Why don't you userfy all 2000 userboxes? See how people would respond to that. Signed, Fr e dd ie 01:47, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. If whether they're in template or user space is the problem, move them to User:Template/Template:Name, and hope no one wants the username "Template". Armedblowfish 14:11, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Not all of template space has to be encyclopedic. Most of it is just sorting. By your reasoning, warning templates, various signing templates, and many other related functionality templates should be deleted to because they aren't encyclopedic either. Template space isn't article space. It's meant to easily insert standardized code into an article without the mess of that code appearing in said article. Same logic goes with userboxes. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 06:26, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On the contrary, Templates that sort, warn, etc. should not be deleted. They are actually useful for editing the encyclopedia. However, Templated Userboxes (most, anyway) hardly fit into the same category. Nhprman 06:54, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I could argue that some of these other userboxes are also helpful. Say for example you're looking for someone who's knows about Republicans. Someone with a petinant userbox would seem to be the logical choice, no? These arguments can go back and forth forever. It's clear we're never going to convince one-another. For what it's worth, I do subst my userboxes, mostly because of all this. however, I don't feel that everyone should have to deal with that, especially those who love these things so much that they keep two-page long sections of them. Userboxes can be called a double-edged sword, but you don't always toss things out because there's a chance it might hurt you. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 07:01, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I assure you that most users aren't seeking out Templated Republican Userboxes and saying, "Gee, this user is an expert in Republicans." What's been happening is that either fellow Republicans are using the template system to recruit other Republicans to gang-edit (and I mean no bias by using the GOP as the example, it happens on both sides) or to form "Republican Wikipedian" groups here, which are wildly inappropriate. Obviously, this isn't universal and many people, like you, already subst their boxes. But it's happened enough times that it's become a problem. By Substing boxes and moving them out of template space, the problem pretty much disappears. While biases on user pages are still a bad idea, that's not the issue here. It's a question of templated Userboxes and why they are demonstrably bad for the project. Nhprman 19:42, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

These are all good points. I think what Someguy0830 is trying to say is that the reasons for destroying the userboxes are completely irrelevent and slapping "unencyclopedic" and "not funny" on all 10,000 of them is pointless. Sorry, maybe it's just me on this additional note, but I really don't see why everyone is freaking out over the fact that these are in template space. If we start cutting throats other everything that is possibly unencyclopedic in that section, this stupid little war shall go on. --Pilo t|guy 12:23, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Taking them out of Template space does not "destroy" Userboxes. Deleting them simply moves them to User space, and this stupid little war ENDS immediately. Nhprman 19:42, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It will not end immediately, and likely never will. Templated userboxes do little harm in most cases. Also, userboxes are destroyed once deleted, because the code, though simple enough for some to duplicate, is gone. It's not "moving" anywhere unless someone goes through and substs every instance of it. As it stands, there is almost no harm in having most of these userboxes in Template space. There will always be ways to abuse features of various things. This is just throwing the baby out with the bathwater. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 20:07, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you've made several misstatements here, hopefully not deliberately. Let me sort them out. First, the problem may not end the day the Templated boxes are deleted, because people will retain the links to their friends, etc. But the linkage will end and new users will (horror of horrors) get the idea that this is some kind of encyclopedia, rather than a much neater version of MySpace. Next, bots have been set up, I understand, to "userfy" these boxes and "Subst" them on Userpages. They will remain active and NONE of them will simply disappear. I also expect there will be a responsitory of Userboxes created after they are all moved to the User pages. If you don't know the harm and abuse they've done to the Project, you have not been paying attention, or you're willfully ignoring them, so I won't rehash it. I just hope you're advocacy will not mislead too many people. - Nhprman 03:37, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Let's shrink this back down for room. First you assume that these userboxes somehow mislead people into thinking this isn't an encyclopedia. Honestly, this is really far-fetched. A user would have to be fairly unintelligent not to catch the "pedia" part of Wikipedia or not notice the 100,000+ articles here. That kind of argument is straw-man at best. Second, if every instance were to be substed (like I specifically mentioned), then those users who have the boxes would retain them. However, any new users will have to resort to code-copying to gain those templates, and one can only imagine what kind of a mess that would make on those user template lists the userbox project maintains. As it is, a simple line of code (substed if they prefer) will instantly put that same format on their userpage. I, for one, can see the obvious benefit for inexperienced users in that rather than the annoying process of copying down and self-aligning all of that code by themselves. Please do not mis-interpret my statements to fit your own view, as I am very well aware of just how the template process works and what will result when you delete them. What you seem to forget is that you can't transclude a template once its gone. This is the main point here. Templates are made for the express purpose of adding standardized code to any number of places. This is what they are for. It applies to userboxes just the same as is does to anything else. I'm getting tired of arguing this back and forth. We're never going to convince each other. You may be content with your user interest list. Others are not. Others like the ease of use that comes with these templates. Simple as that. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs)

99.9% of Userboxes would be fine if they weren't Templates. Please re-read my comments, and keep them in context. The vast amount of Users aren't idiots, and users become very adept at cutting and pasting and even editing Wikicode very quickly, as I did just days after coming here. Below is an example of a SIMPLE line of Wikicode that ANYONE can figure out how to use and easily adapt on their User page. Ending the practice of housing Userboxes in the Template space does NOT destroy Userboxes, so please stop misleading people by saying it will.

{{subst:Userbox|#3f3|#0c3|NO<br>UB|This user opposes Templated [[Wikipedia:Userboxes|Userboxes]]}} - Nhprman 05:29, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The irony of using a standard userbox template to express one's dislike of userbox templates is priceless, I must say. They're still using userboxes that way. It just puts all the strain on a single template being included thousands of times over instead of many being included on a much smaller scale. In the end, they achieve the same goal. It only makes locating a certain group of users somewhat more difficult, not impossible. For clarity's sake, I'll simply refer to Timrem's reply to you near the bottom. He sums it up rather nicely. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 05:46, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The irony was completely intentional, I assure you. As for not being able to seek out others, that's the goal. Wikipedia's mission is not to become a place where we can locate other users who are just like us. It's a place for writing a NPOV encyclopedia. Period. That may seem harsh, but that's reality, and reflects the site owner's views, as well. I realize in this society we live in, one that HATES following rules and believes everyone can do anything at any time and in any place, that creating an ordered, structured Website with a single goal is damn near impossible, especially in this medium. Perhaps it's not worth trying anymore, since mobs will be mobs and will enforce their own chaos on things. Whatever. Nhprman 17:07, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep some and Delete the very stupid ones like Im a ninja, pirate, that longcat one etc, too many userboxes listed though Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 05:31, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all except keep serious skill/interest (Babel-like) boxes. These are actually useful for editing, since using they can give you a list of knowledgeable users. User firearm seems to be the only one listed, and is the only one I have voted on individually. --Philosophus ^T 05:34, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Userboxes, if used in moderation, can add spice and a little humour to otherwise bland user pages like mine. I know there are some objectionable ones—why not nominate them on a case-by-case basis? — Tangot a ngo 05:45, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. If some users want all userboxes deleted, they should propose a new policy, not nominate them bunch after bunch. Friendly Neighbour 05:59, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They did. The newly proposed policy for speedy deletion of Templated Userboxes is T2. Nhprman 06:24, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. I Lo ve Plankton ⁽^T^—^C^—^U^—^L⁾ 06:21, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Explain your reasons clearly or your vote will be discounted. According to WP:TFD: "Please explain how, in your opinion, the template does not meet the criteria above. Comments such as "I like it," or "I find it useful," while potentially true, generally do not fulfill this requirement." —SHINING EYES 08:50, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My reasons are they should not be voted (uh oh, evil word) on as a group, they should each have an indvidual vote (there it is again) for each. I Lo ve Plankton ⁽^T^—^C^—^U^—^L⁾ 04:29, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strong delete, and Subst them all - Templated Userboxes have been abused over and over again to turn Wikipedia into a mini Myspace, with the creation of clubs like "Wikipedians who ... " and vote stacking to delete or save other Userboxes. It's gotten out of hand. By taking them out of Template space, they will still exist, but will be text-based, and COMPLETELY in User space. Those users spreading misinformation about what it means to delete them should be ashamed of themselves. I urge everyone voting "keep" who didn't know they would still exist to change them to "Delete and Subst" (delete as templates, but substitute them as text) Nhprman 06:24, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep All Userboxes because this proposal to get rid of userboxes en-mass (or otherwise) violates WP:POINT and WP:CON. Deleting or substituting userboxes does not respect the community consensus against getting rid of userboxes, and it ignores everyone who protested under the basis that it stifles free expression. Yes, I know it won't stop people from saying the same thing on their user pages, but deleting userboxes en-mass like this has the same effect as the rejected policy. We've already decided against deletion/subst, and if point pushing like this keeps getting allowed, can the last user to edit Wikipedia please turn out the lights; I am already sick of people who want to get rid of (a) userbox(es), and I don't even use one. --DavidHOzAu 06:42, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unlike WP:POINT and WP:CON, userboxes are against WP:NOT, an official policy. It's different. —SHINING EYES 09:00, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

While you're quoting policy, note that Wikipedia is not a democracy, or a place of unregulated free expression. And the lights on WP started dimming when people started Templating Userboxes and using them to gang up on other boxes and articles they didn't like. (WP is also not a social networking site.) - Nhprman 06:49, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If networking among users is the problem, remove the category tag from the offending box so that users can't network around that specific box, but don't delete the userbox. (protect it if need be.) Problem solved. Also, consider requiring users who use userboxes to add a template to their user page such as
This page contains user boxes
User boxes are provided by wikipedia for humor and user classification purposes only. Using them to network with other users and target an article for the purpose of malicious or disruptive editing is a violation of Wikipedia policy. If you suspect that this user is targeting your edits by a userbox classification in this manner, please leave a note at an administrator's talk page.
Note: This template must precede all userboxes on this user page; removal violates wikipedia policy and may result in a temporary block and removal of offending content.
I know it is lacking links, but this should be adequate discouragement if networking is the real problem. I believe a bot could be made to add them automatically. (BTW, I still believe the open slather delete of userboxes is heavy handed and WP:POINT.) --DavidHOzAu 07:28, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just one clarification about my opinion: If the admins want to delete a userbox to eliminate blatant, repeated abuse and reverts of a controversial userbox, and not for I-don't-think-it-is-funny interests, I'm fine with it. The jokes should stay though, I always enjoy a laugh out of those. --DavidHOzAu 07:54, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Super strong delete all of them (except the "User knows a lot about firearms" one, don't know why that was lumped in with the rest). Just dumb and plain worthless. This kind of stuff doesn't belong here. WarpstarRider 09:25, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Super-duper-strong Keep. This is just plain silly, don't deprivate anybody of a little fun in their had Wikipedia work... -- Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 11:18, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pragmatic Keep — Let’s assume we deleted all or most of the(se) user boxes, because we agreed they didn’t belong into Template space. Someone might then start to put them in subpages of his userpage, e.g. User:Foo/Bar, and tell others to include them with the usual template mechanism, {{User:Foo/Bar}}, because the edit views of their userpages would stay maintainable this way. Next someone adapted Template:Babel-X (or something like it) to do the “User:Foo/” part, further minimising the code required. The user boxes would then have gone out of Template space, which is definitely not the same thing as article space, but any alleged server impact would remain. Therefore I think that deleting user boxes solves nothing and substing them is ugly (and in the case of inclusion by Babel-like templates probably hard to do). Efforts should rather be invested in keeping them well designed. It can save time, when one can quickly skim over a userpage, because it uses standardised information representation. Userpages themselves are useful for enhancing collaborative work—in the good sense and in the bad. I’m undecided on the issue of automated categorization of users, though: It can be used as an alternative approach to votes and it can be abused for vote stacking in traditional Wikipedia votes. Anyhow, “What links here” basically offers the same feature. Christoph Päper 13:15, 14 May 2006 (UTC) PS: What I loathe much more are customised signatures on Talk pages.[reply]

Get them out of template space, but find a way for us to use them without having to copy code down. The only argument I see deletionists have is that it wastes template space. I am well aware of WP:FREE, however, it was created as a countervandalism measure and shouldn't be applied to userpages. Plus, it's not official policy, nor is it a guideline. It's just Wikipolitics. Userboxes do not "disrupt Wikipedia." I find many userboxes offensive, but that doesn't mean I start flame wars with Wikipedians. I get along with them just the same. Just find a new way to use Userboxes that don't take up template space and Jimbo's money. WP:NOT a bureaucracy or an autocracy any more than it isn't a democracy. Also, someone's opinion on whether or not something is funny is relative. I mean, there are some that users just don't get, but that's no reason to delete them. They have jokes that they don't understand, so they TfD them. Humor is relative. And if something is an "Inside joke," remember that WP:NFT applies only to articles. Crazyswordsman 13:40, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Most emphatically keep all. They do no harm and their removal would serve only to gratify a handful of killjoys. Ou tis 14:23, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete all of the "funny"/inside joke ones, after subst:ing, per Misza. There is a line past which certain userboxes are just a waste of space. I understand that Wikipedia is not paper, but these just clutter up the template namespace. This is in contrast to the religion ones, which help to build the encyclopedia. TheJabberwʘck 14:46, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment However, I would suggest that a clear policy such as Wikipedia:Userbox policy or User:Misza13/Userbox Gallery Poll be finalized and approved by consensus before further userbox nominations. TheJabberwʘck 17:24, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Subst and delete There fine in userspace but not in template space.Greatigers 15:27, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but, but move to userspaces --Jawr256 15:40, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
A Keep So Strong That It's Unnessesary To Add Meaningless Adjectives. things like this shouldn't be mass-deleted via a cut-and paste method. viva la userboxen! keep in mind that Nearly all the individual voting sessions for the tfd's below are losing soundly.--preschooler @heart my talk - contribs 15:49, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep They don't do any harm at all. CTOAGN (talk) 16:07, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep -- I disagree about voting on them as a group but perhaps it is easier. Cyde needs to stop disrupting wikipedia --T-rex 17:18, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and move to userspace, or another namespace if the developers would oblige.--Toffile 17:28, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and create a Userbox: space for them. This would get them out of the Template space and make it much easier to manage them. Timrem 17:43, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment on the last two comments: You really mean "Delete," don't you? Because the word "Keep" in this discussion means "Keep them in Template space." Nhprman 19:20, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I most certainly do not mean delete. Deletion would mean I want them totally gone. If you do not agree with my terminology, then you can interpret my vote as Move to a Userbox space. Timrem 21:49, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This meaning of the word "Delete" is at the crux of this entire discussion. If they are Deleted from Template space and "Subst'ed" (or "Userfied") then they remain on every single User page where they currently exist. So when you say "move" that's effectively the same thing. Saying "Delete" doesn't mean "delete from wikipedia" in this case - although I won't lie, some people don't want them here. But if they do go to User space only, most of the problems people have now with Templated Userboxes will simply disappear. I do understand the fear that they will be lost, and I don't want them to be lost. Nhprman 03:44, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify: by "totally gone" I did not mean they would dissapear totally from Wikipedia, but that they would be unavailable to easily add to a userpage. Instead of simply adding or substing a template to the page, you would have to write the code yourself, or find a user with the userbox and copy the code from their page. It is much easier and more efficient to be able to add {{userbox}} or {{Userbox:the_box_you_want}} instead of copying the code from someone else. I'm not scared that my userboxes will go away, but I and all other users should be able to add new boxes quickly and easily. Timrem 05:02, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clarifying. I stated it again because I think most people fail to grasp what it means in this context. Above, I posted one single line of code that I've used on my User page and it was VERY easy to create and cut/paste here. Most users are very smart and catch onto Wikicode very quickly. For those who don't, I'm sure someone will (if they haven't already) create a repository of Userbox codes to cut/paste onto User pages. - Nhprman 05:41, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete!!! :Let all user boxes, in line with Jimbo's wish, BURN IN HELL!!! Except for the Babel boxes, location boxes and WikiProject boxes alle of them should be speadily deleted. Steinbach (fka Caesarion) 21:27, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STOP NOMINATING USERBOXES FOR DELETION. Hezzy 00:33, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- inappropriate use of Wikipedia resources. Jkelly 01:18, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It's a pity that administrators, who are supposed to be some of Wikipedia's most valuable contributors, choose to waste their and other contributors time with such pointless activities instead of spending it in the betterment of WIkipedia's content. Loom91 07:42, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep, and if you delete them, userfy them. --NorkNork ^Questions? _fnord? 14:33, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strongest Possible Keep These userboxes are HARMLESS. Userboxes that are personal attacks will not be here because an admin will have already deleted them! the_ed17^(talk)^(contribs) 16:58, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the userboxes, delete the admins who waste their time on trying to mass-delete userboxes instead of working on the hundreds of different backlogged categories that need urgent attention - • The Giant Puffin • 18:56, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Some userbox messages should be moved to individual space; however, they should go through appropriate deletion channels so that people can be warned that they need to copy code to userspace; also, if the consensus for a given userbox is that it is harmless humor and the consensus is to keep it at time of deletion proposal, why *should* they be deleted? If there's a movement to move all userboxes to userspace, isn't there a better way to do it than by nominating individual humor templates for deletion? UnDeadGoat 23:37, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If they are ALL moved to User space, ALL userboxes will be saved. That's clearly better than deleting cetain boxes because someone doesn't think they're funny, etc. I urge everyone to check out the Mackensen proposal to save all Userboxes, end deletions and move them all to Userspace where they can be used freely and adapted by anyone to say what they want them to say. It's a VERY good solution. - Nhprman 03:21, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Per various above. Additionally, subjectivity of humor prevents deletion on basis of lack thereof. Peas 04:52, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Amazingly Strong Keep -- STOP THE VIOLENCE!!! I do not understand what sort of need for vengeance you guys have against userboxes. Let them be. They're fun, harmless, and seriously, "harm the server"? Does Wikipedia run on dial-up or something? And don't the admins have better and more relevant things to do than to debate on the fate of coloured boxes? --many Revolutions 06:12, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or move to Wikipedia:Humourboxes.
Keep. Okkay, so I'm new around here, but I completely fail to see what these hurt. There have to be much bigger problems with Wikipedia than letting users decorate their pages with snippets of code. Further, keeping them all in one place and allowing them to be easily reused is probably a bigger savings than having them in N users' pages as the actual code they represent. Nhprman, if you're not willing to rehash just how userboxes harm the servers, how about a pointer to the discussion where it's laid out? Technical detail, please, as I'm an experienced computer geek. Jay Maynard 12:47, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I've never argued that they are such a strain on the server, because I'm not sure they are - or ever can be much of a strain, but maybe I'm wrong. Someone else can deal with that one. That said, let me also say I don't think they "hurt" anyone, either. That's not the point. You want cold, hard reality here? If they remain in the Template space, some people are going to continue deleting them - fairly or unfairly - and some users will continue to stubbornly defend them from deletion - even the ones that should be deleted under current or future Template space deletion criteria (T1/T2, etc.) Wikipedia is supposed to be something MORE than this idiotic battling. The best solution is to find a home for these "snippets of code" in the User space (or some other non-template space, whatever) and have users cut/paste that code onto their pages, edit them as they wish, and enjoy them to their hearts' content. Please tell me, as a new user, how that offends you? How does it offend the VETERAN users here? I think some of those veterans (users since way back in 2004) just like to argue about things and LOVE this "process" debate, while some others are willfully twisting the facts or ignoring the simple solution in front of us because they enjoy conflict. Whatever the case, it's VERY tiresome, and not worth our time here. - Nhprman 04:11, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Personally, i very much dislike not having that option to include them using 10 to 20 letters of wikicode. I'm not saying that i can't deal with the lots of lines of code that some people want to force on us, but missing that nice little feature that works now feels like having to add <a href>s instead of double-square-bracket-ing... -- Jokes Free4Me 05:55, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep What did they do to you?(if this is my 2nd time sorry! bad memory!--Gangsta-Easter-Bunny 12:45, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. There is nothing wrong with userboxes! ---You're My Juli e t 16:59, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Another voice pro-userbox. We might not have free speech here on Wikipedia according to some users, but if we can't keep at least some form of expression, then there are going to be editors leaving in droves. Coyote42 07:38, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep If you keep trying to remove userboxes, what's next? Everyone's username is just a number? Only specific people can edit? You don't actually know who's edited something? Userpages cease to exist? Userpages exist, but you can't edit them? --Falcon9x5 13:07, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- how about "you'll be free to try and be funny on your own user page without needing to transclude other people's humour"? dab (ᛏ) 16:22, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
delete, away with humour that comes in templates and clutters non-user namespace. dab (ᛏ) 16:22, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Conditional vote — for all userboxes where the result is "Subst and delete", subst as {{userbox}}. Putting raw HTML on a user's page is as offensive as the 1K+ signatures which Cyde has blocked users for. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 21:45, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but they're funny. I think somebody should evaluate Cyde's admin methods. For some reason, they don't give me a good feeling. --D-Day^{(Wouldn't you like to be a pepper too?}) 23:15, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Keep userbox templates. See policy UBX. TfD is not the right place to create or subvert policy. Templates do not have to be encyclopedic and not everyone has to get the joke (if there is one). Bastun 17:09, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was speedy keep the content. As comments overwhelmingly addressed the content of the box rather the status which it occupies, I'm closing this as a subst the content and delete the actual template. No actual content is lost in the process, and the removal of said code to a user's page places it beyond the bailiwick of TfD and CSD. Mackensen (talk) 19:37, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User sumofpi edit

Unencyclopedic template, does not belong in template space. Opinions like "Oh but it's funny" are irrelevant, as humor is relative, but our encyclopedic goals are not. --Cyde Weys 20:21, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. TfD isn't the place to make a WP:POINT about how much you don't like userboxes. By your comment, you seem to be saying a priori that you will ignore any consensus that is opposed to your desire to eliminate all userboxes. That is a dangerous attitude for someone entrusted with administrative rights to take, IMO. BigDT 20:26, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You misunderstand what WP:POINT means - Cyde genuinely wants these gone, so it isn't a WP:POINT. Also, supporters of userboxes have been moaning at admins to use TfD and not speedies - now one does, you call it invalid. He isn't using admin rights to do this, so that's irrelevant. --Doc ^ask? 20:34, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh please, an administrator saying "Opinions like 'Oh but it's funny' are irrelevant" at the top of the discussion is using the position of administrator to enforce a particular POV, even if he does not actually use any special administrative rights to do it. BigDT 20:42, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not WP'Point. Not an abuse unless he deletes it against consensus. Septentrionalis 22:40, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with Septentrionalis and Doc. —SHINING EYES 01:27, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Subst and delete - fine in userspace, not in template space. --Doc ^ask? 20:34, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I can see uses for this, I mean, the value of PI is certainly nice information. Homestarmy 21:09, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Userpages are one place to keep possibly useful peices of information. Septentrionalis 22:38, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There's no point in deleting this. It can just teach some people a little bit about pi if someone finds this, and this would show that people like pi. Kris18 23:22, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep How is the sum of pi not encyclopedic? Pi is an important number in mathematics. As far as the template for it goes, it's not harmful to anyone. Wandering Star 15:15, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per Septentrionalis and Kris18. Thistheman 23:26, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep non-abusive template. Anonymous _anonymous_Have a Nice Day 00:23, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Is there anyway we can modify the template so it displays the amount of digits of pi a user wants. Then we could delete one of the "sum of pi"s with a unanimous consensus. Macwiki 00:43, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I don't see how pi is bad for wikipedia. Paragon12321 00:50, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Of course Pi is not bad for Wikipedia. A Userbox in Template Space is. This could still exist in User space even if it's deleted as a template. Do you realize that? Look at the comments of the deleters. No one is saying restrict its use in Userspace. - Nhprman 02:05, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per above (mmm, pie) -- getcrunk juice ^contribs 01:05, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. —SHINING EYES 01:28, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and Delete as a template. Let users paste it onto their User pages. Nhprman 02:05, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Why are we wasting time with this when we have had so many non-neutral userboxes causing trouble? It seems some foolishness by people with nothing better to do has lead to a crusade against Wikipedia:Userboxes/Humor If this is deleted its needs to receive a subst: on every instance of its use. Otherwise it is simply irrisponsible on top of foolish.--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 03:09, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above. -- Korean alpha for knowledge (Talk / Contributions) 04:11, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per WP:POINT Harvestdancer 04:48, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:POINT is merely a guideline, and it's only for articles, not for templates. —SHINING EYES 09:06, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep per above "keep" votes. Friendly Neighbour 06:00, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. I Lo ve Plankton ⁽^T^—^C^—^U^—^L⁾ 06:21, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep since it's an absolutely neutral userbox. -- Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 11:23, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep -- and change to Pi to being equal to exactlly 3 --T-rex 17:21, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Stop deleting userboxes.Hezzy 20:29, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. When are you going to realise that Wikipedia is NOT intented for personal expression but for ENCYCLOPAEDIC CONTENT ONLY???!!!! Steinbach (fka Caesarion) 21:28, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Would you please tell me, since when is Pi ≈ 3.1415926535897932384626

personal expression? Signed, Freddie 01:50, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per above. -EdGl 01:36, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above Will (^E_@) T 05:32, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Is there anyway we can modify the template so it displays the amount of digits of pi a user wants? Then we could delete one of the "sum of pi"s with a unanimous consensus Macwiki 07:36, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong KEEP First off, if the sum of pi isn't encyclopaedic, I don't know what is... and second, for Macwiki, that woould require too much coding, and in the absence of a variable code for that, there would be far far far too many of the sum of pi templates. NetStormer 08:06, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong KEEP - Good God, man, enough with the crackdown on userbox templates! This crap is really getting old, man! (Ibaranoff24 10:20, 15 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]
Keep Good user box for math/sci oriented users. -MrFizyx 16:24, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep TfD is not the venue to have a rant at templates, or make a point about how you dont like them - • The Giant Puffin • 18:59, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was speedy keep the content. As comments overwhelmingly addressed the content of the box rather the status which it occupies, I'm closing this as a subst the content and delete the actual template. No actual content is lost in the process, and the removal of said code to a user's page places it beyond the bailiwick of TfD and CSD. Mackensen (talk) 19:37, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Template:User Sumofpi2 edit

Unencyclopedic template, does not belong in template space. Opinions like "Oh but it's funny" are irrelevant, as humor is relative, but our encyclopedic goals are not. --Cyde Weys 20:21, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

KeepWandering Star 15:21, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. TfD isn't the place to make a WP:POINT about how much you don't like userboxes. By your comment, you seem to be saying a priori that you will ignore any consensus that is opposed to your desire to eliminate all userboxes. That is a dangerous attitude for someone entrusted with administrative rights to take, IMO. BigDT 20:26, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete - fine in userspace, not in template space. --Doc ^ask? 20:35, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep actual fact that's useful in real-life. --mboverload 20:53, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and Delete The shorter one is nice. This one seems a tad....overboard. In typical usage, I can't see Pi back this far as useful information, and going so far into signifigant figures you'll probably want to verify the number with something else besides a rather large userbox. Homestarmy 21:11, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - useful --GeorgeMoney ^T·C 21:26, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I see no point to deleting this. Septentrionalis 22:41, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Just fine. This is Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia; NOT Cydepedia, where Cyde decides that all userboxes should be deleted all of a sudden. They're userboxes for a reason. Let them stay. Sorry for my potential violation of WP:POINT or NPOV here. Thistheman 23:30, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your vote is a violation of WP:CIV, not WP:POINT. Please don't make another personal attack. —SHINING EYES 02:41, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strong delete. This template serves no purpose whatsoever. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 23:54, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete per Doc and Homestarmy. —SHINING EYES 01:05, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep (mmm, pie) -- getcrunk juice ^contribs 01:06, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Explain your reasons clearly or your vote will be discounted. According to WP:TFD: "Please explain how, in your opinion, the template does not meet the criteria above. Comments such as "I like it," or "I find it useful," while potentially true, generally do not fulfill this requirement." —SHINING EYES 02:44, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It is a handy reference. --Ben Best 02:46, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Why are we wasting time with this when we have had so many non-neutral userboxes causing trouble? It seems some foolishness by people with nothing better to do has lead to a crusade against Wikipedia:Userboxes/Humor If this is deleted its needs to receive a subst: on every instance of its use. Otherwise it is simply irrisponsible on top of foolish.--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 03:09, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per above. -- Korean alpha for knowledge (Talk / Contributions) 04:12, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per WP:POINT Harvestdancer 04:48, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep per above "keep" votes. Friendly Neighbour 06:02, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. I Lo ve Plankton ⁽^T^—^C^—^U^—^L⁾ 06:13, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep per all said above. -- Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 11:24, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Hey. I use this userbox to memorize pi. Go find something else to delete. Signed, Fr e dd ie 15:25, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep for humor. The Gerg 16:31, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep -- not devicive, as this is not debatable --T-rex 17:23, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Why delete it? Too many good userboxes are getting deleted because they are 'unencyclopedic content.' Unencyclopedic content--GAH! that makes me mad. The procrastinator userbox is also on proposal, and that one rocked. Anyway. Back to this discussion. This userbox is funny, and brightens up someone's day. Even if you don't have a sense of humor, Cyde Weys, someone else might. And anyway! if YOU don't like the userbox, then don't put it on your page! The rest of us might like it! You play your game, we'll play ours.Freddie 18:23, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They are unencyclopedic only in Template space, which is reserved for editing tools. If they are deleted from Template space, they would still exist in User space, and could still be used. Nhprman 19:27, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

STRONG KEEP: Stop trying to delete userboxes.Hezzy 20:28, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete same as above Steinbach (fka Caesarion) 21:29, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per my vote for {{sumofpi}} Will (^E_@) T 05:33, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy. Doesn't even try to say anything about the user. Harmless though. Sjakkalle (Check!) 08:44, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong KEEP - Good God, man, enough with the crackdown on userbox templates! This crap is really getting old, man! (Ibaranoff24 10:20, 15 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]
Keep Good user box for math/sci oriented users. -MrFizyx 16:24, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was moo?. What a mess. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All userboxes below edit

I didn't feel like copying my vote some 50 times below, so I just created this section. The following votes (you can add your own) should be accounted for all userboxes listed below. Misza 13 ^{T C} 17:05, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Userfy/subst: and delete per WP:ENC. Misza 13 ^{T C} 17:05, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Vote moved up to cover a wider range. Misza 13 ^{T C} 22:33, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep (not withstanding any specific argument I place at any below), these aren't hurting anything, Wikipedia is not paper. If you don't like them, don't use them. — xaosflux ^Talk 18:37, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If you delete any of them, SUBST! --mboverload 19:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete all of them. Unencyclopedic userboxes don't belong in the template namespace. These don't even make a pretence at being encyclopedia-related. Encyclopedia-related humor: no worries. Non-encyclopedia related humor wasting hundreds of pages: delete and take it to MySpace. We wouldn't have a Wikipedia page about this stuff. Keep 'em coming, Cyde. Snoutwood (talk) 20:05, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. TfD isn't the place to make a WP:POINT about how much you don't like userboxes. BigDT 20:34, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
WP:POINT --mboverload 20:56, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The nominators are in no way trying to make a WP:POINT. If they were, they would delete ALL userboxes without discussion, or perhaps create anti-Userbox Userboxes or some other rash, silly act that policy was meant to discourage. The intention here seems pretty straightforward - to take these boxes OUT of template space, as per T1, and as per common sense. We aren't here to form social networks and make jokes, but if people choose to do that, they can put the code on their User pages without cluttering up the template space. Nhprman 21:35, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above two votes/comments should probably be discounted. They give no valid reason for keeping. Since the nominators genuinely wish these things deleted, this is simply not a WP:POINT. Indeed it is ironic that when folk are always screaming at admins to use TfD rather than speedy boxes, now they do they are told 'this is not the place for it'. --Doc ^ask? 21:46, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They are misphrased, but they should be counted. It is not WP:POINT to nominate something because you don't find it funny; but it is frivolous. Septentrionalis 22:58, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, if you don't think frivolous things belong in template space, then surely TfD is the way to go? Or would you rather he just speedied them? The above contributions must be discounted - as this is a discusison not a vote. So as saying 'WP:POINT' when it isn't does not contribute to the discusion on the fate of these templates, so it cannot be 'counted'. --Doc ^ask? 23:12, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, putting a billion userboxes up for deletion before waiting to see how a sample userbox goes over is trying to make a point. I was totally for this but trying to delete 20 userboxen in one day is just crazy.

ALSO: I deleted the tfd template on some of the user boxes because the one there before was heavily biased in favor of deleting them. Thankfully they all use the standard inline template. --mboverload 22:52, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment replaced from an edit conflict, might not be threaded correctly, sorry. Kotepho 23:18, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep all -- getcrunk juice ^contribs 01:04, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all. Why we don't focus on improve the Wiki instead of creating userboxes that permanently harm the server? —SHINING EYES 01:43, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I find this comment very constructive. I did not think about this more before, but I did notice that pages load considerably longer if they have userboxes. Also, wikipedia servers do quite often become cloged. Is there any statistics that says what is the percent of the server load caused by the userboxes? I will really appreciate if someone finds some, and will base my vote on that statistics. Lakinekaki p.s.: I don't think that user pages are visited as much as user talk pages. Also, much less than article pages and article talk pages.

Keep all. The reasons for the deletion of most of the userboxes makes it sound like all userboxes should be deleted based on the same reason. All this is doing is starting up another userbox war which is getting people who don't even know that userboxes exist involved. Douglasr007 02:09, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep all. Ditto. If it's such a concern, tear the categories from userboxes. That will limit the options for the vote-stacking said to be resulting from these userboxes. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 06:44, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep ALL Oh but it's funny. (I too do not like to vote 50 times) Friendly Neighbour 06:48, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep All Userboxes because this proposal to get rid of userboxes en-mass (or otherwise) violates WP:POINT and WP:CON. Deleting or substituting userboxes does not respect the community consensus against getting rid of userboxes, and it ignores everyone who protested under the basis that it stifles free expression. Yes, I know it won't stop people from saying the same thing on their user pages, but deleting userboxes en-mass like this has the same effect as the rejected policy. We've already decided against deletion/subst, and if point pushing like this keeps getting allowed, can the last user to edit Wikipedia please turn out the lights; I am already sick of people who want to get rid of (a) userbox(es), and I don't even use one. --DavidHOzAu 06:49, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
See full opinion at #Yet_more_userboxes.--DavidHOzAu 07:45, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete all. Joke boxes don't belong in template space. WarpstarRider 10:02, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
See my vote in yet more userboxes section above, which was keep, but move if you want. Armedblowfish 14:20, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete all of the "funny" ones. There is a line past which certain userboxes are just a waste of space. I understand that Wikipedia is not paper, but these just clutter up the template namespace. This is in contrast to the belief ones, which help to build the encyclopedia. TheJabberwʘck 14:30, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep all - this crackdown on userboxes really has to stop, man. (Ibaranoff24 10:21, 15 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]
Keep all - userboxes are not designed to be encyclopedic... they are used to 'spice up' user pages... leave them alone... - Adolphus79 00:37, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep all the strongest possible-they're innocent... quit picking on them!--Gangsta-Easter-Bunny 12:34, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Total Support for the Easter Bunny. Quit deleting userboxes! Fr e dd ie^{Against Userbox Deletion?} 01:44, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep all, no solid basis for deletion beyond several users personal dislike of them. JohnnyBGood t c 17:28, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep all - as above and WP:POINT
Conditional vote: If subst'd convert to {{userbox}} format. Do not leave raw HTML code on user pages. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 21:42, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep That is the obviously correct thing to do. --D-Day^{(Wouldn't you like to be a pepper too?}) 23:17, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep All - тəzєті 14:05, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Keep userbox templates. See policy UBX. TfD is not the right place to create or subvert policy. Templates do not have to be encyclopedic and not everyone has to get the joke (if there is one). Bastun 17:14, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep every single one of them. Cyde, why don't you spend your time doing something productive? Deleting userboxes doesn't help anyone, does it? Fr e dd ie^{Against Userbox Deletion?} 22:41, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User sum edit

Unencyclopedic template, does not belong in template space. Opinions like "Oh but it's funny" are irrelevant, as humor is relative, but our encyclopedic goals are not. --Cyde Weys 20:21, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Wandering Star 15:22, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. TfD isn't the place to make a WP:POINT about how much you don't like userboxes. By your comment, you seem to be saying a priori that you will ignore any consensus that is opposed to your desire to eliminate all userboxes. That is a dangerous attitude for someone entrusted with administrative rights to take, IMO. BigDT 20:27, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete - fine in userspace, not in template space. --Doc ^ask? 20:35, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep --GeorgeMoney ^T·C 22:11, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Why would this bother anyone ?Lakinekaki 22:36, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: This is meant to be a humourous template, but with a serious overtone also (e.g., that userboxes can't define a user in whole). It should be put in the humourous templates section of the templates listings if not already. Unless there is consensus to remove all humourous templates, I say keep this one. --Aquarius Rising 22:51, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean, "Userboxes can't define a user in whole?" Look at my user page, and tell me how far you think I am from self-wikification. Seahen 16:29, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Agreed with Lakinekaki; doesn't bother most, pretty harmless userbox. If you want it, place it; if not, don't. Pretty simple! Thistheman 23:37, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep no reason to delete it. Anonymous _anonymous_Have a Nice Day 00:23, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- getcrunk juice ^contribs 01:07, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Explain your reasons, otherwise your vote is unvalid. According to WP:TFD: "Please explain how, in your opinion, the template does not meet the criteria above. Comments such as "I like it," or "I find it useful," while potentially true, generally do not fulfill this requirement." —SHINING EYES 02:24, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. —SHINING EYES 01:22, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The issue over whether a userbox in templatespace is subject mainspace policies or userspace policies remains fluid. It hardly can be construed as "inflamatory and devisive." In fact, it communicates my skill as an editor to distinguish between core and trivial issues. Rfrisbie^talk 02:22, 14 May 2006 (UTC) In addition, this UBX is totally in compliance with the proposed Userbox policy. Rfrisbie^talk 04:35, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Why are we wasting time with this when we have had so many non-neutral userboxes causing trouble? It seems some foolishness by people with nothing better to do has lead to a crusade against Wikipedia:Userboxes/Humor If this is deleted its needs to receive a subst: on every instance of its use. Otherwise it is simply irrisponsible on top of foolish.--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 03:09, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per WP:POINT Harvestdancer 04:48, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
keep consensus clearly demonstrates that userboxes such as this should not be deleted. Niffweed17, Destroyer of Chickens 05:26, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep per above "keep" votes. Yesterday I substed mine with the following comment "(Saving the Sum from possible Cyde wrath)". How did I know? Friendly Neighbour 06:03, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. I Lo ve Plankton ⁽^T^—^C^—^U^—^L⁾ 06:21, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as it cannot possibly be considered offensive or divisive, and actually makes a good point about not assuming that someones userboxes completely define them. And it is true that it does not violate the proposed userbox policy. Tamino 07:31, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per Tamino. -- Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 11:24, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Users' biographies bad. Userboxes good. Page Up 12:11, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Like what Tamino said.
Keep. as per Tamino. Viva la userboxen! --preschooler @heart my talk - contribs 16:35, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep there is nothing at all wrong with this. Wikipedia is an online community (as seconday function) and this is part of that. — xaosflux ^Talk 16:49, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep -- "Oh but it's funny" is relevant, as humor is not a bad thing --T-rex 17:24, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, for the obvious reasons already mentioned above. Is this nomination serious? It looks like this guy's just trying to delete as many userboxes as he can. Don't we have policies against vandalism? Jimpartame 19:09, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Harmless userboxHezzy 20:30, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. No harm; humour is a good thing. Bucketsofg✐ 20:36, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete user boxes are a bad thing. I even suggest that we discard the user pages! Steinbach (fka Caesarion) 21:30, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

...So, that would make you a wikiextremist? Quick, someone write an article on this new-fangled ideology! --mboverload @ 21:39, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Discard the user pages? Are you kidding? – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 21:47, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. And Steinbach, if you don't like userpages, then you don't need to have one :X -EdGl 01:38, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Oh but it's funny! Seriously, someone seriously needs to delete the pathologically serious deletionists. While an argument of uselessnes could be made for other humour templates, this one actually expresses an important philosophy REGARDING the encyclopedia. Having said that, I'm surprised Cyde bothered to bring these to TfD. Why not Speedy Delete under T1? I'm sure users who feel they are the sum of their userboxes will find this offensive. Loom91 07:17, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. On several userpages, so broad enough to justify a place in userspace. Sjakkalle (Check!) 08:54, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong KEEP - Good God, man, enough with the crackdown on userbox templates! This crap is really getting old, man! (Ibaranoff24 10:20, 15 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]
Keep. Agree with Oni Ookami Alfador Frigoris 12:40, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per BigDT.—thegreentrilby 12:48, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as an easy way to find experts for the math articles.--M @r ē ino 14:53, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Good user box for math/sci oriented users. -MrFizyx 16:25, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep What's so wrong with humor?
Strong Keep The category Userboxes:Humor exists for a reason. They are humorous - this userbox is not inflammatory and divisive in the least. ghansel 02:13, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep keep the userbox.....and in fact....lets keep them all what are they harming. Aeon 03:10, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It does links to real articles and it does remind users not to have too many userbozes on their userpage. (I use it on a sub page)--E-Bod 04:05, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep as per WP:POINT. Amalas =^_^= 20:04, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:11, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - that was not my decision to add this userbox, I just saw and choosed it. Why should I reject it now? --Yuriy Lapitskiy 14:58, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
delete. yay for humour on userpages, away with humour that comes in templates and clutters non-user namespace. dab (ᛏ) 16:17, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It's not remotely offensive.--Brian1979 18:27, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This userbox has not been known to cause dissension or arguments amongst users, and is therefore harmless. yueni 19:03, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
VERY STRONG KEEP. I notice that Cyde Weys has proposed other userboxes for deletion with the exact same reason as this one. The reason is not a reason and posting userbox templates for deletion without a reason is unacceptable. As long as a template is not hurting anything, it should stay. And PS, Loom91, you're welcome for the image fix. Userboxes Rule!--Tuvok 08:15, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keeeeeep, as per Loomis (also for the thing about deleting deletionists, 'cause I'm a metaphysical kinda guy). This is harmless fun, and more people will use it if it's a template, rather than finding it on other user pages, copying it, and pasting the code into their own...which no one will do, 'cause people are lazy. Also: I think Clyde needs to lighten up on the userbox thing (as do we all). --Yossarian 14:37, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Oh, but it's funny! Damn those funny userboxes! Damn them to Wikihell! (At least he didn't say 'crap' this time) Nathan 17:44, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
VERY STRONG NEUTRAL I HATE USERPAGES/BOXES!!--Old Guard 18:11, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
"Unencyclopedic template, does not belong in template space. Opinions like "Oh but it's funny" are irrelevant, as humor is relative, but our encyclopedic goals are not. --Cyde Weys 20:21, 13 May 2006 (UTC)" Somebody please turn this bot off.
- Hear, hear. Cyde needs an emergency shutoff button. Also, please sign your posts. Fr e dd ie^{Against Userbox Deletion?} 01:45, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry, those were both me. --Old Guard 05:53, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Very useful as a template, and harmless too. As are most of the victims of this tiresome battle. Mnerd 06:12, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As for the complaint Unencyclopedic, my response is: neither are User pages. But user pages inform us about Users. It adds slightly to the general spirit of our day. A few folks (thankfully just a few) need to lighten up. -- Sholom 14:24, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the dozens of comments above. Kukini 17:53, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Very strong keep. It has over 65 users who have them on their userpages. Eisenhower (at war or at peace) (Project) (U T C) 19:24, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Darth Rage 19:56, 19 May 2006 (UTC) Keep They're mostly pretty dumb, but that's no real reason to stop people from using this userbox. --Alphachimp ^talk 01:30, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User carbon edit

Unencyclopedic template, does not belong in template space. Opinions like "Oh but it's funny" are irrelevant, as humor is relative, but our encyclopedic goals are not. --Cyde Weys 20:21, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(Sorry for pushing to the front, I just want to point something out.) Wow, Cyde, you're not made out of carbon? Just take a look at how important it is! Oh, right, you're a userbox deleting bot.... Sorry for the potential violation of WP:POINT, WP:NPOV, or WP:CIV. Fr e dd ie^{Against Userbox Deletion?} 01:49, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. TfD isn't the place to make a WP:POINT about how much you don't like userboxes. By your comment, you seem to be saying a priori that you will ignore any consensus that is opposed to your desire to eliminate all userboxes. That is a dangerous attitude for someone entrusted with administrative rights to take, IMO. BigDT 20:27, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete - fine in userspace, not in template space. --Doc ^ask? 20:35, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, Subst if deleted. Keeping this will not harm the encyclopedia; unnecessary creation of bad feeling will. Septentrionalis 22:44, 13 May 2006 (UTC) Septentrionalis 22:42, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It's fine in template space! Thistheman 23:39, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep its just a harmless user box. Anonymous _anonymous_Have a Nice Day 00:24, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- getcrunk juice ^contribs 01:07, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Why we don't focus on improve the Wiki instead of creating userboxes that permanently harm the server? —SHINING EYES 01:35, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per anonymous...It is a harmless user box, it isn't hurting anything in any way... --KPWM_Spotter 02:00, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
Keep. This is like alot of userboxes. You may not find it funny but some do. Stop trying to delete userboxes as this is something that users enjoy. Don't like userboxes? Stop looking at user pages. Leave them ALONE! Jangle 07:44, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It harms the servers. BTW, do you know how many userboxes Wikipedia has? —SHINING EYES 02:17, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not enough. Seahen 16:27, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hear, hear. Signed, Fr e dd ie 00:08, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Why are we wasting time with this when we have had so many non-neutral userboxes causing trouble? It seems some foolishness by people with nothing better to do has lead to a crusade against Wikipedia:Userboxes/Humor If this is deleted its needs to receive a subst: on every instance of its use. Otherwise it is simply irrisponsible on top of foolish.--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 03:09, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per WP:POINT Harvestdancer 04:48, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. I Lo ve Plankton ⁽^T^—^C^—^U^—^L⁾ 06:21, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep per all above Keep votes. Friendly Neighbour 06:25, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Wow, nice of you to speak on behalf of "OUR ENCYCLOPEDIC GOALS," which are what, to disallow individuality and humor? How does this userbox hurt anybody? Who put you in charge of deciding "OUR ENCYCLOPEDIC GOALS"? Give Peace A Chance 06:15, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Please don't assume you're WP and don't decide what "our encyclopedic goals" are... -- Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 11:25, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Humans are carbon-based life forms so there is some truth in the box --Jawr256 15:37, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Jawr256, and create a corresponding Template:User silicon.

Or you could edit an encyclopedia article, rather than creating colorful, funny boxes. Just at thought. Nhprman 17:04, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Wikipedia's goals, overall policies and mission are well established. Does everyone realze that if this is "deleted" you can still use this box? Deletion is simply deleting it from template space, not from Wikipedia. Saying "keep, keep, keep" based solely on content is missing the point of what's being attempted here. Saying it would "disallow individuallity and humor" is missing the point of Wikipedia altogether, but also ignores the fact that this will NOT be leaving Wikipedia even if it's deleted. So please reconsider your "keep" votes. Nhprman 17:04, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

this is designed to be used as a template so keeping it in template space is logical --T-rex 17:27, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Saying "This is a template now, so it should be in template space" is self-referential and circular and misses the point of the discussion, which is to move them to another place, but still keep them. Saying "It does do not belong in Template space because Userboxes are not tools used to edit an encyclopedia" is completely logical, however. Nhprman 19:47, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No regardless of what name space it is in, it would be used as a template, moving this to user space would make it a template in user space, but it would still be a template --T-rex 19:19, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

False and deliberately confusing. All people should take from this is that putting it in User space SAVES it from further reviews and deletion attempts. Mindlessly saying "Keep, I like it," as many are doing, is not resolving the issue. Nhprman 22:26, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep, Subst if deleted - Keeping this will not harm the encyclopedia; unnecessary creation of bad feeling will --T-rex 17:27, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Please, its a userbox.
Delete Yes, it is a user box, that's exactly why it should be speadily annihilated. Steinbach (fka Caesarion) 21:31, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Stuff like this does not get applied to articles so it is not harmfull in anyway to the credibility of Wikipedia (let them have their fun with their nonoffending User templates). Andrew D White 05:04, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy. Assuming that the people here are humans, the template is mostly untrue (humans are mainly made up of Dihydrogen monoxide). Harmless, but not very useful. Sjakkalle (Check!) 08:37, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong KEEP - Good God, man, enough with the crackdown on userbox templates! This crap is really getting old, man! (Ibaranoff24 10:20, 15 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]
Keep. People who think this stuff harms the server probably haven't run a server themselves. Excellent way to identify biochem articles experts.--M @r ē ino 14:55, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Good user box for math/sci oriented users. -MrFizyx 16:26, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per basically everyone --- good god, man, do you even know what a userbox *is*? UnDeadGoat 23:31, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep +Hexagon1 (talk) 09:58, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep. Come on, life is too short to not have fun sometimes. I always try to be as encyclopedic as I can when I edit an article, but outside of my encyclopedic chores that I deeply cherish, there's nothing wrong with it. --JackLumber 13:37, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:11, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per UnDeadGoat --Yousifnet 16:20, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and Comment Isn't it unencyclopedic to nominate userboxes for deletion? It doesn't benifit Wikipedia as an encyclopedia in any real way. --Brian1979 18:35, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep on WHEELS! Oh but its funny. Honestly, why do you need to let these bother you? Just don't look at them!! It's so easy. --D-Day^{(Wouldn't you like to be a pepper too?}) 22:58, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Very useful as a template, and harmless too. As are most of the victims of this tiresome battle. Mnerd 06:17, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Showing a sense of humour can help to make a person more approachable, and approachability is relevant to collaboration over encyclopedia articles. Not only that; this userbox is also indicative of a user's interest in science. Zerrakhi 14:07, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User benzene edit

Unencyclopedic template, does not belong in template space. Opinions like "Oh but it's funny" are irrelevant, as humor is relative, but our encyclopedic goals are not. --Cyde Weys 20:21, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. TfD isn't the place to make a WP:POINT about how much you don't like userboxes. By your comment, you seem to be saying a priori that you will ignore any consensus that is opposed to your desire to eliminate all userboxes. That is a dangerous attitude for someone entrusted with administrative rights to take, IMO. BigDT 20:28, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete - fine in userspace, not in template space. --Doc ^ask? 20:35, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep; Subst if deleted. Septentrionalis 22:43, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Read my comments for the other userboxes I said Keep. Thistheman 23:40, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Why delete this one and keep all other emoticons? --Paulzeromi 00:16, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- getcrunk juice ^contribs 01:08, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Why we don't focus on improve the Wiki instead of creating userboxes that permanently harm the server? —SHINING EYES 01:35, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Why are we wasting time with this when we have had so many non-neutral userboxes causing trouble? It seems some foolishness by people with nothing better to do has lead to a crusade against Wikipedia:Userboxes/Humor If this is deleted its needs to receive a subst: on every instance of its use. Otherwise it is simply irrisponsible on top of foolish.--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 03:09, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per WP:POINT Harvestdancer 04:48, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. I Lo ve Plankton ⁽^T^—^C^—^U^—^L⁾ 06:21, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. Friendly Neighbour 06:27, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Wow, nice of you to speak on behalf of "OUR ENCYCLOPEDIC GOALS," which are what, to disallow individuality and humor? How does this userbox hurt anybody? Who put you in charge of deciding "OUR ENCYCLOPEDIC GOALS"? Give Peace A Chance 06:15, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Harmless wikibox. breaks no rules. Non-offensive. Anonymous _anonymous_Have a Nice Day 10:35, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This is a non-divisive and harmless userbox. -- Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 11:26, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- if this offends you, please stop using the internet --T-rex 17:28, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP: See reason above.Hezzy 20:31, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
delete I am going crazy of all those geeks that seem to live for their user boxes. Wikipedia was NOT created for vanity! Your own identity/opinions/beliefs/interests are very uninteresting and completely irrelevant here on Wikipedia!! Steinbach (fka Caesarion) 21:33, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Your comment is a borderline personal attack. Please stop. --D-Day^{(Wouldn't you like to be a pepper too?}) 23:01, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Then why do we have user pages at all? Jay Maynard 12:34, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong KEEP - Good God, man, enough with the crackdown on userbox templates! This crap is really getting old, man! (Ibaranoff24 10:20, 15 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]
Keep. People who think this stuff harms the server probably haven't run a server themselves. Excellent way to identify biochem articles experts.--M @r ē ino 14:56, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Good user box for math/sci oriented users. -MrFizyx 16:26, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Who the hell let Cyde become an administrator anyway? How can we UNDO it? F**ing 'Willy on Wheels' is a more constructive editor to Wikipedia than Cyde "no way" Weys --FairNBalanced 19:06, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Thank you! FairNBalanced, I would vote him out, but I din't know how
Strong Keep Depression hurts, especially when you try to delete our benzene ring userbox. --Dan Asad 19:08, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Our so-called encyclopedic goals are relative, Clyde. As long as we know as much about the user as we can, it's useful. Anything about a user can be useful; it doesn't matter how small or insignificant it is. Horncomposer 19:37, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Expresses intrest in Science--E-Bod 04:09, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:12, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Please Keep Oh but it's funny. Hey at least they're not claiming T1. --D-Day^{(Wouldn't you like to be a pepper too?}) 23:01, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Very useful as a template, and harmless too. As are most of the victims of this tiresome battle. Mnerd 06:17, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User clownfear edit

Unencyclopedic template, does not belong in template space. Opinions like "Oh but it's funny" are irrelevant, as humor is relative, but our encyclopedic goals are not. --Cyde Weys 20:21, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. TfD isn't the place to make a WP:POINT about how much you don't like userboxes. By your comment, you seem to be saying a priori that you will ignore any consensus that is opposed to your desire to eliminate all userboxes. That is a dangerous attitude for someone entrusted with administrative rights to take, IMO. BigDT 20:28, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete - fine in userspace, not in template space. --Doc ^ask? 20:35, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Fear of clowns is nothing to laugh at -____-. Ok, maybe it is, but maybe not to people who actually are afraid of them. Homestarmy 21:12, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Does not belong in Template space. If you love this box, put the code on your own user page. Nhprman 21:20, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep it breaks no rules.
Keep re above Dev920 22:33, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Its not bad.--Great Legacy 06:08, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
keep--GeorgeMoney ^T·C 22:17, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep; subst if deleted. Keeping this will not harm the encyclopedia; causing needless offense will. Septentrionalis 22:46, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Someone's depressed... will any of you please give Cyde a hug so he will get out of his depression?-Gangsta-Easter-Bunny (talk) -(23:04, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I left him a smile on his talk page. Is a mass bombardment necessary? --D-Day^{(Wouldn't you like to be a pepper too?}) 22:50, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep another harmless user box. Anonymous _anonymous_Have a Nice Day 00:26, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- getcrunk juice ^contribs 01:08, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Why we don't focus on improve the Wiki instead of creating userboxes that permanently harm the server? —SHINING EYES 01:38, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Why are we wasting time with this when we have had so many non-neutral userboxes causing trouble? It seems some foolishness by people with nothing better to do has lead to a crusade against Wikipedia:Userboxes/Humor If this is deleted its needs to receive a subst: on every instance of its use. Otherwise it is simply irrisponsible on top of foolish.--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 03:09, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Some people may have the fear of clowns. -TwilightPhoenix 03:30, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per WP:POINT Harvestdancer 04:48, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. I Lo ve Plankton ⁽^T^—^C^—^U^—^L⁾ 06:21, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. Friendly Neighbour 06:27, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep with subst. I don't use it for humor. I have trouble sleeping like Can't sleep, clown will eat me so for me it has grown as an identity thing for being nocturnal. T e ke 07:07, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Some people have nothing to do except ruining other people's fun... :( -- Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 11:27, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep -- it breaks no rules, although clowns arn't that scarry --T-rex 17:29, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Harmless userbox.Hezzy 20:31, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Harmless; funny. Bucketsofg✐ 20:38, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Six letters, all equal letters are e's, first is a d: Delete!!!!!! Steinbach (fka Caesarion) 21:35, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your rational for this vote follows no logic at all --T-rex

Strong Keep Coulrophobia is a real phobia. La Pizza11 01:02, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP! Starla Dear 01:46, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WHY?. Just asking. Why should it remain as a template. If it's Deleted and moved to User space, it can still be used by users without the threat of this deletion process happening again. Did you know that? I bet no one who reflexively said "Keep" knew this. - Nhprman 03:27, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you asking me why or everyone? If you're asking me, yeah, I already knew that. Thanks, but it doesn't change my opinion.

I was asking you. If you know "Keep" keeps this userbox in harm's way, but support "keeping" it anyway, I can't really counter that because it baffles me. - Nhprman 22:22, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strong KEEP - Good God, man, enough with the crackdown on userbox templates! This crap is really getting old, man! (Ibaranoff24 10:20, 15 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]
STRONG KEEP This is harmless. Another example of the stranglehold of the Wikipedia Secret Police on us editors.
STRONG KEEP Oh but it's funny. Seriously, how does this harm the server? It is five words long and has an excessivly small picture! And I don't think all userboxes, especially those that are meant to be funny, should have to have anything to do with wikipedia! DuctoMan 18:40, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP ON WHEELS!!! Oh but it's funny. What's not funny is the constant POV pushing by Cyde. --D-Day^{(Wouldn't you like to be a pepper too?}) 22:50, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep on behalf of User:Can't sleep, clown will eat me. I'm surprised this isn't on his page. Fr e dd ie^{Against Userbox Deletion?} 01:52, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Very useful as a template, and harmless too. As are most of the victims of this tiresome battle. Mnerd 06:18, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User ignorant edit

Unencyclopedic template, does not belong in template space. Opinions like "Oh but it's funny" are irrelevant, as humor is relative, but our encyclopedic goals are not. --Cyde Weys 20:21, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. TfD isn't the place to make a WP:POINT about how much you don't like userboxes. By your comment, you seem to be saying a priori that you will ignore any consensus that is opposed to your desire to eliminate all userboxes. That is a dangerous attitude for someone entrusted with administrative rights to take, IMO. BigDT 20:28, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete - fine in userspace, not in template space. --Doc ^ask? 20:37, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep; subst if deleted. Leaving editors alone is a good thing. Septentrionalis 22:48, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It's not that big a deal. Lighten up. Thistheman 23:41, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: "oh but it's funny" -- getcrunk juice ^contribs 01:09, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Why are we wasting time with this when we have had so many non-neutral userboxes causing trouble? It seems some foolishness by people with nothing better to do has lead to a crusade against Wikipedia:Userboxes/Humor If this is deleted its needs to receive a subst: on every instance of its use. Otherwise it is simply irrisponsible on top of foolish.--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 03:09, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per WP:POINT Harvestdancer 04:48, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep harmless Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 05:18, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. I Lo ve Plankton ⁽^T^—^C^—^U^—^L⁾ 06:21, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. Friendly Neighbour 06:28, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Wow, nice of you to speak on behalf of "OUR ENCYCLOPEDIC GOALS," which are what, to disallow individuality and humor? How does this userbox hurt anybody? Who put you in charge of deciding "OUR ENCYCLOPEDIC GOALS"? Give Peace A Chance 06:15, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Don't speak on behalf of OUR Goals, please. You're not our director... -- Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 11:28, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep template, delete po-faced wikipedians. An CompSci undergraduate who takes themselves way too seriously -- nice stereotype busting, dude. -- GWO
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny --T-rex 17:30, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep So maybe this template is useful for telling people they'd sort of like help using userboxes, whats the big deal? Homestarmy 19:15, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Harmless userbox.Hezzy 20:32, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete harmless? But it hurts the server! Steinbach (fka Caesarion) 21:36, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I have to say that a "Keep" comment here means "Keep it in template space, where it is subject to deletion - again." But if it's deleted from Template space and moved to User space, that problem virtually disappears and they cannot be deleted unless they are extremely hateful or malicious, which most are not. Please consider your comments in this light. - Nhprman 03:49, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Broad enough to be acceptable in template namespace. Sjakkalle (Check!) 08:44, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong KEEP - Good God, man, enough with the crackdown on userbox templates! This crap is really getting old, man! (Ibaranoff24 10:20, 15 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]
Keep. We need userboxes like this to distract Cyde from editing the articles. --M @r ē ino 14:58, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Aww man, Clyde, I thought you'd like this one. I thought you'd like a userbox pointing out which users put in useless userboxes, thus not knowing how to "use" them. Seriously though, it's fine on user pages. Horncomposer 19:42, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per basically everyone --- good god, man, do you even know what a userbox *is*? UnDeadGoat 23:22, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:13, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete - What's wrong with it directly on userpages? I don't see how this template helps to further the encyclopedic goals of wikipedia. Loudsox 23:24, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Oh but it's funny. Please stop obsessing over these. The only reason why they're controversial is because YOU have made them controversial. --D-Day^{(Wouldn't you like to be a pepper too?}) 23:03, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It appears that Cyde needs this one. Fr e dd ie^{Against Userbox Deletion?} 01:54, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Very useful as a template, and harmless too. As are most of the victims of this tiresome battle. Mnerd 06:18, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User mad edit

Unencyclopedic template, does not belong in template space. Opinions like "Oh but it's funny" are irrelevant, as humor is relative, but our encyclopedic goals are not. --Cyde Weys 20:21, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. TfD isn't the place to make a WP:POINT about how much you don't like userboxes. By your comment, you seem to be saying a priori that you will ignore any consensus that is opposed to your desire to eliminate all userboxes. That is a dangerous attitude for someone entrusted with administrative rights to take, IMO. BigDT 20:29, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete - fine in userspace, not in template space. --Doc ^ask? 20:37, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Does not belong in Template space. If you love this box, put the code on your own user page. Nhprman 21:21, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep; subst if deleted. Leaving editors alone is a good thing. Septentrionalis 22:56, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It's not that big a deal. Lighten up. Thistheman 23:41, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. (I like mad scientists) -- getcrunk juice ^contribs 01:11, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Why are we wasting time with this when we have had so many non-neutral userboxes causing trouble? It seems some foolishness by people with nothing better to do has lead to a crusade against Wikipedia:Userboxes/Humor If this is deleted its needs to receive a subst: on every instance of its use. Otherwise it is simply irrisponsible on top of foolish.--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 03:09, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per WP:POINT Harvestdancer 04:48, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. I Lo ve Plankton ⁽^T^—^C^—^U^—^L⁾ 06:21, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. Funny enough to have it on my page. However I substed it yesterday with the following comment "(Mad scientist looks as a likely target, too.)". How did I know? Friendly Neighbour 06:32, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Wow, nice of you to speak on behalf of "OUR ENCYCLOPEDIC GOALS," which are what, to disallow individuality and humor? How does this userbox hurt anybody? Who put you in charge of deciding "OUR ENCYCLOPEDIC GOALS"? Give Peace A Chance 06:15, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Please don't substitute yourself to Wikipedia and don't define what our goals should be. Thanks. -- Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 11:29, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It is already explicitly stated on the userbox page about why it was kept. -- G.S.K.Lee 13:09, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- mad scientists should not be editing wikipedia --T-rex 17:30, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Many users like this template. þħɥʂıɕıʄʈ^ʝɘɖı 18:06, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Harmless userbox.Hezzy 20:33, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and block those fools that made a lot of user boxes infinitely. Steinbach (fka Caesarion) 21:37, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I don't see the big deal, its just a userbox.User:Blind_Man Walking 18:52, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong KEEP - Good God, man, enough with the crackdown on userbox templates! This crap is really getting old, man! (Ibaranoff24 10:20, 15 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]
Strong Keep - Can I ask that you PLEASE look at what the majority of the community are saying and just leave userboxes alone - it is begining to reach disruptive in my opinion. Ian13/talk 16:08, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep A very nice userbox (Deng 21:42, 15 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]
Keep - Unless they got them all, leave it alone. (not apparently divisive like Anti-facism template was ??? Sigh.) Zotel - the Stub Maker 00:17, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the namespace should allow some humour... elsewise I'd spend more time on Unencyclopedia. - Roy Boy ^"800 03:53, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep On behalf of the Mad Scientist Association, I must recommend we keep this template. --Dan Asad 04:24, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It's important to underline that scientists in fact have no sense of humour. Oh wait...--Limegreen 12:06, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, because do you really want to piss off a group of self-proclaimed MAD SCIENTISTS?!?! Not a smart idea. --Howrealisreal 20:49, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Have a freaking sense of humor. Geg 21:20, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:13, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep We should have some humour on wikipedia and with the userboxes. I find it funny because it is so true. --Eddie ^{(talk/contribs)} 08:59, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per all. Bucketsofg✐ 15:41, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. Besides, how are we mad scientists supposed to declare who we are without bringing our work itself into Wikipedia? *POOF* BACK!!!! BACK YOU GIANT CHICKEN!!! "CLUCK! CLUCK! CLUCK!" --D-Day^{(Wouldn't you like to be a pepper too?}) 23:06, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Very useful as a template, and harmless too. As are most of the victims of this tiresome battle. Mnerd 06:18, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep I am against your policy of less userboxes, Cyde. G eneral E i senhower 21:04, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User No Napoleon edit

Unencyclopedic template, does not belong in template space. Opinions like "Oh but it's funny" are irrelevant, as humor is relative, but our encyclopedic goals are not. --Cyde Weys 20:21, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. TfD isn't the place to make a WP:POINT about how much you don't like userboxes. By your comment, you seem to be saying a priori that you will ignore any consensus that is opposed to your desire to eliminate all userboxes. That is a dangerous attitude for someone entrusted with administrative rights to take, IMO. BigDT 20:29, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete - fine in userspace, not in template space. --Doc ^ask? 20:37, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Insanely inappropriate for an encyclopedia. Take it out of template space. Nhprman 21:22, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep agree with BigDT Heltec talk
Keep; subst if deleted. Leaving editors alone is a good thing. Septentrionalis 22:56, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. (I don't like people who are not Napoleon) -- getcrunk juice ^contribs 01:11, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Why we don't focus on improve the Wiki instead of creating userboxes that permanently harm the server? —SHINING EYES 01:39, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Pleaqse find something better to do than WP:POINT because wikipedia is not a soapbox. It seems some foolishness by people with nothing better to do has lead to a crusade against Wikipedia:Userboxes/Humor If this is deleted its needs to receive a subst: on every instance of its use. Otherwise it is simply irrisponsible on top of foolish.--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 03:09, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Your time could be better spent reverting vandalism or creating articles... really its just a harmless user box Kingpomba 04:03, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per WP:POINT Harvestdancer 04:48, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete this serves no encyclopedic value. I agree with Doc. -- malo (tlk) (cntrbtns) 05:38, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. I Lo ve Plankton ⁽^T^—^C^—^U^—^L⁾ 06:21, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. Besides we seem to have at present too many little Napoleons dreaming of controlling every aspect of Wikipedia community. Friendly Neighbour 06:56, 14 May 2006 (UTC) updated on 08:00, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Please don't substitute yourself to Wikipedia and don't define what our goals should be. Thanks. -- Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 11:29, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP. all these userboxes should be saved without actual arguments other than a cut-and-paste "userboxes that show any personality or tatse should be beaten and dragged through the streets, then tarred and shot." basically what i'm saying is that unless you have specific arguments with one's meniality, don't nominate 30 or so boxes up for deletion. viva la userboxen! --preschooler @heart my talk - contribs 15:46, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Userboxes will only be truly saved if they are moved to the User space, where they are beyond the scope of reviews and deletions like this. Please see WP:MACK for the proposal to do this. Thanks. Nhprman 22:30, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep Oh but it's not funny, however lack of humour is not a reason to delete --T-rex 17:31, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep see aboveHezzy 20:25, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I am convinced this applies to everyone on Wikipedia. Steinbach (fka Caesarion) 21:38, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean it's the least divisive userbox we have? So why do you want to delete it? Friendly Neighbour 08:01, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strong KEEP - Good God, man, enough with the crackdown on userbox templates! This crap is really getting old, man! (Ibaranoff24 10:20, 15 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]
Keep. Deleting this userbox would violate WP:POINT.--M @r ē ino 15:00, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - This is false. Making a WP:POINT would be if the nominator had deleted ALL userboxes in the template space. This was an in-process, legitimate nomination. Nhprman 22:30, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:14, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Bucketsofg✐ 15:43, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. You can thank Cyde and his Tfd proposals for keeping from finishing this. --D-Day^{(Wouldn't you like to be a pepper too?}) 23:07, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Very useful as a template, and harmless too. As are most of the victims of this tiresome battle. Mnerd 06:18, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Showing a sense of humour can help to make a person more approachable, and approachability is relevant to collaboration over encyclopedia articles. Zerrakhi 14:09, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stronger Keep than whoever put this up for deletions delete I need to make an automated message for these stupid deletions Darth Rage 19:31, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User paranoia2 edit

Unencyclopedic template, does not belong in template space. Opinions like "Oh but it's funny" are irrelevant, as humor is relative, but our encyclopedic goals are not. --Cyde Weys 20:21, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep because it poses a complex question and, at the same time, is funny. The Updater
Keep. TfD isn't the place to make a WP:POINT about how much you don't like userboxes. By your comment, you seem to be saying a priori that you will ignore any consensus that is opposed to your desire to eliminate all userboxes. That is a dangerous attitude for someone entrusted with administrative rights to take, IMO. BigDT 20:29, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete - fine in userspace, not in template space. --Doc ^ask? 20:38, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Does not belong in Template space. Nhprman 21:22, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Nothing wrong with it. Dev920 22:35, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Encyclopedic goals should be taken with a grain of salt when it comes to userboxes. --Emilio floris 22:50, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep; subst if deleted. Leaving editors alone is a good thing. Septentrionalis 22:56, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This template is used in user pages. No need to delete it since its NOT used in ordinary wikipedian articles. Anonymous _anonymous_Have a Nice Day 00:28, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sigh I guess it's not been properly explained, but if this is "substituted" and deleted from Template space, it will still be available for use on User pages, just as text. It should not be in Template space, because that should be used strictly for articles. Right now, it's in the same "space" as articles. Please consider Subst'ing and Deleting this as a template. Thanks. - Nhprman 02:29, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep -- getcrunk juice ^contribs 01:13, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Pleaqse find something better to do than WP:POINT because wikipedia is not a soapbox. It seems some foolishness by people with nothing better to do has lead to a crusade against Wikipedia:Userboxes/Humor If this is deleted its needs to receive a subst: on every instance of its use. Otherwise it is simply irrisponsible on top of foolish.--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 03:09, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per WP:POINT Harvestdancer 04:48, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. I Lo ve Plankton ⁽^T^—^C^—^U^—^L⁾ 06:21, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. Friendly Neighbour 07:03, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Should be kept around, it's fine. s»abhorreo»i 09:23, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Violation of WP:ENC (Wikipedia is an encyclopedia) and WP:NOT (Wikipedia is first and foremost an online encyclopedia and, as a means to that end, an online community. Please avoid the temptation to use Wikipedia for other purposes, or to treat it as something it is not.), two critical official policies approved by general consensus. People who like userboxes can {{subst}} them on their own userpages. BTW, Wikipedia has more than 2000 userboxes as of now, why we don't focus on improving articles instead of permanently damaging the server? —SHINING EYES 09:31, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- This discussion takes up more memory on the server then the userbox --T-rex 17:34, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Please don't substitute yourself to Wikipedia and don't define what our goals should be. Thanks. -- Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 11:29, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
'Keep -- no need to delete--T-rex 17:34, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Harmless userbox.Hezzy 20:35, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all stupid user boxes. Steinbach (fka Caesarion) 21:10, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong KEEP - Good God, man, enough with the crackdown on userbox templates! This crap is really getting old, man! (Ibaranoff24 10:20, 15 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]
Keep. "Oh but it's funny"... -- Jokes Free4Me 20:03, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:16, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per all of my other votes. --D-Day^{(Wouldn't you like to be a pepper too?}) 23:08, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep clever game reference that actually links to the article. Yet another lame sig I came up with ^{T | @ | C} 01:39, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Very useful as a template, and harmless too. As are most of the victims of this tiresome battle. Mnerd 06:19, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep it is so cool, besides, its for USERPAGES!!!! DEATH TO THE SOVIETS!! 12:27, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User Bermuda Triangle edit

Unencyclopedic template, does not belong in template space. Opinions like "Oh but it's funny" are irrelevant, as humor is relative, but our encyclopedic goals are not. --Cyde Weys 20:21, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete this thing as an eyesore ... good grief BigDT 20:31, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete - fine in userspace, not in template space. --Doc ^ask? 20:38, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Does not belong in Template space. - Nhprman 21:23, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete --GeorgeMoney ^T·C 22:18, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep; subst if deleted. Leaving editors alone is a good thing. Septentrionalis 22:56, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- getcrunk juice ^contribs 01:13, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Pleaqse find something better to do than WP:POINT because wikipedia is not a soapbox. It seems some foolishness by people with nothing better to do has lead to a crusade against Wikipedia:Userboxes/Humor If this is deleted its needs to receive a subst: on every instance of its use. Otherwise it is simply irrisponsible on top of foolish.--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 03:09, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per WP:POINT Harvestdancer 04:48, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. I Lo ve Plankton ⁽^T^—^C^—^U^—^L⁾ 06:21, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. Friendly Neighbour 07:04, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Violation of WP:ENC and WP:NOT, two critical official policies approved by general consensus. People who like userboxes can {{subst}} them on their own userpages. BTW, Wikipedia has more than 2000 userboxes as of now, why we don't focus on improving articles instead of permanently damaging the server? —SHINING EYES 09:33, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Please don't substitute yourself to Wikipedia and don't define what our goals should be. Thanks. -- Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 11:29, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Harmless.Hezzy 20:24, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete harmful Steinbach (fka Caesarion) 21:40, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, harmless Will (^E_@) T 05:34, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong KEEP - Good God, man, enough with the crackdown on userbox templates! This crap is really getting old, man! (Ibaranoff24 10:20, 15 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]
Keep- This box is about a user so it desrves to be userbox and to remain the way. Felixboy 15:55, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong KEEP -- harmless --T-rex 19:25, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Redesign --The userbox is sorta annoying to look at. 216.37.227.202 01:02, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:16, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Very useful as a template, and harmless too. As are most of the victims of this tiresome battle. Mnerd 06:19, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User Martian ancestry edit

Unencyclopedic template, does not belong in template space. Opinions like "Oh but it's funny" are irrelevant, as humor is relative, but our encyclopedic goals are not. --Cyde Weys 20:21, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Does not belong in Template space. If you love this box, put the code on your own user page. Nhprman 21:25, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete - fine in userspace, not in template space.--Doc ^ask? 21:33, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep; subst if deleted. Leaving editors alone is a good thing. Septentrionalis 22:56, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- getcrunk juice ^contribs 01:13, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Why we don't focus on improve the Wiki instead of creating userboxes that permanently harm the server? —SHINING EYES 01:41, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Pleaqse find something better to do than WP:POINT because wikipedia is not a soapbox. It seems some foolishness by people with nothing better to do has lead to a crusade against Wikipedia:Userboxes/Humor If this is deleted its needs to receive a subst: on every instance of its use. Otherwise it is simply irrisponsible on top of foolish.--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 03:09, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per WP:POINT Harvestdancer 04:48, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete stupid Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 05:21, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. I Lo ve Plankton ⁽^T^—^C^—^U^—^L⁾ 06:21, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Wow, nice of you to speak on behalf of "OUR ENCYCLOPEDIC GOALS," which are what, to disallow individuality and humor? How does this userbox hurt anybody? Who put you in charge of deciding "OUR ENCYCLOPEDIC GOALS"? Give Peace A Chance 06:15, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. Friendly Neighbour 06:54, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Please don't substitute yourself to Wikipedia and don't define what our goals should be. Thanks. -- Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 11:30, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep -- How does this userbox hurt anybody? --T-rex 17:36, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep' Harmless userboxHezzy 20:35, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete stupid user box Steinbach (fka Caesarion) 21:40, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above Stormscape 01:14, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong KEEP - Good God, man, enough with the crackdown on userbox templates! This crap is really getting old, man! (Ibaranoff24 10:20, 15 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]
Keep. Just as valid as "this user speaks Italian." Don't be racist!--M @r ē ino 15:01, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is just plain stupid! Felixboy 15:57, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:17, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Very useful as a template, and harmless too. As are most of the victims of this tiresome battle. Mnerd 06:19, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It is a USERBOX for Pete's sake. The next thing we should do is delete every userbox. But we will not let you delete this one either. G eneral E i senhower 21:09, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User maybe ET edit

Unencyclopedic template, does not belong in template space. Opinions like "Oh but it's funny" are irrelevant, as humor is relative, but our encyclopedic goals are not. --Cyde Weys 20:21, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Does not belong in Template space. - Nhprman 21:24, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete - fine in userspace, not in template space.--Doc ^ask? 21:33, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I like this one.--Great Legacy 06:08, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep; subst if deleted. Leaving editors alone is a good thing. Septentrionalis 22:56, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, I like it too! -- getcrunk juice ^contribs 01:14, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. People who like it can subst it on their userpages, or use {{user alien}} instead. —SHINING EYES 01:20, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Pleaqse find something better to do than WP:POINT because wikipedia is not a soapbox. It seems some foolishness by people with nothing better to do has lead to a crusade against Wikipedia:Userboxes/Humor If this is deleted its needs to receive a subst: on every instance of its use. Otherwise it is simply irrisponsible on top of foolish.--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 03:09, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per WP:POINT Harvestdancer 04:48, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. I Lo ve Plankton ⁽^T^—^C^—^U^—^L⁾ 06:21, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Wow, nice of you to speak on behalf of "OUR ENCYCLOPEDIC GOALS," which are what, to disallow individuality and humor? How does this userbox hurt anybody? Who put you in charge of deciding "OUR ENCYCLOPEDIC GOALS"? Give Peace A Chance 06:15, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. Friendly Neighbour 06:46, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Please don't substitute yourself to Wikipedia and don't define what our goals should be. Thanks. -- Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 11:30, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Harmless userbox.Hezzy 20:36, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong burn in hell for all user boxes Steinbach (fka Caesarion) 21:42, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Good god, man, calm down! Signed, Fr e dd ie 00:12, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong KEEP - Good God, man, enough with the crackdown on userbox templates! This crap is really getting old, man! (Ibaranoff24 10:20, 15 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]
Strong Keep per Ibaranoff24 and Give Peace A Chance. I know I created this one, but still. Signed, Fr e dd ie 00:12, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:17, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Very useful as a template, and harmless too. As are most of the victims of this tiresome battle. Mnerd 06:19, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User firearm edit

Unencyclopedic template, does not belong in template space. Opinions like "Oh but it's funny" are irrelevant, as humor is relative, but our encyclopedic goals are not. --Cyde Weys 20:21, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Umm, unless I'm missing something, this userbox is actually about articles that the contributor writes or hopes to write. I would think that this one would be rather worthy to be kept. BigDT 20:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I guess I'm missing something. This is a very important box. --mboverload 20:46, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Doesn't look like humor to me. Homestarmy 21:13, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Very helpful. But it doesn't need to be a template so it can be used for social networking. Subst and take out of template space. Nhprman 21:27, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This userbox is almost exactly akin to all the language boxes which tell the world "Hey, I know stuff about this for Wikipedia", are all the language boxes social networking too? Have I been participating in Myspace Junior by using the basic spanish comphrehension template? And now that I think about it, how many times has any userbox been caught in the act as being a social network creator? Homestarmy 21:46, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen this comment of yours elsewhere, and I seriously doubt language boxes will ever be controversial in the way you suggest, and they are not now. Few people rally to create counter-boxes like "I oppose Finnish." But it's widely known that these Templated Userboxes create communities of "Wikipedian Gun Owners" etc. and that's a perversion of Wikipedia's purpose. Even if this box is deleted, it's not like the text will disappear. It will still be available as text. They just won't be used anymore to create "clubs" of users. - Nhprman 02:24, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The idea of this userbox is sound, to tell people that they have knowladge of firearms, convienently in an encyclopedia who's goal is to collect knowladge on nearly everything, which includes firearms. If there's really some sort of evil community of gun owners, i'd say that's a failure of the people using the template rather than a failure of the template itself. Homestarmy 19:21, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The two (failure of the template/failure of the users to use templates properly) are intertwined. If we delete this and other Userbox Templates, they go to Userspace and the abuse of templates to build a social network for this or any other subject ends. - Nhprman 19:57, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well deleting the template doesn't delete the category, and if people are commiting the apparently anti-wikipedia policy of meeting acquaintences, one would think they would be determined enough to simply re-add themselves to the category and then the problem isn't solved compleatly, if there is one in the first place. Homestarmy 21:04, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting the template "unlinks" users. That's enough. The categories cannot exist without that linkage. If so, I don't know how. Please explain. - Nhprman 03:29, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Try adding yourself to [[Categories: Wikipedians interested in firearms]] and be amazed as you are labellebed under a category without the usage of a userbox :). When the Christian userbox was deleted, I was able to do the exact same thing with Category:Christian Wikipedians or whatever it's called, and a few people were still there who I assume listed themself manually as well. Homestarmy 14:11, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep Wow, nice of you to speak on behalf of "OUR ENCYCLOPEDIC GOALS," which are what, to disallow individuality and humor? How does this userbox hurt anybody? Who put you in charge of deciding "OUR ENCYCLOPEDIC GOALS"? Give Peace A Chance 06:15, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

*Subst and delete - fine in userspace, not in template space.--Doc ^ask? 21:33, 13 May 2006 (UTC) Actually, this one does indicate an editing interest rather than a POV. --Doc ^ask? 23:07, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This is not breaking any rules. Dev920 22:36, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep unconditionally; claim to expertise. Septentrionalis 22:56, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Wha-huh? Keep; claims to expertise are the the good kind of userbox. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 23:52, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Extreme keep, useful -- getcrunk juice ^contribs 01:15, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Why we don't focus on improve the Wiki instead of creating userboxes that permanently harm the server? —SHINING EYES 01:36, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Why don't you focus on the wiki instead of putting your same message on every vote? --mboverload @ 03:04, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How interesting, another guy who answers a question with another question, but in this case in particular with a clear lack of community service; if you didn't noticed before, many users use the same reason for different proposals. —SHINING EYES 03:32, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So a single userbox (okay, fine, a batch of userboxes) is corrupting Wikipedia. Do we really need all this text because of it? Signed, Fr e dd ie 00:15, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Pleaqse find something better to do than WP:POINT because wikipedia is not a soapbox. It seems some foolishness by people with nothing better to do has lead to a crusade against Wikipedia:Userboxes/Humor If this is deleted its needs to receive a subst: on every instance of its use. Otherwise it is simply irrisponsible on top of foolish.--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 03:09, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Useful to viewers, as they can see from this userbox he knows about firearms and can, therefore, seek his firearm knowledge if they are curious and the articles do not satisfy them. Futhur more, I see no humor. -TwilightPhoenix 03:34, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per WP:POINT Harvestdancer 04:48, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep, per above. // ^The True _Sora 01:17, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - this could have a wording change, but is like the Babel templates otherwise. It seems this was caught it an otherwise mostly useful mass TfD. --Philosophus ^T 05:28, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. I Lo ve Plankton ⁽^T^—^C^—^U^—^L⁾ 06:21, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I see no reason why it should be removed. --Geneb1955^Talk/_CVU 06:36, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. Friendly Neighbour 07:01, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Please don't substitute yourself to Wikipedia and don't define what our goals should be. Thanks. -- Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 11:30, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep not funney and useful --T-rex 17:37, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Harmless userboxHezzy 20:37, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - not designed for social networking primarily, but for finding other editors with a particular expertise. (ESkog)^(Talk) 22:50, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep --Lukobe 06:43, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Well, it is narrow, but at least it does say what a person's interests in are in writing the encyclopedia. Sjakkalle (Check!) 08:45, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong KEEP - Good God, man, enough with the crackdown on userbox templates! This crap is really getting old, man! (Ibaranoff24 10:20, 15 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]
Keep. This template is not a humorous one and should be removed from the "humor" page. It's nomination here was clearly a mistake. It is an extremely useful template for improving Wikipedia articles (it could, for example, be used as a miniature "WikiProject Firearms"), and a useless one for "social networking". -Silence 18:50, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as a template that indicates the user has knowledge of a subject, it should be kept by the definition of what a User Box should be used for.--DCAnderson 04:54, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - This one's actually useful in the same sense that language Babel boxes are. I don't see why anyone's even discussing its humor value - it's not a joke template like so many others. Agree w/ Silence that some mistake was made here. -GTBacchus^(talk) 18:54, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This is a bizarre nomination, even if you're generally opposed to "personal statement" userboxes. Having a category of people claiming specific expertise, and a template to link to that category, is tremendously useful for our encyclopedic goals. Destroying that simply because some miscreants could use the category to socialize is a proverbial baby-and-bathwater error. (It's not useless for social networking like Silence suggested, but I like his Wikiproject suggestion, and the social networking could really help organize that.) DCB4W 03:43, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Not my thing personally, but why not? MK2 06:26, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:18, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as a statement of personal expertise, useful in an encyclopedic context. User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 22:25, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep per Homestarmy's language box argument.--M @r ē ino 22:42, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep. This one really does go to interests, rather than as a statement of belief. Not T1, not T2, and helpful in writing the encyclopedia. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 21:32, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Very useful as a template, and harmless too. As are most of the victims of this tiresome battle. Mnerd 06:20, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:user merc edit

Unencyclopedic template, does not belong in template space. Opinions like "Oh but it's funny" are irrelevant, as humor is relative, but our encyclopedic goals are not. --Cyde Weys 20:21, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Does not belong in Template space. If you love this box, put the code on your own user page. Nhprman 21:27, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete - fine in userspace, not in template space.--Doc ^ask? 21:33, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep assertion of policy preference; leave it alone. Septentrionalis 22:56, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I myself see no humor in it and use it to describe myself in all honestly. The vagueness allows it to be a general use userbox, whether the user is refering to humor, internet flame wars, real life fist fights, or is actually a mercinary. -TwilightPhoenix 23:23, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Do you know you can still use this box if it's Substituted and Deleted as a template? It won't disappear, just change form. I'm not sure people are understanding this. Please consider supporting deletion as a template. Nhprman 02:11, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I am aware of that, but not everyone here understands nor has the time and (in some cases) the ability to learn the nessisary code to put it in themselves, particularly those who merely do text modification, such as myself. - TwilightPhoenix 02:43, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is a bit disingenuous. If someone can use enough Wikicode to edit an article, they can cut-and-paste the text onto a Userpage. I trust users to be smart enough to cut-and-paste, don't you? Nhprman 02:49, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

where are they going to cut and paste the code from if this is deleted? --T-rex 17:39, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Used to, no offense to anyone. I've had too many experiences where solutions such as that made things more complicated, such as people complaing a code doesn't work because they miscopied it, its too hard (when its not), etc. etc. etc. -TwilightPhoenix 19:11, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per above user -- getcrunk juice ^contribs 01:15, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Same as TwilightPhoenix Loompyloompy313 01:32, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per WP:POINT Harvestdancer 04:48, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. I Lo ve Plankton ⁽^T^—^C^—^U^—^L⁾ 06:21, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Wow, nice of you to speak on behalf of "OUR ENCYCLOPEDIC GOALS," which are what, to disallow individuality and humor? How does this userbox hurt anybody? Who put you in charge of deciding "OUR ENCYCLOPEDIC GOALS"? Give Peace A Chance 06:15, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. Friendly Neighbour 07:00, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Violation of WP:ENC and WP:NOT, two critical official policies approved by general consensus. People who like userboxes can {{subst}} them on their own userpages. BTW, Wikipedia has more than 2000 userboxes as of now, why we don't focus on improving articles instead of permanently damaging the server? —SHINING EYES 09:35, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Please don't substitute yourself to Wikipedia and don't define what our goals should be. Thanks. -- Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 11:31, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep -- I can't trust Cyde's judgement following his vandalism to the User Christian template --T-rex 17:39, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Harmless userbox.Hezzy 20:38, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong KEEP - Good God, man, enough with the crackdown on userbox templates! This crap is really getting old, man! (Ibaranoff24 10:20, 15 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]
Keep either used as a joke or might be informative as well Jasra 19:38, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Just because you don't like a template doesn't mean others don't. Userpages don't interfere with wikipedia, just like it doesn't matter what the editor of an encylopedia believes --Falcon9x5 13:04, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:18, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Very useful as a template, and harmless too. As are most of the victims of this tiresome battle. Mnerd 06:20, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:user Pillage edit

Unencyclopedic template, does not belong in template space. Opinions like "Oh but it's funny" are irrelevant, as humor is relative, but our encyclopedic goals are not. --Cyde Weys 20:21, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Does not belong in Template space. If you love this box, put the code on your own user page. Nhprman 21:29, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete - fine in userspace, not in template space.--Doc ^ask? 21:33, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep; subst if deleted. Leaving editors alone is a good thing. Septentrionalis 22:56, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keeep -- getcrunk juice ^contribs 01:16, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Explain your reasons or your vote will be discounted. According to WP:TFD: "Please explain how, in your opinion, the template does not meet the criteria above. Comments such as "I like it," or "I find it useful," while potentially true, generally do not fulfill this requirement." —SHINING EYES 02:30, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Cyde Weys, Nhprman and Doc. —SHINING EYES 02:33, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Why are we wasting time with this when we have had so many non-neutral userboxes causing trouble? It seems some foolishness by people with nothing better to do has lead to a crusade against Wikipedia:Userboxes/Humor If this is deleted its needs to receive a subst: on every instance of its use. Otherwise it is simply irrisponsible on top of foolish.--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 03:09, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep Theoretically, the user could actually be interested in burning and pillaging or may actually do so. Also in theory, this may indicate the user may be well versed in points in history where pillaging occured, razed villages, etc. Of course, thats all in theory, which is why my vote is weak. -TwilightPhoenix 03:37, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per WP:POINT Harvestdancer 04:48, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep How does this user box hurt anyone? Leave my user boxes alone. Give Peace A Chance 05:48, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. I Lo ve Plankton ⁽^T^—^C^—^U^—^L⁾ 06:21, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. Friendly Neighbour 06:59, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete Oh but "it's funny" has never been a strong argument on deletion debates (not votes) -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 23:29, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Please don't substitute yourself to Wikipedia and don't define what our goals should be. Thanks. -- Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 11:31, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Harmless userbox.Hezzy 20:39, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Its just a userbox.Blind_Man_Walking 20:39, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
Strong KEEP - Good God, man, enough with the crackdown on userbox templates! This crap is really getting old, man! (Ibaranoff24 10:20, 15 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]
Strong Keep - Arrr... keep this one please... some of us history geeks need something to be proud of... - Adolphus79 11:42, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Come on! This is ment to be funny. Many users use this one! Aeon 22:04, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Oh, but it's funny. DuctoMan 18:34, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. Humor may be relative, but harm is not. This takes up almost no space and doesn't attack anyone, so there is no persuasive reason why it SHOULDN'T be left. If you don't like it, ignore it.DCB4W 23:33, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:18, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. As per DCB4W. You might considering ignoring userboxes if you don't care for them.--Brian1979 02:13, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete as per User:TwilightPhoenix, but more on the side of delete. --MOE.RON ^{talk | done | doing} 03:56, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Very useful as a template, and harmless too. As are most of the victims of this tiresome battle. Mnerd 06:20, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:user Tommy Gun edit

Unencyclopedic template, does not belong in template space. Opinions like "Oh but it's funny" are irrelevant, as humor is relative, but our encyclopedic goals are not. --Cyde Weys 20:21, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Does not belong in Template space. If you love this box, put the code on your own user page. Nhprman 21:28, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete - fine in userspace, not in template space.--Doc ^ask? 21:33, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep; subst if deleted. Leaving editors alone is a good thing. Septentrionalis 22:56, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- getcrunk juice ^contribs 01:16, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per WP:POINT Harvestdancer 04:48, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Wow, nice of you to speak on behalf of "OUR ENCYCLOPEDIC GOALS," which are what, to disallow individuality and humor? How does this userbox hurt anybody? Who put you in charge of deciding "OUR ENCYCLOPEDIC GOALS"? Give Peace A Chance 06:15, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Wikipedia is not a soapbox, and not a place of unrestricted free speech. The nominator didn't invent that, he's just repeating it. The goal here is to write an encyclopedia, not clutter the Template space with funny boxes. If deleted, it will still exist as text and you can put it on your User page. Did you know that? If so, why are you arguing? Nhprman 06:31, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Keeping the template allows me to locate others who share the same views or sense of humor. This can lead to collaboration, and eventually improved articles. Yes, wiki is not a soapbox, but there is no harm in keeping you views confined to userpages and templates. Give Peace A Chance 06:38, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but policy states that Wikipedia is also NOT a social networking site. People may wish it to be so, but it's not. "Locating others" who share your sense of humor isn't the goal of this project. It's to edit an encyclopedia. However, you got it half right at the end. If you keep your views confined to the USER SPACE, few will bother with those comments. If they are Templates, that's a community concern, because that's not where POV belongs. - Nhprman 07:02, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Give Peace A Chance, also note that you can still locate the users trough categories instead of userboxes, taking less server resources. —SHINING EYES 08:32, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. I Lo ve Plankton ⁽^T^—^C^—^U^—^L⁾ 06:21, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. Friendly Neighbour 06:55, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Violation of WP:ENC and WP:NOT, two critical official policies approved by general consensus. People who like userboxes can {{subst}} them on their own userpages. BTW, Wikipedia has more than 2000 userboxes as of now, why we don't focus on improving articles instead of permanently damaging the server? —SHINING EYES 09:37, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Please don't substitute yourself to Wikipedia and don't define what our goals should be. Thanks. -- Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 11:31, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny --T-rex 17:40, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong KeepHarmless userbox.Hezzy 20:39, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong KEEP - Good God, man, enough with the crackdown on userbox templates! This crap is really getting old, man! (Ibaranoff24 10:20, 15 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:19, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Very useful as a template, and harmless too. As are most of the victims of this tiresome battle. Mnerd 06:20, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stronger Keep that yours hahaha Do these people have a life? or do they look for innocent things to delete? Darth Rage 19:33, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:user Kalashnikov edit

Unencyclopedic template, does not belong in template space. Opinions like "Oh but it's funny" are irrelevant, as humor is relative, but our encyclopedic goals are not. --Cyde Weys 20:21, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep VALUABLE template. If someone has this boxen then you know you can ask them questions about the AK-47. --mboverload 20:57, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Does not belong in Template space. If you love this box, put the code on your own user page. Nhprman 21:28, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete - fine in userspace, not in template space.--Doc ^ask? 21:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep What is it with deleting all the humorous userboxes? It's part of the fun of being a wikipedia contributor. --Emilio floris 22:53, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep; subst if deleted. Leaving editors alone is a good thing. Septentrionalis 22:56, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- getcrunk juice ^contribs 01:17, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per WP:POINT Harvestdancer 04:48, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep If you don't like this userbox, you don't have to put it on YOUR user page. Leave MY user page alone, busybody. Give Peace A Chance 05:51, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- If this were 'substed and deleted the way it should be (because it has nothing to do with building an encyclopedia), your userpage would be unchanged. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 06:08, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Wrong! Then I have no way of finding others with the same information on their page. Others who I might relate to, and with whom I might collaborate on projects. Just because it doesn't serve your idea of building an encyclopedia doesn't mean that it doesn't serve building an encyclopedia. Give Peace A Chance 06:24, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a social networking site. Sorry if you can't find like-minded people anymore but that's simply not the policy here and not why WP exists. Nhprman 05:45, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. I Lo ve Plankton ⁽^T^—^C^—^U^—^L⁾ 06:21, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. Friendly Neighbour 06:34, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Please don't substitute yourself to Wikipedia and don't define what our goals should be. Thanks. -- Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 11:32, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Harmless userboxHezzy 20:40, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong KEEP - Good God, man, enough with the crackdown on userbox templates! This crap is really getting old, man! (Ibaranoff24 10:20, 15 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]
Strong Keep - It's a userbox. Are they supposed to be useful for anything besides userpages?--Joseph 21:37, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:19, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Very useful as a template, and harmless too. As are most of the victims of this tiresome battle. Mnerd 06:21, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

UBER UBER NON-NOOB 1337 KEEP whats with the hatin' of teh userboxen? no need to delete, in fact go find a sense of humor and get a life Darth Rage 19:17, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:user EBR edit

Unencyclopedic template, does not belong in template space. Opinions like "Oh but it's funny" are irrelevant, as humor is relative, but our encyclopedic goals are not. --Cyde Weys 20:21, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Does not belong in Template space. If you love this box, put the code on your own user page. Nhprman 21:29, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete - fine in userspace, not in template space.--Doc ^ask? 21:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep; subst if deleted. This also may be aclim of expertise. Septentrionalis 22:56, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Eh? --Doc ^ask? 23:08, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- getcrunk juice ^contribs 01:17, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per WP:POINT Harvestdancer 04:48, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. I Lo ve Plankton ⁽^T^—^C^—^U^—^L⁾ 06:21, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. Friendly Neighbour 06:50, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Please don't substitute yourself to Wikipedia and don't define what our goals should be. Thanks. -- Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 11:32, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Harmless userbox.Hezzy 20:41, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong KEEP - Good God, man, enough with the crackdown on userbox templates! This crap is really getting old, man! (Ibaranoff24 10:20, 15 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:19, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Very useful as a template, and harmless too. As are most of the victims of this tiresome battle. Mnerd 06:21, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:user pirate edit

Unencyclopedic template, does not belong in template space. Opinions like "Oh but it's funny" are irrelevant, as humor is relative, but our encyclopedic goals are not. --Cyde Weys 20:21, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Shiver me timbers and take it out of template space. - Nhprman 21:30, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete - fine in userspace, not in template space.--Doc ^ask? 21:40, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep; subst if deleted. Leaving editors alone is a good thing. Septentrionalis 22:56, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Note that this template is listed twice, along with a few others. Kotepho 23:03, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- getcrunk juice ^contribs 01:17, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete But keep the one below, its better and may show that the user is knowledgable in pirates and pirate related themes. -TwilightPhoenix 03:39, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per WP:POINT Harvestdancer 04:48, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. I Lo ve Plankton ⁽^T^—^C^—^U^—^L⁾ 06:21, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. Friendly Neighbour 06:53, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Please don't substitute yourself to Wikipedia and don't define what our goals should be. Thanks. -- Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 11:33, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep -- and why was my earlier vote on this deleted? --T-rex 17:42, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Harmless userbox.Hezzy 20:42, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep. It's true, man!!! Starla Dear 01:48, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong KEEP - Good God, man, enough with the crackdown on userbox templates! This crap is really getting old, man! (Ibaranoff24 10:20, 15 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]
Redirect to Template:user Pirate. The anti-ninja cabal is inflammatory and divisive.--M @r ē ino 15:02, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per basically everyone --- good god, man, do you even know what a userbox *is*? UnDeadGoat 23:24, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:20, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Oh but it's funny. -- Nathan 21:57, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Very useful as a template, and harmless too. As are most of the victims of this tiresome battle. Mnerd 06:21, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:user Pirate edit

Unencyclopedic template, does not belong in template space. Opinions like "Oh but it's funny" are irrelevant, as humor is relative, but our encyclopedic goals are not. --Cyde Weys 20:21, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Subst and delete - fine in userspace, not in template space.--Doc ^ask? 21:40, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not for template space. Move to user space. Nhprman 21:37, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I like this one.--Great Legacy 06:08, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep; subst if deleted. Leaving editors alone is a good thing. Septentrionalis 22:56, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- getcrunk juice ^contribs 01:17, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep But delete the one above, this one is better and may show that the user is knowledgable in pirates and pirate related themes. -TwilightPhoenix 03:40, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per WP:POINT Harvestdancer 04:48, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. I Lo ve Plankton ⁽^T^—^C^—^U^—^L⁾ 06:21, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. Friendly Neighbour 06:44, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Please don't substitute yourself to Wikipedia and don't define what our goals should be. Thanks. -- Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 11:34, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the only point to be had here is at the end of me' sword, Arr! — xaosflux ^Talk 15:54, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Harmless userbox.Hezzy 20:45, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. What is so bad about that userbox?? Weirdy 06:31, 15 May 2006 (UTC).[reply]
Userfy. Harmless, but useless. Sjakkalle (Check!) 08:38, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong KEEP - Good God, man, enough with the crackdown on userbox templates! This crap is really getting old, man! (Ibaranoff24 10:20, 15 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]
Strong Keep - Arrr... delete the other one, keep this one please... some of us history geeks need something to be proud of... - Adolphus79 11:39, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Please recall that "Pirate" is the name of many professional, college, and high school sports teams, and that those kinds of boxes are not being deleted.--M @r ē ino 15:03, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This is like alot of userboxes. You may not find it funny but some do. Stop trying to delete userboxes as this is something that users enjoy. Don't like userboxes? Stop looking at user pages. Leave them ALONE! Jangle 07:44, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:20, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep!. Or we'll have you keel-hauled. Jaksmata 13:42, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep (nearly put "avast") Good-humoured, even if not seen as funny, and therefore far from divisive; simultaneously indicates to other editors ways of approaching the editor. At the very least, if it is userfied, it should not be removed from the userbox index. --Cedders^tk 19:03, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Oh but it's funny. -- Nathan 21:57, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Very useful as a template, and harmless too. As are most of the victims of this tiresome battle. Mnerd 06:21, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was no consensus. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Gee Bee Series edit

keep there are templates with less links, sometimes red. Perfectly valid footer. Circeus 19:51, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom -- getcrunk juice ^contribs 01:18, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Angr (t • c) 19:32, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and clean up! The Gerg 00:17, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was no consensus. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:North Auckland Line edit

Enooormous template that completely dominates several of the articles that it is on and deals with what is a fairly minor feature of them. Have a look at Maungaturoto for instance. Having a railway halt there is a minor feature of the township, and certainly doesn't require the stub to be blighted with this monstrosity. At the very least it needs a serious re-working, but I'd seriously question the need for it at all. Grutness...wha? 07:08, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete with nerve agent --mboverload 07:10, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Reformat and keep We have templates with higher link content, but the way this one is done is awful. Circeus 19:58, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Reformat - This one is not that huge and with a bit of work it can become a perfectly normal template. Afonso Silva 21:00, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I second Delete with nerve agent -- getcrunk juice ^contribs 01:19, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. NZ has pretty good geographic coverage, and I think that the number of red links here is not going to decrease too fast. It also seems like the (given the rail line has had no passsenger service for a while) that people are not going to navigate through articles on the rail stop. Move content the to the North Auckland Line page I think...--Limegreen 12:25, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PS -- The content of the template is really interesting, I'm just not sure that it adds to the geographic articles.--Limegreen 23:52, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:user procrastinate edit

Unencyclopedic template, simply not funny, no point in having around. Get this junk out of template space. --Cyde Weys 05:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep --mboverload 06:30, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy. —Andux^␅ 06:17, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst/userfy and delete unencyclopedic- but no need to deny the users their userpage fun--Doc ^ask? 11:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
userfy They'll be happy if its still on their userpage. Funnybunny (^talk/_QRVS) 16:45, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy, and Delete template - I'm glad someone finally got around to nominating this template for deletion. - Nhprman 17:00, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, nothing wrong with it. Stifle (talk) 20:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, This is a good userbox, no reason to delete it. Bluepaladin 20:47, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, What happens if somebody is being expected to give some big contribution to an article but doesn't show up and people start getting suspicious? Why, they can look at this userbox, and be armed with knowladge! :). Homestarmy 21:15, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Some people have a sense of humor.-Gangsta-Easter-Bunny (talk)-(21:54, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep; glad to be warned. Septentrionalis 23:00, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It's not that big a deal. Lighten up. Thistheman 23:42, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep See my reasons in the next one. -TwilightPhoenix 02:50, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. Friendly Neighbour 06:49, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Please don't substitute yourself to Wikipedia and don't define what our goals should be. Thanks. -- Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 11:35, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep; if you don't want humourous userboxes, don't create them in the first place. How come it's okay to have ones saying "this user is a wombat or at least thinks they are" but not ones making humourous warnings about procrastination?--The Wizard of Magicland 15:14, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It's harmless. Aeon 03:02, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Even the procrastinators come and vote. This should stay. þħɥʂıɕıʄʈ^ʝɘɖı 18:09, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Super Strong Keep What do you mean, "Unencyclopedic template, simply not funny, no point in having around. Get this junk out of template space."?! The only junk in template space is that ugly mass of atoms you call your face! This UB is funny, and who gives a frick if it's not encyclopedic? Our user pages aren't articles, let us put what we want on them, GAH! Freddie 18:29, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I find this to be a humorous way of telling people that I don't get on things right away. Dee man45 20:02, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP: HARMLESSHezzy 20:22, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The equivalent of putting the "holdon" tag on your user page.--M @r ē ino 15:05, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep I think this is a statement about the user's personality, just like many other userboxes out there. It's perfectly legitimate. No need to delete. Mimz 02:48, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, per Dee man45. — Ian Manka Talk to me‼ 19:51, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This template is relevant to how wikipedians edit wikipida and so not only is funny, but also is useful to other wikipidians viewing the page--E-Bod 21:00, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Harmless, funny, and occasionally useful. DCB4W 23:29, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:21, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP . [chuck heston mode] I'LL KEEP MY PROCRASTINATOR USERBOX 'TILL THEY TAKE IT FROM MY COLD DEAD HANDS!!![/chuck heston mode]
Keep Very useful as a template, and harmless too. As are most of the victims of this tiresome battle. Mnerd 06:22, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As for the complaint Unencyclopedic, my response is: neither are User pages. But user pages inform us about Users. It adds slightly to the general spirit of our day. (also: keep as per Mimz). A few folks (thankfully just a few) need to lighten up. -- Sholom 14:27, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above --Bucketsofg✐ 23:20, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:user procrastinate2 edit

Unencyclopedic template, simply not funny, no point in having around. Get this junk out of template space. --Cyde Weys 05:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep because Cyde is dead on the inside =) --mboverload 05:27, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I really don't see that as a "justification" for keeping nonsense in template space. --Cyde Weys 05:28, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep on over 150 pages, and I'm sure other users have planned on using it, but just put off adding it to their pages until another later... --T-rex 05:53, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy. —Andux^␅ 06:18, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete unencyclopedic- but no need to deny the users their userpage fun--Doc ^ask? 11:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
userfy Just the same as the template that's going to be deleted above. Funnybunny (^talk/_QRVS) 16:46, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, harmless. Stifle (talk) 19:55, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep,I love this userbox! It's my favorite! It describes me completely! Bluepaladin 20:45, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep,almost every other userbox would be deleted if we followed the same criteria. --Kristbg 21:49, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. --Chris (talk) 22:26, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, there are people who could (and probably do) use this for a serious description of themselves. After all, this one more or less accurately describes me at times. -TwilightPhoenix 23:11, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Bluepaladin and TwilightPhoenix. Fr e dd ie 23:38, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It's not that big a deal. Lighten up. Thistheman 23:48, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This user box defines what user boxes are for...it describes me in totality. If userboxes are to stay around, this one should not be deleted before any other. --KPWM_Spotter 02:02, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
keep Niffweed17, Destroyer of Chickens 05:20, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. Friendly Neighbour 06:57, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep This really is a brilliant userbox. It won't be used in any serious way, is totally harmless and inoffensive, AND it makes me burst into laughter. Keep things light-hearted :) Russia Moore 07:11, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I think it reflects a users personality and sense of humour nicely. s»abhorreo»i 09:10, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Please don't substitute yourself to Wikipedia and don't define what our goals should be. Thanks. -- Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 11:35, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Seriously, someone give Cyde that hug I've been talking about. I'm not joking. It's for the userboxes!-Gangsta-Easter-Bunny (talk)-(17:38, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Harmless userbox.Hezzy 20:47, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Starla Dear 01:50, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep I'd give Cyde that hug, but I think I'll do it later, maybe... plus I don't even know the guy... so probably not... if I get around to it... NetStormer 07:48, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I love this userbox! I have it on my page. It sums me up perfectly. --Pharaoh Hound 13:51, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strongest Possible Keep This is a funny and harmless userbox. If we vote to kill this userbox, we may as well kill 95% of the rest! the_ed17^(talk)^(contribs) 16:51, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep Anyone who wants to delete this userbox is obviously biased against the procrastinator way of life. ;p --Dan Asad 19:03, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There's absolutely nothing wrong with this. If you don't like it then don't use it. --green_penguin 23:29, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Harmless fun Boddah 00:47, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Nothing wrong with this template
Keep This is getting out of hand how many userboxes as this guy nomed?

Aeon 03:03, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(response to Aeon, let's see, useerbox Tokyo(the largest city in the Boworld, is in danger from Cyde. That give you an idea?--Gangsta-Easter-Bunny 12:37, 16 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Keep. If you are subst'ing, where are Template:User iamalemming-en (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) and Template:User Longcat (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs), among lots and lots of others? -- Jokes Free4Me 20:10, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This is like alot of userboxes. You may not find it funny but some do. Stop trying to delete userboxes as this is something that users enjoy. Don't like userboxes? Stop looking at user pages. Leave them ALONE! Jangle 07:44, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:21, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Very useful as a template, and harmless too. As are most of the victims of this tiresome battle. Mnerd 06:22, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Showing a sense of humour can help to make a person more approachable, and approachability is relevant to collaboration over encyclopedia articles. Zerrakhi 13:48, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

UBER LEET STRONG KEEP This doesnt offend anyone and it is there for your enjoyment, i see no reason to delete something that alot of us are. Darth Rage 19:00, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per above. --Bucketsofg✐ 23:22, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Industrial strength KEEP It gives a good introduction into the eternal struggle that procrastinators face. I should know; it took me a week to contribute to this discussion. (The Lake Effect 03:42, 20 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:user procrastinatea edit

Unencyclopedic template, simply not funny, no point in having around. Get this junk out of template space. --Cyde Weys 05:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep --mboverload 05:29, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy. —Andux^␅ 06:18, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst/userfy and delete unencyclopedic- but no need to deny the users their userpage fun--Doc ^ask? 11:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
strong delete Gosh! How many of these procrastination templates are still around? Funnybunny (^talk/_QRVS) 16:48, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete immediately. Nhprman 17:01, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep; subst if deleted. Leaving editors alone is a good thing. Septentrionalis 23:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Thanks for saying the words I wished to say, Septentrionalis. You voiced what I could not. Thistheman 23:49, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep See my reasons in the above one. -TwilightPhoenix 02:50, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. Friendly Neighbour 06:59, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Please don't substitute yourself to Wikipedia and don't define what our goals should be. Thanks. -- Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 11:35, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Harmless userbox.Hezzy 20:47, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to the funnier Template:user procrastinate2 --T-rex 19:34, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This is a great user box Aeon 22:02, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Get a life, Cude. Quit picking on the userboxes. How would you like it if they picked on you?-Gangsta-Easter-Bunny (talk)-(12:32, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Very useful as a template, and harmless too. As are most of the victims of this tiresome battle. Mnerd 06:22, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above. Bucketsofg✐ 23:24, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User Rotary Dial edit

Unencyclopedic template, simply not funny, no point in having around. Get this junk out of template space. --Cyde Weys 05:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment What next, are we going to have a user box that says we use Windows 98? Oh...wait... --mboverload 05:29, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep on over 200 user pages, and I happen to still have a rotary dial fone --T-rex 05:41, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- And you having a rotary dial phone is relevant to the encyclopedia how?! You haven't addressed one bit how it deserves to be a template. --Cyde Weys 14:18, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - did you miss the part where I pointed out that deleting this would mess up over 200 pages? --T-rex 17:44, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy. —Andux^␅ 06:18, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The template is extremally usefull in finding people with experience in ancient communication techniques to review WP articles. (Well, I know this explanation is rubbish but I'm still 100 storeys above the level of Gmaxwell & Cyde pranks). Friendly Neighbour 07:13, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete unencyclopedic- but no need to deny the users their userpage fun--Doc ^ask? 11:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete. Stifle (talk) 20:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. May show the user is knowledgable in rotary dial phones and therefore can provide information on them. -TwilightPhoenix 03:42, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment As the creator is this userbox, I would like to say that I only made it a template to make it easier for others to access. If this template is deleted it should be subst:ed into every userpage on which it appears. Blarneytherinosaur 08:26, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It is already explicitly stated on the userbox page about why it was kept. -- G.S.K.Lee 09:35, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Please don't substitute yourself to Wikipedia and don't define what our goals should be. Thanks. -- Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 11:36, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep, subst if deleted. This template deserves existence just as much as boxes saying what OS you have. the rotary dial is the OS of your phone!--Kenmcfa 20:09, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Harmless userboxHezzy 20:48, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep, agree with all previous reasons for same. --Bluejay Young 21:24, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: It doesn't have to be funny. This isn't Uncyclopedia. Possible uses for it have been stated above. Mengsk 00:13, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Starla Dear 01:51, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Funny. Gives comments about the age not putting them straight forward. If you don't like it, don't use it Jasra 14:57, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Jasra. -MrFizyx 16:31, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Kenmcfa. -Rpresser 21:31, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Galilite. What do you have against rotary phones. And I find it funny. - Galilite 00:03, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Don't discriminate against us old farts. Jay Maynard 00:33, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Cyde Weys has nomed countless userboxes on the basis that they are unencyopedic. Using that logic all user pages would have to be deleted to since they are not encyclopedic Aeon 03:07, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - It is only unencylopedic in the Template space. If this Userbox is deleted, it will STILL be available for people to use on user pages AND it be protected against being nominated for deletion again. Everyone should check out WP:MACK for the details of this proposal to save Userboxes. Nhprman 05:12, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But it won't be available to other users because it will no longer be in a substable form. It'll be code on random pages. This is why it WON'T be available. This is comparable to taking a product of the market then claiming "Oh, it's still available. Look, that guy has one." Keep the product on the market. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 05:31, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's patently false and misleading. Yes, the boxes will be available to users in User space. There will be a central location for all code to exist, most likely where they are listed right now, and where users currently go to get the template code. You are seeking to make this complicated and confusing, when it's not. - Nhprman 22:18, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, I haven't voted on this one. Keep. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 05:31, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep (I'm a minor and used a rotary phone for years when I was very little!) G y re 05:52, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, for the love of God, deleting userboxes would take more space, AND this one is used on over 200 user pages. --many Revolutions 05:55, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. caprivi 07:56, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and Comment, I use like this userbox, it is not provocative of any controversy, and over 200 users use it. If 200 users use it, then 200 users find it usefull. Flamarande 16:39, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I like it, too. Vote "Delete and Move" to move it to user space (and to keep it on those 200 pages) otherwise, it will remain a tempate and be subject to deletion again and again by people who simply don't like it. - Nhprman 22:18, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per above. --Ton e 20:27, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - it gives information on the age of the user without going telling a specific age. Ñomination in bad faith. // Liftarn 13:54, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:22, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep for reasons stated above. I am one of the 200 users. Kgwo1972 15:47, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Aeon. It's not meant to be funny. -- Nathan 17:29, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Very useful as a template, and harmless too. As are most of the victims of this tiresome battle. Mnerd 06:23, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As for the complaint Unencyclopedic, my response is: neither are User pages. But user pages inform us about Users, and so does this template, in a way that's slightly amusing by reference to older technology. It adds slightly to the general spirit of our day. -- Sholom 14:22, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This is funny and harmless and in all honesty most things in wikipedia user templetes are not encyclopedic and are just there to be shared on user pages. Vcelloho 01:47, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User sellout edit

Unencyclopedic template, simply not funny, no point in having around. Get this junk out of template space. --Cyde Weys 05:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Useless --mboverload 05:29, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy. —Andux^␅ 06:19, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst/userfy and delete unencyclopedic- but no need to deny the users their userpage fun--Doc ^ask? 11:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
userfy per above comments. Funnybunny (^talk/_QRVS) 16:49, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete inappropriate as a template. Nhprman 17:00, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, not really relevant. Stifle (talk) 20:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Pretty funny. You have to have a sense of business humor to get it, though.-Gangsta-Easter-Bunny (talk)-(21:56, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Please don't substitute yourself to Wikipedia and don't define what our goals should be. Thanks. -- Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 11:36, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Harmless userbox, see reason above.Hezzy 20:50, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
KeepDoes this guy have a sense of humor or a life? Pat Payne 17:27, 16 May 2006 (UTC) Somebody deleted stuff from my comment and I do not appreciate that. Pat Payne 14:16, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:22, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Funny.
Delete. inappropriate as a template or on user pages. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 21:46, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. Honestly, this has gotten so freaking old. --D-Day^{(Wouldn't you like to be a pepper too?}) 23:11, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Very useful as a template, and harmless too. As are most of the victims of this tiresome battle. Mnerd 06:23, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep template is funny and harmless. Is this admin a bot?? -Aknorals 09:29, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User serviceable-no edit

Unencyclopedic template, simply not funny, no point in having around. Get this junk out of template space. --Cyde Weys 05:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep What? --mboverload 05:30, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy—harmless. —Andux^␅ 06:01, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst/userfy and delete unencyclopedic- but no need to deny the users their userpage fun--Doc ^ask? 11:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per above. Nhprman 17:03, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, harmless. Stifle (talk) 20:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No Opinion. This one is a tad bit pointless, but still very amusing. Now I'm unsure to keep or delete for this one. -TwilightPhoenix 23:16, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Harmless if used in moderation. -- Tangot a ngo 05:40, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. Friendly Neighbour 06:36, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Please don't substitute yourself to Wikipedia and don't define what our goals should be. Thanks. -- Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 11:36, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Harmless userbox, see reason above.Hezzy 20:51, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per above --KharBevNor 23:25, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above. +Hexagon1 (talk) 11:21, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - it's a joke, and it's funnier than half of BJAODN Tyrhinis 10:42, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP What is offensive about this one? It's not in articlespace, and a little levity lightens up everything. Pat Payne 17:23, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst/userfy and delete per doc -- malo (tlk) (cntrbtns) 23:53, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I find it funny. // Liftarn 06:41, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Somewhat futile delete. Again, template space isn't the place for jokes. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 06:46, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Harmless bit of irony. This is Wikipedia; of course there are user serviceable parts inside. Xinit 06:56, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:23, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. We shall not be silenced!--Brian1979 18:51, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
EXTREMELY STRONG KEEP. Where's all the humour gone? Max naylor 16:02, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Very useful as a template, and harmless too. As are most of the victims of this tiresome battle. Mnerd 06:23, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was no consensus, defaults to keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User Sheep Herder edit

Unencyclopedic template, simply not funny, no point in having around. Get this junk out of template space. --Cyde Weys 05:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not even close to hitting the clever button --mboverload 05:30, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Es muy estupido.--Conrad Devonshire ^Talk 06:14, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not a valid reason for deletion. --Pilo t|guy 16:51, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Userfy. —Andux^␅ 06:19, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete unencyclopedic- but no need to deny the users their userpage fun--Doc ^ask? 11:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete save some space on the Wikipedia servers, man. Funnybunny (^talk/_QRVS) 16:51, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP is not the place for this kind of template. Take it to MySpace Nhprman 17:05, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop using this irrelevant stereotype. You should note that many Userbox supporters have made many useful edits to Wikipedia. --D-Day^{(Wouldn't you like to be a pepper too?}) 23:13, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Nhprman, but Funnybunny should note that deleting it will actually use more space (the material isn't deleted from the servers, and there would just be an extra log entry). Stifle (talk) 20:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Why we don't focus on improve the Wiki instead of creating userboxes that permanently harm the server? —SHINING EYES 01:45, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Because one has to laugh a bit, not just work... -- Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 11:37, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Harmless userboxHezzy 20:52, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong, muscular Keep. It'd use more space deleted, it's useful to see who likes Brokeback, it's harmless, plus the sheep is cute.--many Revolutions 05:38, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
keep. who cares if it's stupid? some of the people nominating these userboxes are just as if not more stupid than the boxes they nominate. get over it, cyde. ... aa:talk 18:21, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:23, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Utterly harmless Deyyaz ^{[ Talk | Contribs ]} 16:40, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Oh for Sakura's sake. As much of a waste of space as a piece of paper... --Charlie Huang 【正矗昊】 18:43, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep So what if it's not particularly clever? Maybe some people would like to show support for the film.--Brian1979 18:54, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Big Brother is watching. -Emerald807
Revise content to apply to persons who are actually shepherds; it would then be a quite useful occupational categorization template. User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 22:23, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Enough. --D-Day^{(Wouldn't you like to be a pepper too?}) 23:13, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete a template for actual sheperds? Yes. One for what ever humor/point this one is trying to make as a reference to Brokeback Mountain? I don't feel so. --MOE.RON ^{talk | done | doing} 04:01, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Very useful as a template, and harmless too. As are most of the victims of this tiresome battle. Mnerd 06:23, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was no consensus, defaults to keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User SNL edit

Unencyclopedic template, simply not funny, no point in having around. Get this junk out of template space. --Cyde Weys 05:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete So completely obscure, I should have nominated it. But I'm super-lazy --mboverload 05:31, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - ...okay...--Conrad Devonshire ^Talk 06:14, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy. —Andux^␅ 06:20, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete unencyclopedic- but no need to deny the users their userpage fun--Doc ^ask? 11:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Is this template supposed to be a joke? Funnybunny (^talk/_QRVS) 16:53, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or change to "Welcome to MySpace." Not appropriate here. Nhprman 17:06, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete. Stifle (talk) 20:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete--Matthew Fenton (TALK - CONTRIBS) 20:56, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Note that this template is listed twice, along with a few others. Kotepho 23:01, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - This is funny! It is based on a famous sketch from SNL.- JustPhil 22:49, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete pointless, maybe reword to this user likes SNL or something like that, if reworded than Keep Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 05:21, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Since when were userboxes supposed to be encyclopedic? They are for user pages, not articles. But no objection to rewording. Armedblowfish 13:04, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Voted above for userboxes in general (still keep). Armedblowfish 14:18, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep Harmless userbox.Hezzy 20:53, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Substitute There should be a userbox for SNL, but maybe a more well-known reference should be used. John R Murray 20:16, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Please note that a deletion discussion for this template is already open below. Timrem 02:35, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Substitute, per John R Murray. — Ian Manka Talk to me‼ 19:52, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- (Forgot to sign. Sorry!) 19:52, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
Voted below (duplicate discussion) to keep. DCB4W (Sorry, forgot to sign earlier.)
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:24, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I see no harm in keeping this. Deyyaz ^{[ Talk | Contribs ]} 16:46, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. If I understood it, it probably would be an attack template. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 21:47, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Very useful as a template, and harmless too. As are most of the victims of this tiresome battle. Mnerd 06:24, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP. Very funny. I have no idea what's wrong with the nominating admin here.... -Aknorals 09:34, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
KEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP You do not want to taunt the happy fun ball. G eneral E i senhower 21:20, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep until a better userbox is made. Perhaps something referencing a less obscure recurring sketch, like "Spartan Spirit" or "Two Wild and Crazy Guys." (The Lake Effect 04:02, 20 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User stories edit

Unencyclopedic template, simply not funny, no point in having around. Get this junk out of template space. --Cyde Weys 05:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I feel that people should tell stories and talk with other people on wikipedia to get more of a sense of community. I'm not sure how much this would help, but personal accounts and war stories are nothing to ignore. --mboverload 05:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep not funny is not a reason to delete --T-rex 05:42, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Well Cyde used that as a blanket statement for his latest round of kicking ass! --mboverload 05:45, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Cyde also said that these userboxes are junk. That's not very nice to the people who created them (btw, I would know. I created User:Wombat and User:maybe ET). Signed, Fr e dd ie 00:19, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Not a bad userbox. I personally like it.--Conrad Devonshire ^Talk 06:14, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy. —Andux^␅ 06:21, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete unencyclopedic- but no need to deny the users their userpage fun--Doc ^ask? 11:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no point in having this around. Funnybunny (^talk/_QRVS) 16:54, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Pointless on an encyclopedia site. Nhprman 17:06, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete. Stifle (talk) 20:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. TfD isn't the place to make a WP:POINT about how much you don't like userboxes. Get rid of the offensive ones first, then come and talk about the inocuous ones. BigDT 20:23, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Its pretty funny and can be used to realistically describe someone. -TwilightPhoenix 23:06, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Harmless userbox. Hezzy 20:54, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Useful for users who support the goal of making Wikipedia articles very long and thorough, and are aware that other users will question the value of their edits.--M @r ē ino 15:17, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:24, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Humor is not a prereq for userbox template creation. It's obvious Cyde Weys dislikes userboxes and is trying to get rid of as many as possible. --Brian1979 11:37, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Very useful as a template, and harmless too. As are most of the victims of this tiresome battle. Mnerd 06:24, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was no consensus, defaults to keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User The Stig edit

Unencyclopedic template, simply not funny, no point in having around. Get this junk out of template space. --Cyde Weys 05:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not too obscure, but useless anyway --mboverload 05:33, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - These "this user is - " templates are not very creative.--Conrad Devonshire ^Talk 06:15, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete unencyclopedic- but no need to deny the users their userpage fun--Doc ^ask? 11:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom. Nhprman 17:08, 13 May 2006 (UTC)][reply]
Subst and delete. Stifle (talk) 20:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
subst and delete. I have a guess at would it could mean, but it makes little sense to me. Too obscure in my opinion to be kept. -TwilightPhoenix 23:35, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Twilight - the stig article is linked in that box and explains everything about it. Icecradle 14:57, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep could show a knowledge of cars, racing, driving, top gear and anything else related. Plus it actually links to the article. Icecradle 14:57, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Harmless userboxHezzy 20:55, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Harmless insude joke userbox (automotive show fans knows what it is). --Bud 22:55, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. What if the user was, in fact, The Stig? --KharBevNor 23:26, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Harmless fun. Boddah 23:58, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep This is a harmless, fun userbox. With regards to obscurity, I don't think The Stig is THAT obscure. If one reads the article that the userbox links to, you'll find that there is a good description of what/who "The Stig" is there. Jpmanalo 03:56, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - This and other user boxes should be saved and protected from deletion on the grounds they are not funny or have no point. See WP:MACK for details of this proposal to save Userboxes from future deletions. - Nhprman 05:28, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:25, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong, Hard, Fast, Deep Keep #1. The Stig references are: Funny... #2. Anybody who uses the expression: "Unencyclopedic template" is: "simply not funny, no point in having around."
KEEP! The stig is nowhere near obscure! Duke toaster 19:12, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Very useful as a template, and harmless too. As are most of the victims of this tiresome battle. Mnerd 06:24, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Doesn't harm any one, good fun as an in-joke. Chrisd87 16:10, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was no consensus, defaults to keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:user used parts network edit

Unencyclopedic template, simply not funny, no point in having around. Get this junk out of template space. --Cyde Weys 05:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Needs a better pun. --mboverload 05:33, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete unencyclopedic- but no need to deny the users their userpage fun--Doc ^ask? 11:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - This network will cease to exist in the Fall, when it merged with the WB. The Userbox should die now, however. Nhprman 17:09, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete. Stifle (talk) 20:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Harmless userbox. Hezzy 20:56, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep, until The CW launches Harmless and funny userbox. User:Mboverload, humour is relative. how about delete it when UPN shuts down? as for everyone else... everything that makes people think these days is "junk". ugh. User:Raccoon Fox - Talk 21:03, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:25, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Very useful as a template, and harmless too. As are most of the victims of this tiresome battle. Mnerd 06:24, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User Who's On First edit

Unencyclopedic template, simply not funny, no point in having around. Get this junk out of template space. --Cyde Weys 05:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Take it to userspace, boys --mboverload 05:34, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- how do you not find Abbott and Costello funny? --T-rex 05:44, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Too obscure.--Conrad Devonshire ^Talk 06:14, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy. —Andux^␅ 06:21, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete unencyclopedic- but no need to deny the users their userpage fun--Doc ^ask? 11:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Funny, but should be in userspace, not in Template space. Nhprman 17:07, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, what on earth is this? Stifle (talk) 20:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, this shouldn't be deleted, who's on first is a hilarious and incredibly famous skit. Bluepaladin 20:55, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Seriously, who's on first is pretty funny, and certainly userful to brighten many people's day i'd say. Homestarmy 21:21, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Who's on First is a hilarious skit. If you haven't read it yet, you should take the time to go read it. This template is actually pretty funny, and I think Cyde is a moronic retard to even propose it for deletion! If Cyde keeps proposing stuff for deletion, even userboxes we ourselves created will be proposed! Cyde's gonna propose every last UB for deletion. That's how dumb he is. Freddie 18:32, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Harmless userbox. Hezzy 20:56, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:25, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
SUPER STRONG KEEP -- Why would anyone want to delete a template/userbox containing perhaps the most famous bit of (baseball) comedy in history? --Tuvok 09:31, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. An important bit of contemporar culture. Alluding to it via a userbox is harmless. Bucketsofg✐ 15:45, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Who's On First is encyclopedic, darn it! --D-Day^{(Wouldn't you like to be a pepper too?}) 23:14, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It refers to the whos on first article, which I just read and thought was interesting. Yet another lame sig I came up with ^{T | @ | C} 01:36, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Hands down one of the best comedic skits/performances of all time, deserving of a UB. --MOE.RON ^{talk | done | doing} 03:48, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Very useful as a template, and harmless too. As are most of the victims of this tiresome battle. Mnerd 06:25, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was no consensus, defaults to keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User zombie edit

Unencyclopedic template, simply not funny, no point in having around. Get this junk out of template space. --Cyde Weys 05:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Take it to userspace, boys --mboverload 05:34, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Dumb.--Conrad Devonshire ^Talk 06:14, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy. —Andux^␅ 06:22, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete unencyclopedic- but no need to deny the users their userpage fun--Doc ^ask? 11:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete. Stifle (talk) 20:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Why we don't focus on improve the Wiki instead of creating userboxes that permanently harm the server? —SHINING EYES 01:45, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Very Strong Delete this is getting stupid, can be speedy as nonsense Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 05:23, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Very Strong Keep Oh no! Our PRECIOUS template space. God forbid. Nice of you to call someone elses work "junk." Way to build community spirit!! Give Peace A Chance 06:48, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Harmless userbox.Hezzy 20:57, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Utterly useless, userfy if absolutely needed. Sjakkalle (Check!) 08:40, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:26, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Against Cyde's deletion policy. G eneral E i senhower 21:24, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was no consensus, defaults to keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:user your mom edit

Unencyclopedic template, simply not funny, no point in having around. Get this junk out of template space. --Cyde Weys 05:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep because Cyde is dead on the inside =) --mboverload 05:28, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per mboverload??? --T-rex 05:46, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy. —Andux^␅ 06:22, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete unencyclopedic- but no need to deny the users their userpage fun--Doc ^ask? 11:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom. Nhprman 17:12, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, rather silly. Stifle (talk) 20:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, The "your mom" jokes have been going on for years I think, time for a change i'd say. Homestarmy
Keep I like this one.--Great Legacy 06:08, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete as per nom. -- Masterjamie 02:33, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Just plain dumb. Do we need a template so people can add weak jokes to their userpage? I say no. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 02:36, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete--GeorgeMoney ^T·C 02:39, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Harmless userbox.Hezzy 20:58, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong KeepAs the creator of this Userbox! Simply intended for humorThe Gerg 00:11, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy. Harmless but useless. Sjakkalle (Check!) 08:39, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. We have templates for "this user is a girl", "this user is married", why not a template for the next stage in the circle of life, motherhood? --M @r ē ino 15:13, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:26, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Your mom jokes have been making a comeback. AscendedAnathema 05:14, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I always wondered where the your mom stuff come from - this answered it basically. Yet another lame sig I came up with ^{T | @ | C} 01:45, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per User talk:A Man In Black. --MOE.RON ^{talk | done | doing} 04:04, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was subst and delete. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User Dingbat edit

Unencyclopedic template, simply not funny, no point in having around. Get this junk out of template space. --Cyde Weys 05:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Clever, but take it to userspace, boys --mboverload 05:35, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy. —Andux^␅ 06:23, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete unencyclopedic- but no need to deny the users their userpage fun--Doc ^ask? 11:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom. Nhprman 17:12, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete per Doc. Stifle (talk) 20:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Harmless userbox.Hezzy 20:59, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:27, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was no consensus, defaults to keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User Wombat edit

Unencyclopedic template, simply not funny, no point in having around. Get this junk out of template space. --Cyde Weys 05:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Yeah, I don't know what the point of this is, either. THANKS to Cyde for taking the time to clean up this crap! Hugs and kissies! --mboverload 05:36, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I second that thanks.--Conrad Devonshire ^Talk 06:14, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete unencyclopedic- but no need to deny the users their userpage fun--Doc ^ask? 11:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom. Nhprman 17:12, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete per Doc. Stifle (talk) 20:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Very Strong Keep Oh no! Our PRECIOUS template space. God forbid. Nice of you to call someone elses work "junk." Way to build community spirit!! Give Peace A Chance 06:48, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Harmless userbox.Hezzy 21:00, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:27, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User self test edit

Unencyclopedic template, simply not funny, no point in having around. Get this junk out of template space. --Cyde Weys 05:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Stupid² --mboverload 05:36, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Possibly confusing.--Conrad Devonshire ^Talk 06:14, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy. —Andux^␅ 06:23, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete unencyclopedic- but no need to deny the users their userpage fun--Doc ^ask? 11:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom. Nhprman 17:12, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep, it is funny and not hurting anyone. Stifle (talk) 20:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep, funny and not hurting anyone. s»abhorreo»i 09:28, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It does no harm and its removal would serve only to gratify a handful of killjoys.
Strong Keep. Harmless userbox.Hezzy 21:00, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, harmless and funny. +Hexagon1 (talk) 09:48, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Harmless. Varco 18:44, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP This userbox is not confusing at all. at most, someone will go, "hey wait a minute, how can we tell them if we don't see it? Oh, It's probably a joke. HA HA HA, i get it now."

And I find it very funny. Furthermore, if it is not deleted, i won't have to edit my userpage at all. DuctoMan 18:54, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This is like alot of userboxes. You may not find it funny but some do. Stop trying to delete userboxes as this is something that users enjoy. Don't like userboxes? Stop looking at user pages. Leave them ALONE! Jangle 07:44, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:27, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG 123 KEEP Stupid WSp. I'll get my revenge on you yet, Cyde Weys! Keep per Jangle. ---HomfrogHomfrog ^{Tell me a story!}_{Contribulations}Homfrog 18:30, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Showing a sense of humour can help to make a person more approachable, and approachability is relevant to collaboration over encyclopedia articles. Zerrakhi 13:54, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Kukini 18:00, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:ILife edit

Delete per nom --CapitalR 01:48, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Redundancy not needed. Nhprman 03:10, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom --T-rex 05:46, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom Paul^C/_T+ 16:55, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. The Apple_software Template won't catch the reader's eye at all! -- Jokes Free4Me 20:34, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was no consensus, defaults to keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User Cowbell fever edit

Stupid and lacking in humor. Pointless to have around.--Conrad Devonshire ^Talk 05:58, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Condrad is dead on the inside. Since he is dead on the inside, he has no capacity for humor. --mboverload 06:10, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - Complete randomness does not equal humor.--Conrad Devonshire ^Talk 06:19, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Please read the link in the userbox. It is one of the most well known and funniest skits from a show that everyone in the continental united states knows about. --mboverload 06:23, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Inappropriate use of template space. WP:ENC, not "Wikipedia is a repository for crappy jokes in colored boxes." --Cyde Weys 06:17, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- It doesn't say that, and that's not an official policy. --mboverload 06:23, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy. —Andux^␅ 06:24, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete unencyclopedic- but no need to deny the users their userpage fun--Doc ^ask? 11:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom. Nhprman 17:17, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete per Doc. Stifle (talk) 20:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no cowbell for me Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 05:27, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Harmless userbox. Hezzy 21:02, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Conrad obviously doesn't watch enough TV. John R Murray 20:21, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, per Hezzy. — Ian Manka Talk to me‼ 19:48, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:28, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was no consensus, defaults to keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User love you edit

Stupid and lacking in humor. Pointless to have around.--Conrad Devonshire ^Talk 05:58, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Inappropriate use of template space. WP:ENC, not "Wikipedia is a repository for crappy jokes in colored boxes." --Cyde Weys 06:17, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:TOE. Userfy. —Andux^␅ 06:26, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy --mboverload 06:30, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete unencyclopedic- but no need to deny the users their userpage fun--Doc ^ask? 11:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom. Nhprman 17:17, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Stifle (talk) 20:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete this one kinda scares me. Homestarmy 21:24, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Harmless userbox. Hezzy 21:02, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. As per norm. This is an entirely informative userbox which denotes the user as whimsical --ĶĩřβȳFile:KirbySig.JPGŤįɱé Ø 23:29, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Userbox has sexual connotions making it offensive. Sjakkalle (Check!) 08:35, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Wikipedia is not censored, userboxes don't cause holes on the ozone layer, this particular one is funny and used by a lot of people. Save the userboxes!!--many Revolutions 05:58, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:29, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I see no reason whatsoever for this to be removed. It's not offensive, it's not scary and it's not sexual. Wikipedia isn't censored so why should the userboxes be censored? --Godlesswanderer 13:34, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Possibly T1, probably deletable even if in code on a user's page. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 21:49, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Perfect for Wikipedians who wish to declare their love! There's no reason to delete this or any other of the above-mentioned userboxes. --D-Day^{(Wouldn't you like to be a pepper too?}) 23:10, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Subst'd, now delete Shanel ^§ 01:41, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User Longcat edit

Stupid and lacking in humor. Pointless to have around.--Conrad Devonshire ^Talk 05:58, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Userfy Per nomination --mboverload 06:15, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Inappropriate use of template space. WP:ENC, not "Wikipedia is a repository for crappy jokes in colored boxes." --Cyde Weys 06:17, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete unencyclopedic- but no need to deny the users their userpage fun--Doc ^ask? 11:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom. Nhprman 17:17, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, inappropriate for template space. Stifle (talk) 20:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I don't get it. Homestarmy 21:26, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- It is a 4chan meme/cliche`, look it up in ED or watch a flash animation Kotepho 22:54, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Too obscure. -TwilightPhoenix 03:26, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Longcat is going to be Deleteddddddddddd Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 05:28, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy Eh. Atltais 19:28, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I usually stick up for even the dumbest userboxes, but for this one, I will make an exception. Delete it.Hezzy 21:04, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and Delete. Not for the reasons stated in Conrad's nomination, but this is less of an Internet meme marker than a vanity userbox.

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User IP edit

Has no use and is possibly misleading or confusing.--Conrad Devonshire ^Talk 05:58, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - It is possible to adjust this userbox, so that the IP address changes. Check out my user page for an example... It's there, somewhere, but the IP can be changed, via a mode. I think it's...

Keep this is a classic internet joke and something that will not go unmissed by Wikipedia's large technical community. --mboverload 06:11, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Inappropriate use of template space. WP:ENC, not "Wikipedia is a repository for crappy jokes in colored boxes." --Cyde Weys 06:17, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- It's not a crappy joke =( --mboverload 06:19, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - It's a technical joke! :) TheKeithD 22:13, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy. —Andux^␅ 06:27, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It's funny. It helps to find geeks with a sense of humor. If it makes even one script kiddie attack himself, it's worth the precious template space (probably 600 bytes) it uses in gold. Friendly Neighbour 07:03, 13 May 2006 (UTC) expanded 20:10, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete unencyclopedic- but no need to deny the users their userpage fun--Doc ^ask? 11:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Classic relic. Free speech. Let us be free. -- Shell <e> 12:10, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom. Wikipedia is not the place for unregulated free speech. Nhprman 17:17, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep WP:POINT. --Pilo t|guy 19:45, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The joke's not half bad, and the article on 127.0.0.1 doesn't seem to be either. Homestarmy 21:28, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Userboxes are serious business it seems. TheKeithD 22:13, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
keep --GeorgeMoney ^T·C 22:16, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Not finding it funny is not a reason for deletion. Besides, its a classic joke. Also, on the other hand, it may show that the user is knowledgable in computer and internet related areas. -TwilightPhoenix 23:14, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep oh no we shall run out of space on wikipedia because of userboxes for they will be the fall of wikipedia userboxes i mean not running out of space D: D: D: Atltais 19:48, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Harmless userbox. Hezzy 21:05, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Humorous userbox. No negative connotations. ddcc 04:29, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Misleading. Sjakkalle (Check!) 14:16, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I support the retention of most userboxes; in this case, however, the IP address is rather central to the identity of people here, and using false IP addresses is a real problem. Despite this being related to an internet joke (which is fine), I think this hits a little too close to the problems we have related to spoofing and sockpuppetry; perhaps my concerns are ill founded (if so, please set me right on this matter), but these are my concerns nonetheless. User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 16:46, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It doesn't harm anybody, and it's really good for putting on your IP's userpage, if you want to redirect users wanting to send you a message or something to your real userpage, or vice versa.212.242.144.172 20:27, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:29, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
KEEEEEEEP You should not nominate a userbox for deletion just because you don't like it.--Brian1979 18:57, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
KEEEEEEEEP (with one extra E) --Oblivious 22:36, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
KEEEEEEEEEP Partly because I loved the userbox so much I put it on my own page and partly so I can do another KEEEEEEEEP with an extra E. — Jeremy | Talk 06:56, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy/subst:; it's hilarious, but still userfy. smurrayinchester^{(User), (Talk)} 21:26, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User IPv6 edit

Has no use and is possibly misleading or confusing.--Conrad Devonshire ^Talk 05:58, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Probably the most informative and useful of the lot. Introduces people to IPv6 --mboverload 06:12, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Inappropriate use of template space. WP:ENC, not "Wikipedia is a repository for crappy jokes in colored boxes." --Cyde Weys 06:17, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- It doesn't say that, and that's not an official policy. --mboverload 06:22, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy. —Andux^␅ 06:27, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per mboverload. Friendly Neighbour 07:05, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete unencyclopedic- but no need to deny the users their userpage fun--Doc ^ask? 11:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Nice intro to IP6. Free speech. Let us be free. -- Shell <e> 12:13, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:NOT. Speech is regulated on Wikipedia. This is not MySpace. Nhprman 17:17, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We're not saying this is myspace, we're saying all this is a WP:POINT and to keep the userbox war going. Period. --Pilo t|guy 21:11, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is a way to end the Userbox war, and to get Userboxes out of Template Space once and for all. Unencyclopedic content doesn't belong there. Period. This is not a WP:POINT nomination. The nominator's statement is clearly not "making a point" under those guidelines. I suggest people actually go and read the WP:POINT guideline and decide for themselves. - Nhprman 03:43, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per nom. Nhprman 17:17, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep See my comment in the one above. -TwilightPhoenix 19:15, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Harmless userbox. Hezzy 21:05, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. It is a userbox showing the user uses IPv6. You might as well delete every other Computing userbox if you delete this! ~Linuxerist E/L/T 11:42, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:31, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep it is not just a joke but a possible "intro" to IP6 as well, which most certainly makes it "encyclopedic" Yet another lame sig I came up with ^{T | @ | C} 01:49, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was no consensus, defaults to keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User SNL edit

Stupid and lacking in humor. Pointless to have around.--Conrad Devonshire ^Talk 05:58, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Inappropriate use of template space. WP:ENC, not "Wikipedia is a repository for crappy jokes in colored boxes." --Cyde Weys 06:17, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- It doesn't say that, and that's not an official policy. --mboverload 06:21, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete this nomination is redundant, see above --mboverload 06:25, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete unencyclopedic- but no need to deny the users their userpage fun--Doc ^ask? 11:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom. Nhprman 17:17, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Note that this template is listed twice, along with a few others. Kotepho 23:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep because Happy Fun Ball is not something to be toyed with lightly. Seriously though, it's just humor. It's not hurting anyone. Replicate this vote for the duplicate version. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 17:47, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Harmless userboxHezzy 21:06, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Funny Userbox, good reference to SNL. вάвŷ pάйĉнǿ 20:16, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Disagree re: funny. Peas 04:33, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I endorse the reasoning of Someguy0830. DCB4W 23:37, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:32, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. If I understood this, it would probably be T1. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 21:51, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was no consensus, defaults to keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User sdrawkcab edit

Stupid and lacking in humor. Pointless to have around.--Conrad Devonshire ^Talk 05:58, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Per nomination --mboverload 06:16, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Inappropriate use of template space. WP:ENC, not "Wikipedia is a repository for crappy jokes in colored boxes." --Cyde Weys 06:17, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
~~.yfresU~~ Userfy. —Andux^␅ 06:31, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete unencyclopedic- but no need to deny the users their userpage fun--Doc ^ask? 11:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
peeK. Stifle (talk) 20:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy. Harmless joke template, but not very useful. Sjakkalle (Check!) 08:42, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
~~peeK gnortS~~. Strong keep. Extremelly funny. Not getting a joke is no reason for wanting to delete it. Or maybe it is? Friendly Neighbour 14:35, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
~~peeK ythgiM~~. Mighty keep. Funny, would take more space deleted... userboxes don't kill, you know.--many Revolutions 05:50, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, user-ifying it would take more space, and it's harmless. +Hexagon1 (talk) 09:47, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
!peeK (Keep!, if you're 'lacking in humor'...) -- Jokes Free4Me 19:39, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:33, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
peeK kluH ehT sA gnortS I like to be backwards! Stupid WSP. This place should have a category for userboxen. --HomfrogHomfrog ^{Tell me a story!}_{Contribulations}Homfrog 18:22, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep every which way but Sunday. Just because you think it's stupid and unfunny, that doesn;t mean it should be deleted.--Brian1979 18:42, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
.aidepikiW ot lufmrah si taht VOP deweks ylsuoivbo na evah yeht taht wohs taht sexobresu evah ohw elpoep ro ,sexobresu kcatta ,yas tuoba yrrow dna sexobresu romuh gnitaerht-non tuoba gniyrrow pots ot deen snimda esehT .thgir no dewercs daeh rieht evah ohw evoba elpoep dna TNIOP:PW rep sa peek gnorts yreV -Aknorals 10:33, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User asplode edit

Stupid and lacking in humor. Pointless to have around.--Conrad Devonshire ^Talk 05:58, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Inappropriate use of template space. WP:ENC, not "Wikipedia is a repository for crappy jokes in colored boxes." --Cyde Weys 06:17, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy Per nomination --mboverload 06:18, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy. —Andux^␅ 06:33, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete unencyclopedic- but no need to deny the users their userpage fun--Doc ^ask? 11:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It's called an inside joke, guys. What? You're gonna go around deleting all your base are belong to us templates, too? Besides, this site lacks homestar runner templates. If you do delete this, at least make Strong Bad templates or others. Bluepaladin 20:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Bluepaladin. —Akrabbim 00:27, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Homestarrunner reference.
Keep. Viva la userboxen! --preschooler @heart my talk - contribs 15:41, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
THIS KEEP VOTE, PER BLUEPALADIN, A SPLODE. Seahen 16:23, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, obvious humor. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by TheTrueSora (talk • contribs) .
Keep As per the inspiration for my username, come on, it'd be kinda hypocritical for me to vote delete on this one. Homestarmy 19:17, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Bluepaladin. Dee man45 19:59, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per BluePaladin. --DJ Wings- Freestyle here 20:01, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Harmless userbox.Hezzy 21:07, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Harmless userbox, let there be some humor for crying out loud. EASports 05:29, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Mostly harmless. Friendly Neighbour 14:39, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
~~Baleeted!~~Keep. Homestarrunner reference.--M @r ē ino 15:11, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per basically everyone --- good god, man, do you even know what a userbox *is*? UnDeadGoat 23:28, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Seriously speedy delete after having lost out with {{user not drug-free}}. It's an unhappy face.Myrtone 13:00, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per User:Cyde. — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 20:05, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per, like UnDeadGoat said, pretty much everyone Doug A Scott ^{(4 8 15 16 23 42)} 00:14, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep I haven't much to add, other than what everyone else has said as to supporting the box. Deleting this box is a slippery slope, when it comes to the status of other boxes.--DoctorWorm7 05:03, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Is it just me, or do humourous userboxes keep getting put up for deletion? If this continues, we'll eventually have a drab, humourless wiki. --Falcon9x5 12:52, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:34, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

STRONG BAD KEEP. I wike Homestaw Wunnew! This is a wefewence! Please to be keeping on Wikipedia, no DELETED! EVER! Keep per BluePaladin --HomfrogHomfrog ^{Tell me a story!}_{Contribulations}Homfrog 18:19, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. What's different about this userbox from any other? This user box says I speak 1337, while the one you want to delete says my head asplode. What's the difference? Do you not want to know that my head is asploding? Keep per BluePaladin. TheProgrammingGuy 20:26, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Why should this get deleted? Isn't there a lot of joke userboxes? Whats different about this one? Pece Kocovski 10:10, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep whats the point in deleting it? arnt we allowed to express ourself on our user page? the only reason i would see it deleted if ti cropped up on articles, but ive only seen it on user pages, (plus i have it on mine ;P)Darth Rage 19:12, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was moot - deleted by Cyde. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User iamalemming-en edit

Stupid and lacking in humor. Pointless to have around.--Conrad Devonshire ^Talk 05:58, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Inappropriate use of template space. WP:ENC, not "Wikipedia is a repository for crappy jokes in colored boxes." --Cyde Weys 06:17, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy Per nomination --mboverload 06:18, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete unencyclopedic- but no need to deny the users their userpage fun--Doc ^ask? 11:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - This was nominated for deletion yesterday, too. Nhprman 17:22, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Wow, user Conrad Devonshire has userboxes on his page, and he presumes to tell others that THEIR user boxes are stupid and pointless. How hypocritical. Give Peace A Chance 08:34, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Harmless userbox. Hezzy 21:08, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Who is one person to tell others that something isn't funny? La Pizza11 00:36, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was moot - deleted by Cyde. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User iamafish-en edit

The vote was to delete it. Myrtone 09:04, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stupid and lacking in humor. Pointless to have around.--Conrad Devonshire ^Talk 05:58, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Inappropriate use of template space. WP:ENC, not "Wikipedia is a repository for crappy jokes in colored boxes." --Cyde Weys 06:17, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom --mboverload 06:26, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete unencyclopedic- but no need to deny the users their userpage fun--Doc ^ask? 11:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - This was nominated for deletion yesterday. Nhprman 17:24, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Wow, user Conrad Devonshire has userboxes on his page, and he presumes to tell others that THEIR user boxes are stupid and pointless. How hypocritical. Give Peace A Chance 08:40, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Harmless userbox.Hezzy 21:08, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete stupid userbox Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 01:10, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or unDelete How did this get deleted already? This is a good userbox for swimming enthusiasts. It also has a very Zen message. Why is this stupid? -MrFizyx 16:51, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was no consensus, defaults to keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User LSOH edit

Stupid and lacking in humor. Pointless to have around.--Conrad Devonshire ^Talk 05:58, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Inappropriate use of template space. WP:ENC, not "Wikipedia is a repository for crappy jokes in colored boxes." --Cyde Weys 06:17, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom --mboverload 06:27, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete unencyclopedic- but no need to deny the users their userpage fun--Doc ^ask? 11:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Not right for a template. Subst it and get it out of Template Space. Nhprman 01:36, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Harmless userbox. Hezzy 21:09, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep - if you don't think it's funny, you've never seen the movie it is based on. (Ibaranoff24 10:14, 15 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]
Very serious speedy delete Highly inapropriate template, for glovepuppets only, and it's a very angry face. Myrtone 09:02, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:34, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was no consensus, defaults to keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User Fatmouse edit

Stupid and lacking in humor. Pointless to have around.--Conrad Devonshire ^Talk 05:58, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Inappropriate use of template space. WP:ENC, not "Wikipedia is a repository for crappy jokes in colored boxes." --Cyde Weys 06:17, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete~~Keep per User:Hezzy below --mboverload 06:27, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete unencyclopedic- but no need to deny the users their userpage fun--Doc ^ask? 11:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unencyclopedic. Should not be in Template Space. - Nhprman 17:27, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 05:24, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Conrad seems to not have a sense of humour. shall i nominate all the other userbox templates listed in "Wikipedia/Funny"? I'm sure it would please everyone here.

Keep: A lot of people use the template and like it. You guys seem to have nothing else to do, other than incite flame wars, and try to delete every template that does not suit your group/pack/gang's tastes, tand then back your pointless deletions up with "it doesn't fit on wikipedia." or "it's not encyclopedic". if that's so, then NO ONE should have a userpage here... "humour is relative"...i beg to differ. User:Raccoon Fox - Talk 15:40, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep. Harmless userbox. Hezzy 21:10, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. There is no deletion, only fatmouse. ~ Simulacrum Caputosiscensor me17:54, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete "I like it, it's funny, it's harmless" are quite weak arguments when it comes to debating if this should be deleted or not. This is pollution of template namespace, it's ok on usersace, it's ok if users wrtite fatmouse on their userpages, the existence of the template isn't. -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 23:39, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Very serious speedy delete For glovepuppets only, and it's a very angry face. Myrtone 09:10, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:38, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep interesting internet phenominon reference, although it could be made more humerous by using a more direct quote derivative. Yet another lame sig I came up with ^{T | @ | C} 01:54, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was no consensus, defaults to keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User MrDucky edit

Has no purpose and is possibly misleading or confusing.--Conrad Devonshire ^Talk 05:58, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Inappropriate use of template space. WP:ENC, not "Wikipedia is a repository for crappy jokes in colored boxes." --Cyde Weys 06:17, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom --mboverload 06:29, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy —Andux^␅ 06:34, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete unencyclopedic- but no need to deny the users their userpage fun--Doc ^ask? 11:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unencyclopedic. Should not be in Template Space. - Nhprman 17:27, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Mr.Ducky told me to vote Delete on his userboxes Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 05:33, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Harmless userbox.Hezzy 21:10, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep! Why is this harming anyone!?! Do you have a problem with Mr. Ducky! Did he burn your house down?!? Did he steal your car!?! What did Mr. Ducky do to hurt anyone!?!?!?!?!?!?! Why Mr. Ducky!?!? Why, Santa, Why!?!?

DuctoMan 18:47, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:39, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was subst and delete. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User MrDucky2 edit

File:Mr rubber ducky.gif

This user has no idea who Mr Ducky is, but wanted to join in the fun.

Has no purpose and is possibly misleading or confusing.--Conrad Devonshire ^Talk 05:58, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Inappropriate use of template space. WP:ENC, not "Wikipedia is a repository for crappy jokes in colored boxes." --Cyde Weys 06:17, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom --mboverload 06:28, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy —Andux^␅ 06:35, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete unencyclopedic- but no need to deny the users their userpage fun--Doc ^ask? 11:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unencyclopedic. Should not be in Template Space. - Nhprman 17:27, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Definate keep Duke toaster 20:12, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Harmless userbox.Hezzy 21:11, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:39, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was subst and delete. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User MrDucky3 edit

File:Mr rubber ducky.gif

This user may, or may
not be Mr Ducky.

Has no purpose and is possibly misleading or confusing.--Conrad Devonshire ^Talk 05:58, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Inappropriate use of template space. WP:ENC, not "Wikipedia is a repository for crappy jokes in colored boxes." --Cyde Weys 06:17, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom --mboverload 06:28, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy —Andux^␅ 06:35, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete unencyclopedic- but no need to deny the users their userpage fun--Doc ^ask? 11:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unencyclopedic. Should not be in Template Space. - Nhprman 17:27, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Harmless userbox. Hezzy 21:12, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:39, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Serious speedy delete Another glovepuppet template to me me angry. Myrtone 13:58, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete junk Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 02:14, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was subst and delete. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User Alien edit

ALIEN

This user will never look at spaghetti the same way again.

Stupid and lacking in humor. Pointless to have around.--Conrad Devonshire ^Talk 05:58, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Inappropriate use of template space. WP:ENC, not "Wikipedia is a repository for crappy jokes in colored boxes." --Cyde Weys 06:17, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom --mboverload 06:28, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete unencyclopedic- but no need to deny the users their userpage fun--Doc ^ask? 11:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unencyclopedic. Should not be in Template Space. - Nhprman 17:27, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete please save some space on the servers. :-) Funnybunny (^talk/_QRVS) 03:06, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It should be noted that deleting things on Wikipedia (save for images) don't free up space on the server. —THIS IS MESSED OCKER (TALK) 19:06, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep Harmless userbox. Hezzy 21:12, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep This is a userbox for indicating that a user is a fan of the Alien movies, and is therefore not pointless. --GJ 09:51, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is kind of technical, so bear with me. It's "pointless" (and "unencylopedic", as I said above) only in Template space, where it resides now. Templates are supposed to be for tools that help create the encyclopedia. The nominators of these boxes want them to be moved over to the USER space, where they can still exist on your user page - in the same form, shape and size - but will be clearly out of the main space where the encyclopedia is written. By supporting "Keep" you are, perhaps unwittingly, saying you want it to stay in the Template space, where it risks being deleted. It CANNOT BE DELETED in the User space. If people support "Delete, and Userfy" it becomes "Userfied" and SAVED for users to continue using without the risk of deletion. Isn't that what everyone wants? I have no idea why this wasn't explained better before, but here it is now. Does this clear things up? - Nhprman 17:30, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:40, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was subst and delete. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User alien edit

This user believes in aliens and lies naked on his or her rooftop, waiting to be picked up.

Stupid and lacking in humor. Pointless to have around.--Conrad Devonshire ^Talk 05:58, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Inappropriate use of template space. WP:ENC, not "Wikipedia is a repository for crappy jokes in colored boxes." --Cyde Weys 06:17, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom --mboverload 06:28, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete unencyclopedic- but no need to deny the users their userpage fun--Doc ^ask? 11:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unencyclopedic. Should not be in Template Space. - Nhprman 17:27, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete how many more alien userboxes are there? Funnybunny (^talk/_QRVS) 03:09, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 05:27, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Cyde. -Ambuj Saxena (talk) 13:36, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and Weak Delete It is a crappy userbox, and is unencyclopediedic. However read Wp:UBX. They will not be used in articles,they are for making your userpage not suck. The Gerg 16:29, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Or suck more in the case of this userbox. (But, hey, if someone wants their userpage to suck more, who am I to stop them?) Bucketsofg✐ 20:43, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Bucketsofg✐ 20:43, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Harmless userbox. Hezzy 21:13, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:41, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Cyde --Alphachimp ^talk 01:36, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User antiderivative edit

Stupid and lacking in humor. Pointless to have around.--Conrad Devonshire ^Talk 05:58, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Inappropriate use of template space. WP:ENC, not "Wikipedia is a repository for crappy jokes in colored boxes." --Cyde Weys 06:17, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom --mboverload 06:28, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy —Andux^␅ 06:37, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete unencyclopedic- but no need to deny the users their userpage fun--Doc ^ask? 11:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst or Userfy, this one is actually rather funny... --T-rex 15:00, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Wandering Star 15:20, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This one actually isn't too bad. I'm not sure if I meant to nominate this one or not.--Conrad Devonshire ^Talk 16:53, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unencyclopedic. Should not be in Template Space. - Nhprman 17:27, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep **sigh** Here we go again with the userbox wars. As the creator of the userbox, it's funny for the ones who understand and/or have taken Calculus. I didn't know a userbox that was used by almost 100 people was lacking in humor. Jeez, it seems you can't please everyone. Douglasr007 23:31, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Come on. Lighten up. Thistheman 23:50, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Inappropriate template space. Daniel5127, 01:33, 13 May 2006(UTC)
Keep It's funny, and I don't even use it. --DavidHOzAu 05:31, 14 May 2006 (UTC)Comment moved up to blanket vote.[reply]
Keep It appears to be a spoof on the "my antidrug" ads, and the integral is THE antiderivative...it's amusing to some and not to others...can't please everyone...if you don't like it, don't use it! S. Ellis 05:56, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It's a userbox, what's wrong with it? All userboxes are in the template space. If it were in the article space I'ld have a problem with it, but it isn't. Timrem 16:02, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep If one knows calculus it's quite appropriate. Atltais 19:26, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. harmless userbox. Hezzy 21:14, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment—If one really knows calculus, then it's obvious that the graphic makes no sense mathematically. That being said, I don't get it...is it supposed to be like the "sex = ecstacy" joke with the exponential function? Ardric47 22:53, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment What do you mean the graphic makes no sense? The graphic is hypothetically asking for the indefinite integral of 3x². I couldn't just put the integral symbol up on there because then it would be asking for the sum of nothing. As stated above, it's making fun of those anti-drug commercials where they put messages at the end of commercials such as " |P|A|R|E|N|T|S| The antidrug". Hopefully, that clears up some confusion. Douglasr007 23:13, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment You forgot the "dx" Timrem 23:15, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Oh wow... I didn't even notice that until you pointed that out, Timrem. Good point. TauNeutrino 23:25, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Oh crap. You're right. Douglasr007 23:29, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I was referring to the lack of "dx". Ardric47 01:46, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I like this template. It is funny and links us math geeks together. Also, adding a dx would crowd the picture. It is a nice square-ish picture without the dx. --Shanedidona 03:36, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Actually, I tested out adding the dx and it would actually still be the same size. It's just that the current TfD notice makes the table bigger. Douglasr007 03:57, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I love this, it's funny. Varco 05:02, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Again, I'll repeat myself from earlier, let them enjoy the clever user templates which do not get applied to articles and that are harmless. Andrew D White 05:09, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, someone please explain the joke to this kid.--Gephart 06:06, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Good user box for math/sci oriented users. -MrFizyx 16:33, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per various above, good math joke. Peas 04:36, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I actually prefered the userbox without the image but still... JYOuyang 05:07, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Come on, it's funny. ---You're My Juli e t 16:55, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It's harmless, and userbox wars are pointless. Lordhatrus 20:44, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Relatively witty, and ... how can a userbox be "unencylopedic?" We are not the articles, and who says that displaying humor isn't conveying important information about a user. - IstvanWolf 05:35, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This is like alot of userboxes. You may not find it funny but some do. Stop trying to delete userboxes as this is something that users enjoy. Don't like userboxes? Stop looking at user pages. Leave them ALONE! Jangle 07:44, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:41, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. User pages are not part of the encyclopedia proper. - Corbin ^{Be excellent} 01:52, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Great math joke, agree with CorbinSimpson. --Alphachimp ^talk 01:37, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep not getting a joke isn't grounds for deleation. ---J.S (t|c) 04:33, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User Cowbell + edit

Stupid and lacking in humor. Pointless to have around.--Conrad Devonshire ^Talk 06:34, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per above. Keep 'em coming! --Cyde Weys 06:36, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy. —Andux^␅ 06:38, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep see above comments about me needing more cowbell! --mboverload 06:40, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete unencyclopedic- but no need to deny the users their userpage fun--Doc ^ask? 11:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unencyclopedic. Should not be in Template Space. - Nhprman 17:27, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This is amusing and an Internet meme. It is relevant. Dev920 22:40, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It's a userbox, let us enjoy that privilege. Also, pay attention to Cyde Weys comment above. Just shows us that he's been wanting to do this. Stop him, please. (I apologize for my own bias, but it is clear what he wants to do.) Thistheman 23:53, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cyde hates Wikipedians? =P --mboverload @ 00:03, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep in counter to this asinine load of crap that is a userbox crusade. They're USERBOXES! They are meant to be used on userspace and have been accepted until one or two people got a burr up their... well I'll stop their to be civil...--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 03:16, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I've got a fever, and the only cure is this template. — xaosflux ^Talk 03:49, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Give Peace A Chance 06:15, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep: No reason to delete it.Hezzy 20:21, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Harmless. The Gerg 00:13, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. No point in deletion of harmless userboxen. Miwa * talk * contribs ^_^ 01:13, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Good userbox for music enthusiasts of a sort. -MrFizyx 16:53, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, per Xaosflux and Lordhatrus. — Ian Manka Talk to me‼ 19:47, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This is like alot of userboxes. You may not find it funny but some do. Stop trying to delete userboxes as this is something that users enjoy. Don't like userboxes? Stop looking at user pages. Leave them ALONE! Jangle 07:44, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:42, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Those that advocate deletion obviously don't have enough cowbell ;-) Also, they may not understand the refernece. --Brian1979 18:31, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. No reason, it is funny. What's the point of these userbox wars? If you don't think it's funny, don't use it.
Keep. We have to really explore the space with this. You know, last time I checked, we just don't have a whole lot of templates that feature the cowbell. I'm usually anti-userbox, but if Bruce Dickenson wants more cowbell, we should probably give him more cowbell. By the time this TfD is over, we'll all be wearing gold-plated diapers. -Gene Frenkle 14:37, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Just because one particular person doesn't "get it" doesn't mean it isn't funny. And frankly, whether it is funny or not is irrelevant. If people want to use this userbox, why not let them? Fairsing 18:46, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User Towel edit

Stupid and lacking in humor. Pointless to have around.--Conrad Devonshire ^Talk 07:00, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Doesn't belong in template space. --Cyde Weys 07:06, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy. —Andux^␅ 08:39, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete unencyclopedic- but no need to deny the users their userpage fun--Doc ^ask? 11:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - why not? Davidpk212 15:40, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unencyclopedic. Should not be in Template Space. - Nhprman 17:27, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep - Could indicate that the user is very knowledgeable about The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, rather than just being a joke. -- Zawersh 23:01, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I don't see what makes it different from the user42 one, both are quotes from the same book(s). This one may be slightly less recognisable, but should that be something negative? --From 23:12, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The towel joke being one of the more recognizable ones regarding The Guide, I am sure that there are a number of people who find it funny. As far as Personally, I find it no more needless than a large majority of userboxes. —Akrabbim 00:25, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I see nothing in the criteria for deletion that allows the deletion of templates on the basis that they are "Stupid" or "lacking in humour". This is an inproper nomination and there should be no action on the basis of it. If someone wants to nominate it for deletion, let them do it properly, and we'll go from there. Blarneytherinosaur 08:50, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and agreed with Blarney. Stupid and unfunny is in the eye of the beholder. The massive TfDing doesn't help either. Antipode 13:13, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep agree with Blarney and Adam. And also Zawersh. Icecradle 15:06, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Like I've said several times, it's all relative. Your reason for tossing it is an opinion, and to say that, you've probably never read "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy". So, cut the opinions, it has as much right to stay as you do.--DJ Wings- Freestyle here 15:14, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Well known humour from "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy". Note - I use this userbox on my own user page.--Takver 16:00, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Harmless userbox.Hezzy 21:15, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep or Userfy. Mostly harmless. ;) -Fadookie ^Talk 23:01, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, for god's sake, keep! One of the funniest userboxes going around. If you don't get it, read the frigging books. --Closedmouth 06:38, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- You seem to be operating under the mistaken assumption that there is a correlation between not understanding the humor of templates and thinking that they are unencyclopedic. For what it's worth I have read the "trilogy" thrice. --Cyde Weys 00:33, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. This userbox is, in fact, very funny, and not worthless. --GJ 09:48, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete Minglex 16:11, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep to delete this, you'd have to be a jerk, a complete kneebiter. -MrFizyx 19:00, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. If you think this is stupid or not funny, you couldn't have read the books. There's nothing bad about it, and great for any Hitchhiker fan (such as me!). Also, if you look at the page on Wikipedia:Userboxes/Humor you'll find that almost ALL of them, (including this) are proposed for deletion! Stop the madness, people!! Red Alien 23:58, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep userboxes don't need to be encyclopedic, they're used on user pages, not articles... and besides, everyone need to know where their towel is... - Adolphus79 00:31, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Super Strong Keep you have to have this so people can see what others are like!!!! Rdunn 16:24, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Guide fans, let us rally against the people who have no idea what the guide is! But seriously, this is actually quite funny if you like Adams-ish humour (I happen to be one of those people). --Green451 20:35, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It is funny if you know what it is about. --Ton e 20:44, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It is Vital to people ediding artilces about H2G2 becose it shows they have a byist about the subject at hand--E-Bod 21:02, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Useful identifying labels such as this need to be in template form so that they can be copied easily, and to avoid wasting space by over-substing.--M @r ē ino 22:24, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Serious speedy delete For glovepuppets only! This user is angry.Myrtone 09:14, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:43, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep There has been very few good arguments for the deletion of the 'towel' userbox. 'Stupid and lacking in humour' is hardly a viable argument, and if you want 'unencyclopedic', well... Userboxes themselves could be considered 'unencyclopedic'. It's not as if this userbox is slanderous or politically incorrect, and it's not hurting anyone. -- Paul Hooper 17:53, May 17, 2006 (UTC)
Me Again Sorry if im breaking rules but why do we have them in the first place if there are arguments about deleating them? Rdunn 20:37, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
SERIOUSLY KEEP This box shows that the user has read the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. The reason you dont think it's funny is beacuse it's an in-joke. DEATH TO THE SOVIETS!! 12:33, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Showing a sense of humour can help to make a person more approachable, and approachability is relevant to collaboration over encyclopedia articles. Not only that, but the userbox also indicates an area of knowledge. Zerrakhi 13:52, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User Person edit

Stupid and lacking in humor. Pointless to have around.--Conrad Devonshire ^Talk 07:00, 13 May 2006 (UTC)--[reply]

Delete - Doesn't belong in template space. --Cyde Weys 07:06, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete unencyclopedic- but no need to deny the users their userpage fun--Doc ^ask? 11:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unencyclopedic. Should not be in Template Space. - Nhprman 17:27, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. If the inclusionists, the deletionists, the Lutherans, the Catholics, the pedants, and the gays can all have their own userboxes, the person who just wants to be considered a person should also be allowed their own userbox.Dev920 22:42, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Those boxes are next up for deletion, more than likely. None of them should be in template space - which exists to help us edit an encyclopedia, not create and disseminate clever or funny Userboxes (or boxes like this.) You do realize that even the deleters, above, want them only out of Template space, but available for use in User space, right? I don't think that message is getting through. - Nhprman 01:47, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep per Dev920 -- Zawersh 23:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep rather useful Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 05:26, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Users' biographies bad. Userboxes good. Page Up 12:12, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep. Its stupid and and lacking in humour. But everyone has the right to define their personality. -Ambuj Saxena (talk) 13:31, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This userbox is useful for me in expressing who I am. Please don't try to delete useful things from Wikipedia. Jimpartame 19:10, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP: expresses one's lack of concetration on race. It symbolizes racial harmony.
Keep. I was not aware that this userbox was supposed to be humorous. It is no less useless than any other userbox. Miwa * talk * contribs ^_^ 01:40, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The nom is incorrect in thinking that all templates that are "lacking in humor" should be deleted. In fact, many people seem to believe the opposite. I oppose both extremes.--M @r ē ino 18:22, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, it's not 'funny', but it serves as a nice, thoughtful replacement from the gazillion 'this user is asian', 'this user has green eyes', 'this user has two hands' userboxes. Why is the nom on a crusade to delete every 'fun' userbox in existence, by the way? --many Revolutions 05:44, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It sends out a Strong anti rasist messag that builds Wiki Comunity and Helpfs Wikipidia Flow. It is sends a stron message that Rasism is not Tolerated on Wikipidia--E-Bod 21:05, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep. This is one of the less frivolous userboxes imaginable. I can't believe it's on Wikipedia:Userboxes/Humor, much less nominated for deletion. DCB4W 03:32, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:43, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Bucketsofg✐ 14:55, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
'Keep It's the only Userbox I would consider having, and I feel it can be a helpful reminder. Skittle 16:32, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was no consensus, defaults to keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User smartass edit

Stupid and lacking in humor. Pointless to have around.--Conrad Devonshire ^Talk 07:00, 13 May 2006 (UTC)--[reply]

Delete - Doesn't belong in template space. --Cyde Weys 07:06, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy Finally, me in a box! --mboverload 07:07, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy. —Andux^␅ 08:40, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete unencyclopedic- but no need to deny the users their userpage fun--Doc ^ask? 11:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unencyclopedic. Should not be in Template Space. - Nhprman 17:27, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Harmless userbox.Hezzy 21:16, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It's too large for my taste, but it's a harmless userbox. What's all this "unencyclopedic" mumb jumbo all about? These are user boxes. They're just for users to have fun on their homepages. - Michael Goonan_(talk) 02:27, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Let me explain. The Userboxes can still be on User pages even if they are deleted from Template space. They should not exist in Template space, which is reserved for tools for creating articles. They are only "unencyclopedic" when they are templates. Once they're out of template space, the problem will go away. If misguided users keep all their "favorite" boxes in Template space, they could very well be nominated for deletion again. Please consider deleting them as templates but saving them in User space. Nhprman 03:21, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Userfy. Self-deprecation is not offensive, but this template is rather narrow. Sjakkalle (Check!) 08:41, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This userbox is about how a perspn edits wikipedia it is a nother ways of saying Template:user screw--E-Bod 21:09, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep It can function as a disclaimer for customers (like me) whose humor might be misunderstood. --JackLumber 13:39, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:44, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Bucketsofg✐ 23:41, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not appropriate. --Alphachimp ^talk 01:35, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User pirate edit

Stupid and lacking in humor. Pointless to have around.--Conrad Devonshire ^Talk 07:00, 13 May 2006 (UTC)--[reply]

Delete - Doesn't belong in template space. --Cyde Weys 07:06, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy. —Andux^␅ 08:40, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete unencyclopedic- but no need to deny the users their userpage fun--Doc ^ask? 11:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- pirates are better than ninjas --T-rex 15:01, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unencyclopedic. Should not be in Template Space. - Nhprman 17:27, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This userbox has been nominated twice today, shouldn't the top nomination be removed? Homestarmy 21:31, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and show the plank to anyone making points. — xaosflux ^Talk 03:50, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep (some of us really are pirates). (Bjorn Tipling 04:40, 14 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]
Strong Keep Wow, user Conrad Devonshire has userboxes on his page, and he presumes to tell others that THEIR user boxes are stupid and pointless. How hypocritical. Give Peace A Chance 08:42, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep harmless userboxHezzy 21:17, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep I see no reason to delete it--while nerdy, the "debate" between Pirates vs. Ninjas still helps to define a user. authraw 02:04, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:44, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User nj edit

Stupid and lacking in humor. Pointless to have around.--Conrad Devonshire ^Talk 07:00, 13 May 2006 (UTC)--[reply]

Keep famous on the internet --mboverload 07:06, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Doesn't belong in template space. --Cyde Weys 07:06, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy. —Andux^␅ 08:41, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete unencyclopedic- but no need to deny the users their userpage fun--Doc ^ask? 11:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unencyclopedic. Should not be in Template Space. - Nhprman 17:27, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I like this one.--Great Legacy 06:08, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Its fine but should be fixed up Loompyloompy313 01:34, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. Friendly Neighbour 06:43, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I think there's no need to delete it as its non-political (and possibly informative). If there's any political angle to it, I will reconsider my view. -Ambuj Saxena (talk) 13:26, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Harmless userbox. Hezzy 21:18, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Harmless userbox. I vote to have you deleted because, in my opinion, you are Stupid and lacking in humor. Pointless to have around. --Muchosucko 00:20, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep I see no reason to delete it--while nerdy, the "debate" between Pirates vs. Ninjas still helps to define a user. authraw 02:21, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It's not offensive or anything, and we want it on our user pages! Mr Bisciut 21:38, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. No harm done. P.H. - Kyoukan, UASC 16:38, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:45, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP cmon conrad.... its a user page, not an encyclopedia entry. see my page even says that: "This is a Wikipedia user page. This is not an encyclopedia article." Leave the ninjas alone. Qleem 06:49, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User nj2 edit

Stupid and lacking in humor. Pointless to have around.--Conrad Devonshire ^Talk 07:00, 13 May 2006 (UTC)--[reply]

Delete - Doesn't belong in template space. --Cyde Weys 07:06, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy. —Andux^␅ 08:41, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete unencyclopedic- but no need to deny the users their userpage fun--Doc ^ask? 11:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unencyclopedic. Should not be in Template Space. - Nhprman 17:30, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It's funny, and a clever reference to Real Ultimate Power. --maru (talk) contribs 02:34, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Voting to delete every "inside joke" userbox because you don't get it is, indeed, stupid and lacking in humor. -- Miwa * talk * contribs ^_^ 01:10, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep I see no reason to delete it--while nerdy, the "debate" between Pirates vs. Ninjas still helps to define a user. authraw 02:19, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Authraw. P.H. - Kyoukan, UASC 16:41, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Lighten up. SleepyWeasel 17:28, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:45, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User nj3 edit

Stupid and lacking in humor. Pointless to have around.--Conrad Devonshire ^Talk 07:00, 13 May 2006 (UTC)--[reply]

Keep famous on the internet --mboverload 07:05, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Doesn't belong in template space. --Cyde Weys 07:06, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy. —Andux^␅ 08:42, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete unencyclopedic- but no need to deny the users their userpage fun--Doc ^ask? 11:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Take it outside of template space. Nhprman 17:33, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

HEY, why do you want to delete this?! This userbox IS funny if you are familier with the real ultimate power website! Please let it stay! The ninja will get really mad if you don't!

Strong Keep. Harmless userbox.Hezzy 21:19, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Can we please remember WP:POINT? Userboxen are harmless. - Miwa * talk * contribs ^_^ 01:12, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep I see no reason to delete it--while nerdy, the "debate" between Pirates vs. Ninjas still helps to define a user. authraw 02:19, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Authraw. P.H. - Kyoukan, UASC 16:41, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep- It is fun for the Users. B4n1sh 20:00, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:46, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I keep seeing the same names of users nominating usuerboxes for deletion... Is this about benifiting Wikipedia, or is it about certain users' irrational dislike of userboxes? --Brian1979 18:46, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. On the basis that there is no reason to eliminate it - harmless until proven inflammatory or divisive. ghansel 00:09, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User nj4 edit

Stupid and lacking in humor. Pointless to have around.--Conrad Devonshire ^Talk 07:00, 13 May 2006 (UTC)--[reply]

Delete - Doesn't belong in template space. --Cyde Weys 07:06, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy. —Andux^␅ 08:42, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete unencyclopedic- but no need to deny the users their userpage fun--Doc ^ask? 11:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unencyclopedic. Should not be in Template Space. - Nhprman 17:33, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or change wording If the part about "Don't even try it" was removed, I can see this useful for finding people to help with articles on Ninjitsu. Homestarmy 21:29, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Harmless userbox. Hezzy 21:19, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep I see no reason to delete it--while nerdy, the "debate" between Pirates vs. Ninjas still helps to define a user. authraw 02:20, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep again with the anti-ninja cabal! --M @r ē ino 15:15, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Authraw. P.H. - Kyoukan, UASC 16:41, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:47, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 06:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User Chuck Norris edit

Stupid and lacking in humor. Pointless to have around}}--> Conrad Devonshire ^Talk 07:00, 13 May 2006 (UTC)--[reply]

Keep famous on the internet --mboverload 07:05, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per above.Dev920 22:43, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Doesn't belong in template space. --Cyde Weys 07:06, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per mbo Will (^E_@) T 10:18, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete unencyclopedic- but no need to deny the users their userpage fun--Doc ^ask? 11:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Chuck rules. But let him rule in User Space, not Template Space, which reserved for writing an encyclopedia. Nhprman 17:34, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, what do we need food for in a war? You can't kill dem terrorist sumsabitkes with bread! Remove teh food! --mboverload @ 01:04, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It's supposed to be a joke, and a good one at that. Chuck Norris has recently been a subject of humor in media, mostly on the interweb. --Chris 03:17, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Oh but it's funny. Friendly Neighbour 06:35, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, lest Chuck Norris roundhouse kick us for our insolence. Seriously, though, it's funny and isn't hurting anyone. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 06:38, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Very Strong Keep This is hillarious! Plus, this joke has been spread all over the place. -- Shell <e> 13:15, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Isn't "stupid and lacking in humor" an opinion? Wikipedia needs some lightheartedness here and there. --DJ Wings

T

KEEP. nomination based on POV. viva la userboxen!--preschooler @heart my talk - contribs 15:42, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Incredibly strong keep: Don't deny me of my role model.Cameron Nedland 18:30, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP KEEP KEEP: FunnyHezzy 20:17, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I even hate the Chuck Norris jokes, but there's no point in deletion of harmless userboxen. Miwa * talk * contribs ^_^ 01:14, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Conrad Devonshire, and everyone who votes delete, are going to be roundhouse kicked to the face by you know who. :-( -EdGl 01:27, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and subst. Not funny at all IMO... --Chris (talk) 01:41, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. If we even try to delete this, Chuck will roundhouse kick us.--M @r ē ino 15:15, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It's just a userbox. Wisekwai 16:39, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Conrad exhibits all of the same qualities he claims describe this userbox. But that doesn't mean we should delete HIM --FairNBalanced 19:15, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per basically everyone --- good god, man, do you even know what a userbox *is*? UnDeadGoat 23:23, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I must congradulate Condrad for being so bold! everybody knows not to **** with Chuck... -EdGl 02:29, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. There's a special category for silly or humorous userboxes. Some people consider this joke funny; some do not. Plus, it's famous. Mimz 02:42, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Mimz. P.H. - Kyoukan, UASC 16:41, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Maybe you're stupid and lacking in humor! Chuck Norris is so cool, that once, he killed 5 people in less than a second! The only thing he said after that was, "When Chuck Norris doesn't want girlscout cookies, Chuck Norris doesn't want girlscout cookies!"

Also, did you know, oxygen requires Chuck Norris to Survive? Its true. DuctoMan 18:59, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Bite me. Sidar 00:49, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Anyone voting to delete this is about to receive a roundhouse kick to the head. Which will inhibit your ability to edit Wikipedia. --DreamsReign 04:39, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This is like alot of userboxes. You may not find it funny but some do. Stop trying to delete userboxes as this is something that users enjoy. Don't like userboxes? Stop looking at user pages. Leave them ALONE! Jangle 07:44, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Another attempt by the Wikipedia Secret Police to keep us down and flex their muscle. I'll be damn if I let them do this without a fight! Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 14:47, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete Because I think it's unfunny and badly designed.
Keep The joke is old, but that's no reason to keep it out of wikipedia. --Alphachimp ^talk 01:31, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

< May 12	May 14 >

May 13, 2006 edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete. - Mailer Diablo 06:20, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Pokemonusermadeimages edit

Template:Pokemonusermadeimages (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
A template that is entirely redundant with placing the image page in Category:Pokémon User Made Images (which is on CFD anyway). Additionally, it is unused and more or less unnecessary. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 00:05, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. —MiraLuka 03:12, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Because it was new so it wasn't used yet — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iloveminun (talk • contribs)

Delete 100% usless and unused. --Dom thedude 0 0 1 21:24, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Ignore all these messages. It IS going to be used. It was requested for deletion about 5 minutes after it was created. --I Love Minun 17:33, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete All Pokémon characters (like characters from any other fictional work rely) are copyrighted so all images made by users of anyting "official" Pokémon related would be a copyvio anyway, and I don't see much call for images of unofficial Pokémon-ish fan made characters on Wikipedia. Keep this sort of things to the various fan sites dedicated to Pokémon instead. --Sherool (talk) 18:09, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Pokemon are copyrighted. Making images yourself doesn't circumvent this. So we don't need a template or category for such images, they should be deleted. - Mgm|^(talk) 09:29, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Man in Black and Sherool. John Reid 14:27, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not good. Eisenhower (at war or at peace) (Project) (U T C) 19:26, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete. - Mailer Diablo 06:20, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:ControversialArticle edit

Template:ControversialArticle (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Used as a disclaimer on Abortion (I have removed it until this discussion concludes). It isn't necessary to crowd articles with a disclaimer, just in case, people do not know what Wikipedia is about. If it is kept, at the very least it should be clarified it is not to be used in articles. - Roy Boy ⁸⁰⁰ 23:36, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete! expert? pfft Be bold! --Dom thedude 0 0 1 21:27, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete --mboverload @ 00:04, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=22122&dict=CALD Disclaimer: 1 FORMAL a formal statement saying that you are not legally responsible for something, such as the information given in a book or on the Internet, or that you have no direct involvement in it, 2 SPECIALIZED a formal statement giving up your legal claim to something or ending your connection with it

The box contains no claims about legal responsibility of wikipedia or editors, it is only a warning that the contents of the article can be changed at anytime by anyone. It is not redundant, as the disclaimer at the bottom of the page is purposely small, and there are errors, intentional disinformations (John Seigenthaler), and nationalist POVs (see Talk:Expulsion_of_Germans_after_World_War_II#Nonsense) not only used by people unexpecting the possibility that something that calls itself "encyclopedia" could be inaccurate, but also mirrored on other servers, therefore sending the nonsense info further to other audiences. I have explained the problem with nonsense / biased edits that go undetected for a long time on the talk page of this template. Please read the reasons there before you vote here. According to the definition provided (Cambridge dictionary), this box is not a disclaimer, therefore the Wikipedia:No disclaimer templates doesn't apply here. And the "just in case people don't know what Wikipedia is about" argument is the most silly thing I've ever heard, though a very popular argument among wikipedians - like the Seigenthaler scandal never happened. Do you really expect an average internet user who googles something once twice a week and google sends him to wikipedia (which calls itself "encyclopedia") to research and find out what Wikipedia actually is, at least for this type of articles - a big chatroom for people pushing their beliefs and geeks who want to prove to the world that they are "wise" somehow?

Disagree with the deletion. ackoz

00:13, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what you're smoking, but that's a damn disclaimer. --mboverload @ 01:05, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In answer to your question... yes I expect them to know what Wikipedia is when an edit tab is at the top of almost every page. Furthermore we aren't going to tailor the site for clueless users, we tailor it (as best we can) as an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia's do not have disclaimers at the top of controversial articles. - Roy Boy ⁸⁰⁰ 04:15, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. We can use {{controversial}} instead. —SHINING EYES 01:03, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No disclaimers. —MiraLuka 03:12, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This "warning" is unnecessary as Wikipedia:General disclaimer, which is linked to at the bottom of each page, already states "WIKIPEDIA MAKES NO GUARANTEE OF VALIDITY". It's not our responsibility to type that at the top of each article. If extra warning is deemed necessary, then there is {{controversial}}. -AED 03:55, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reference to the fact that I might be a drug addict, very kind of you Mboverload. No, it's not a disclamier, if you could read, you could read the definition above and as the text makes no claims about legal responsibility, it's not a disclaimer. Furthermore, if wikipedia was encyclopedia, the contents wouldn't be changing constantly with the current "consensus" of editors. I would provide consistent information. Which it doesn't. Those articles need a warning, because they are a public chatroom. ackoz

07:01, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Followed abortion for a while now and feel this is innapropriate, regardless of whether it is a disclaimer or not.

Ackoz - you say it is a warning, I think a warning about a page not being authoritative is a disclaimer, even if not explicitly legal. I also think your attempts to belittle the editors are pretty low and hypocritical. |→ Spaully°τ 17:17, 14 May 2006 (GMT)

Delete; there are other templates found at Wikipedia:Template messages/Disputes which deal more directly with the content of a diputed or controversial article and which address specifically what the problem(s) is. User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 22:19, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This template is on the verge of WP:BEANS, users should not be encouraged to edit articles unless they can improve the article.--M @r ē ino 14:52, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and Reword in it's current state it is pushing WP:BEANS, but it could be reworded along the lines of "the subject of this article is controversal" with that type of approach the template could be useful --T-rex 19:13, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. {{controversial}} does the job just fine. We can't go around sticking disclaimers on articles because people are too lazy too look them up on their own. It's the reader's responsibility to check on a site's credibility, not ours. - Mgm|^(talk) 09:37, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was moo?. What a mess. - Mailer Diablo 06:20, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yet more userboxes edit

Template:User against haters (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) thye are too useful. STOP THE HATE!!! DEATH TO THE SOVIETS!! 12:38, 19 May 2006 (UTC) Cyde has dropped another batch of boxes below. So here goes another batch voting. This section applies to all userboxes below, so move your votes upwards (from under #All userboxes below) to upgrade them to a wider range of templates and let's hope it's all for today. Misza 13 ^{T C} 22:33, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Userfy/subst: and delete per WP:ENC. With the exception of {{user firearm}}, for which it is keep-useful. Misza 13 ^{T C} 22:33, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If you delete, userfy them all --mboverload 22:57, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I feel that all these userboxes should not be grouped into one mass deletion, but be rather considered individually for best results. Some of these can, in fact, be used to describe oneself realistically. For example, a person could be a procrastinator and could be using the said user box not to be funny, but to describe himself in a quick and easy fashion. I know it'd take longer, but, in the end, its often better. -TwilightPhoenix 02:49, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First, how does having this in Userspace rather than Template space destroy the intent of what you're saying? It doesn't. Deleting these boxes and putting them in the Userspace as text hurts no one. Secondly (and more philosophically) consider how these even remotely help us edit an encyclopedia, either as text or tempate. They don't, and I (and Jimbo) discourage their use in any format. Nhprman 06:09, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See below comment in responce to Shining. It explains all. -TwilightPhoenix 19:05, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all. Why we don't focus on improve the Wiki instead of creating userboxes that permanently harm the server? —SHINING EYES 02:39, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]