Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 October 5

< October 4	October 6 >

October 5 edit

Template:Deprecated template 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 Merged and redirected (as creator). The template was intended to be used while pages are transitioned to the newer dated system with more flexible syntax. I've replaced that with a tracking category and rather complex ParserFunctions to switch between syntaxes, since the simpler method is apparently undesireable. // [admin] Pathoschild (^talk/_map) 18:01, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary, given {{Tdeprecated}}. Switch all instances to Tdeprecated and delete. Pagra shtak 04:13, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why didn't you discuss this with the users involved first? —Centrx→talk • 04:33, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Merge & redirect. >Radiant< 16:13, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect to {{tdeprecated}}. If it was used more we could just deprecate it... --ais523 16:22, 5 October 2006 (U T C)

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.

Template:Author 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 deleted per Criteria for speedy deletion G7 (author's request). // [admin] Pathoschild (^talk/_map) 18:10, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I created it, it's superceded by Template:Infobox Writer, nobody is using it. --PdDemeter 17:46, 5 October 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.

Template:user Earth 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 deletion, as userfied. RyanG e rbil10(Kick 'em in the dishpan!) 00:14, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category includes all users. Xiner 20:37, 5 October 2006 (UTC) Please argue for this and the next template in the next section. Xiner 16:40, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Many Star Trek fans, such as myself, see Earth as a planet which will eventually adhere to the United Federation of Planets. So the category is something of an avantgarde really. Other Wikipedians might also use it to assert their cosmopolitanism. RedZebra 21:30, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have no problem with Star Trek, humor, etc., but of the few rules for infoboxes, one is being violated here. One may argue for a rule change, otherwise this would have to go. Xiner 00:30, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please direct me to the article for infobox/userbox rules and state which rule you feel is violated by this userbox and by the one below, which you've also proposed for deletion. --Wordbuilder 02:44, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I should've included the link with my original request. Xiner 03:46, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, these two fall outside of the requirements since, at the moment, all Wikipedians are from Earth. I would argue for keeping both and for a rule change. --Wordbuilder 04:02, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

KeepGLGerman 08:45, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Peachey88 09:47, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A note to everyone who doesn't read before posting, discussion's pretty much over. Xiner 00:02, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What is the argument for the rule change? Xiner 14:33, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to remind everyone to please provide a reason for your argument against my nomination. A "Keep" message is not a valid objection per guidelines. Neither is the userbox being humorous; that's beside the point. Xiner 14:39, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to remind everyone that Template:user Earthling3 is an acceptable alternative for user Earth. Xiner 14:47, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I beg to differ. The template you have suggested is technically acceptable because there are several people on this planet who have actually left Earth. Whether this tiny group of people include contributors to Wikipedia is in all fairness a matter of speculation. In any case I have another problem with the Earthling3 template. In view of my above argument, this template is quite defeatist. I am not really interested in what I haven't done and I can certainly do without a reminder of this sad reality on my personal page. I appreciate your effort though. RedZebra 15:13, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Those few people can create a userbox of their own. In fact I agree that Earthling3 is rather useless, but the difference is that it does not violate any rules. Personally I'd like it changed to include those few lucky souls who have left Earth. Xiner 15:24, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete by the arguments at next section. JoergenB 15:34, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

GUS There's no real reason to delete this when it can be GUSed. EVula 16:05, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If everyone says "GUS", does it mean all the templates should get to stay where they are? Please respond in the next section. Xiner 01:09, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Take a look at WP:GUS. GUS provides for the userfication of "unencyclopedic" userboxes so they don't get included with the encyclopedic content.

--Core des at (talk) 03:51, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If a template in the Template namespace should be GUSed, it automatically follows that it should be deleted from the Template namespace. Xiner 14:41, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep--Nikolay Kolpakov 18:05, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Just becuase we agree with your rationale for deletion does not mean we want it deleted. "Delete: Userbox is gray" cannot be disupted, but tell us why that means it should be deleted without regards to its other merits. 75.33.140.40 00:49, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, I don't understand what you're saying in the last part. In any case, if you agree with my rationale, you'd want to delete the userbox. I don't know what merit this userbox has in the Template namespace. Please respond in the next section. Xiner 01:09, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Userfy and delete per WP:GUS. This userbox does include all users, but it isn't doing any harm. Move it to userspace, where it belongs. --Core des at (talk) 03:49, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep it may not have a real purpose, but neither to most userboxes. Hey, that's the fun of them! Jamie|C 16:25, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Comment And I've a funny feeling most people who are responding on this page have not read the pages offering rationales, GUS explanations, etc. Xiner 19:03, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    - Userfied. - Valarauka^(T/C) 21:46, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      - I was just working on this and then realized you had already taken care of it. Well done. I now vote to DELETE it from the templates. --Wordbuilder 21:50, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        Thanks. We should wait until all transclusions are updated before deleting the page. - Valarauka^(T/C) 22:06, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        Agreed. --Wordbuilder 00:57, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Major Significant Keep I see no justifiable reason TO delete this particular infobox. It is true, some users here can argue for its deletion; but this is a community of many different individuals! Ben Franklin once said "It's very difficult to make 13 clocks chime all at the same time." Meaning, it’s difficult to get everybody to agree on a matter. Sure, there are people (such as the person who put Template:user Earth here for deletion) who would say it should go; but just as there are people who would object to it, there are also people who do not. Check the listing of users who are listing this box on their pages. Its quite lengthy, but does not list everyone. I'm sure that there are a lot of users here who do not use this particular box on their page, but there are others -- such as myself -- who do. I believe this is a matter that should be left up to each individual here. Nobody is forcing the use of this box on their pages; it's all a matter of choice. And freedom of choice is a very significant commodity -- especially here! --Jason Palpatine 18:23, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

KeepDrumlineramos 06:38:50, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First, please add your comments to the end of discussions. It makes it easier for other editors to find them. Second, please add your comment to the next section as both templates will either go or stay together. I understand some userboxes are quite popular, especially humorous ones, but that has nothing to do with why I nominated this and other templates for nomination. It is also less of an issue of opinion if you'd read the reasonings. Xiner 00:22, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry -- my bad. I thought it was the other way around. --Jason Palpatine 22:31, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It does not potentially include all wikipedians -only those who like Star Trek and identify with its values. Raystorm 23:35, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- -- Actually, if you look at it, the box is more about those who like Stargate SG-1 and identify with its values. --Jason Palpatine 20:30, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jason, I actually see a point there. However, as it stands the only relation the userbox has with Stargate is an image. Two other links in the userbox go to something very different and NO link goes to Stargate-related pages. Unless it changes to something like "This Stargate fan is from Earth", it would still violate the few basic rules for templates, which I've included countless times in my previous posts. And it would still be cause for deletion. Xiner 19:07, 13 October 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.

Template:User Earthling 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 deletion, as userfied. RyanG e rbil10(Kick 'em in the dishpan!) 00:15, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category includes all users. Xiner 20:42, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep That's the whole part of the joke. Although, it is a weak one... Tennis Dynamite 21:05, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Many StarTrekk fans, such as myself, see Earth as a planet which will eventually adhere to the United Federation of Planets. So the category is something of an avantgarde really. Other Wikipedians might also use it to assert their cosmopolitanism. RedZebra 21:25, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Only the most anti-social of anti-socials, who can't even fit in with sci-fi geeks, would bother deleting this, realy sad Xachna 22:07, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. --Iamunknown 02:39, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep --Oblivious 22:43, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep it's useful as an alternative to national place-of-origin templates for people that are or identify themselves as stateless person --Lino Mastrodomenico 23:01, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep~~Comment Many user boxes are added pointlessly and as jokes, this is no exception. Cbrown1023 23:49, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep/GUS --Etherialemperor 00:05, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have no problem with humor, pan-planetism, etc., so please don't make judgments. I'm just saying that of the few rules for infoboxes, one is being violated here. One may argue for a rule change, or this would have to go. Xiner 00:32, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep keep keep keep Zotel - the Stub Maker 01:18, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I should've included the link to the rule in question with my original request. Xiner 03:48, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per arguments above -- DiegoTehMexican 03:49, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, I haven't seen a real argument. I'd venture to guess that all categories that include all Wikipedians are attempts at humor. Being a joke is thus NOT an argument for keeping the userbox, the concept of which is often debated as it is. Xiner 14:32, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

BJAODN It seems funny enough to many people to go to BJAODN, but I do not care one way or another on whether or not this gets deleted. Jesse Viviano 05:12, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep GLGerman 08:45, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe a joke, but in fact it is pure nonsense. delete. --84.160.16.135 10:47, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Although is obvious that all users are from Earth (in a far future this couldn't be true), I think it's funny to say which are we from. Erukto -- 11:50, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to remind everyone to please provide a reason for your argument against my nomination. A "Keep" message is not a valid objection per guidelines. Neither is the userbox being humorous; that's beside the point. Xiner 14:40, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to remind everyone that Template:user Earthling3 is an acceptable alternative for user Earth. Xiner 14:48, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I beg to differ. The template you have suggested is technically acceptable because there are several people on this planet who have actually left Earth. Whether this tiny group of people include contributors to Wikipedia is in all fairness a matter of speculation. In any case I have another problem with the Earthling3 template. In view of my above argument, this template is quite defeatist. I am not really interested in what I haven't done and I can certainly do without a reminder of this sad reality on my personal page. I appreciate your effort though. RedZebra 15:14, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Those few people can create a userbox of their own. In fact I agree that Earthling3 is rather useless, but the difference is that it does not violate any rules. Personally I'd like it changed to include those few lucky souls who have left Earth. Xiner 15:25, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete both these templates; and do not replace by Template:User_Earthling3.

The quoted rules include the items

Do not create categories which could potentially include all Wikipedians. For example: "This user is a Wikipedian."; "This user is human."; "This user uses the internet"; etc.
Avoid categorising "not"-based userboxes. For example: "This user does not like <noun phrase>."

The two templates up for vote violate the first rule. Template:Earthling3 technically doesn't, by implicitly "not"-basing the category; besides, technicalities are no good arguments, when there is no change in spirit.

I also would vote against a change of rules. People should have fun editing wikipedia; but at the bottom line, this is still an encyclopædian project. Both rules tend in that direction, and therefore the rules should be kept.

Humour does have its place in life, and in the Wikiproject; but that is primarily not here.

I could accept a positively formulated template, from the 'pointing to the future' point of view; e.g., with an argument we all(?) would have to put to 0 for the time being:

This user has left Earth for space {{1}} time(s). JoergenB 16:01, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that Wikipedia is primarily encyclopædic. Nevertheless, many of the userbox templates don't fall into the category of providing useful information (e.g. "This user loves pizza," etc.). As long as these are used exclusively on user pages, I see no harm. What is the basis for the rule restricting such templates as the ones being discussed here? --Wordbuilder 16:53, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Those should also be moved to userspace, if not deleted outright. But we have to start somewhere. Xiner 21:04, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They are being moved gradually. So, why not just move the others there, too? Again, what is the basis for restricting such userboxes? --Wordbuilder 20:10, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Whether others are moved have no bearing on this matter. Two wrongs don't make one right. We have to start somewhere and I decided to nominate these two for deletion first. If you check the logs you'll see I have since nominated quite a few more useless templates. The basis for restricting userboxes such as these have been explained in the documents I've linked to. I must say I still haven't seen an argument against the logic for my nominations. Xiner 00:18, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You brought up migration, not me. Anyway, do the documents to which you link tell us why such userboxes are restricted or only that they are restricted? If I missed the why, I apologize. --00:45, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

I brought up migration to remind objectors that if the userbox is so important to them, they can do something about it. It is technically a separate matter as it doesn't affect whether this userbox belongs to the Template namespace, and I think it's clear from the discussions that there are no logical reasons for it. As for why userboxes are restricted, it is explained in the links other people and I have included in our comments here. Xiner 02:13, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The reason for the rule restricting such userboxes is not linked to, as far as I can see. --Wordbuilder 04:29, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I won't even refer to posts within this discussion. Please follow the Templates for deletion link at the top of this page. Xiner 14:50, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I did not ask for the two templates to be replaced by Earthling3, which probably confuses the discussion. In any case, another rule that these two templates violate is that they are "not helpful or noteworthy (encyclopaedic)" per TfD page. Xiner 16:46, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It would seem that you are mixing apples and oranges here. The templates in question are used exclusively on user pages which have nothing to do with (the content of) the encyclopaedia itself. This is what the TfD page says: Templates that reside in userspace or other non-article namespaces should instead be nominated [...] but please note that Wikipedia is very lenient about userspace. I think you are mistakenly applying a Wikipedia policy which does not cover the templates in question. RedZebra 17:11, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The templates in question are not in userspace, as shown in their names (e.g. Template:User Earthling). Someone could move them to their own space, I think, but I'm not sure. Xiner 17:57, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that. I misinterpreted the meaning of the above section of the policy. Nonetheless my objection to deleting these templates still stands. I also think that Wordbuilder has made an excellent point in his last note. RedZebra 19:02, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep/GUS This should be GUSed, not deleted. EVula 20:06, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep this userbox could be intended to show that a user identifies more strongly as from the planet Earth than from any particular country - as in Global citizenship. The suggestion above of moving the userbox to userspace seems good to me. Hut 8.5 08:45, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I see no reason for deleting it, it's just a bit of fun and it doesn't offend anyone Guess who i am 10:46, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There's no point deleting it. Half the stuff on Wikipedia is deadly serious (e.g.World War 1), and they put in the Earthling box for a joke. Andy mci

Comment No one is responding based on why this was put for deletion. The reason was because the category of uses who are from Earth would potentially include ALL Wikipedia users, making an un-needed category. For example, we don't have a pages category on Wikipedia because it would include everything on Wikipedia. Cbrown1023 00:04, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Attached Category Don't delete the template, just delete the category it adds users to. Cbrown1023 00:04, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - In response to "I'm sorry, I don't understand what you're saying in the last part. In any case, if you agree with my rationale, you'd want to delete the userbox. I don't know what merit this userbox has in the Template namespace. Please respond in the next section." by Ziner above. I agree with the rationale as a fact; "All Wikipedians are from Earth" is utterly indisputable. I disagree with using as a rationale to delete the userbox, because 1. It is humorous, and 2. Some people may use it to specify global citizenship. Even if has no encyclopeidic merit whatsoever, useless but funny things like BJAODN exist, so why not this? 75.33.140.40 01:29, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The humor issue has been dealt with above. Global citizenship should get a more specific userbox and would not include all Wikipedians. Xiner 02:13, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Humor is not a valid objection to this nomination; that's beside the point" does not constitute being "dealt with." It's not an objection to this nomination. It is an objection to the deletion of the userbox. Here's a point of my own: Uselessness besides the point, why should this be deleted? Answer: There is none. That says nothing. 75.33.140.40 05:18, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't wanna speak for JoergenB, but if I were him I would be quite unhappy as it appears you have not read his post. Just one example of a number of posts explaining in detail the answer to your question. Xiner 14:50, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep As there are people like me, who would like to not to identified by the country or region, which in a sense, devides human beings and even the speces from around the world. I would like to identify myself through the love I devote to the world as a whole - which I would not like to end up in breaking up. Keeping this template, hurts no one, but the deletion will seriously hurt a bunch members, like me. --∞Sechzehn16^Talk∞ 11:45, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Users supporting global citizenship would NOT include every Wikipedian, unlike this userbox. Xiner 14:50, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Please note that I am not trying to define or the sole purporse purpose of the box, what I want to say is, it means something for users like me. Thanks for your attempts to understand. --∞Sechzehn16^Talk∞ 00:37, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your interpretation of the userbox, but that's not a reason to keep it in the Template namespace, if at all. Xiner 13:22, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

While the question is, there may be no reason found by people who want ot delete this template, to keep the box, but not a single has given to demonstrate the merit of the deletion of this template. Hope they will spend their energy in something very useful rather that battling on this single userbox. Well, I am going to keep this userbox in my user page, by writing the raw source, in case of this userbox got deleted. I keep my vote strong keep as voted previously. --∞Sechzehn16^Talk∞ 17:01, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Or rather, the reasons have not been read. But of course I'm repeating myself now. Xiner 00:07, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Fun factor mainly - and the fact it's actually quite a well-used userbox. --Sagaciousuk ^(talk) 12:45, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Neither is a reason for keeping this template in the Template namespace. Xiner 14:50, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It's supposed to be humorous, like 9/10 user boxes, so why delete something that's serving its purpose of being mildly humorous - as a user box is intended to be. You could delete all of my user boxes on the grounds that the Slightly Silly Party doesn't exist, neither does Big Brother, and you could delete my h2g2 userbox on the grounds that no-one has found any evidence to suggest that 42 is in fact the meaning of life, the universe, and everything; when it CLEARLY is! Most of these userboxes are pop-culture references anyway, so maybe "this user is from earth" could be a wiki-culture reference? --Sean 14:33, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Two wrongs don't make one right. There are good reasons for keeping templates like this away from the Template namespace, and many templates have been removed for the same reason. Xiner 14:50, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I personally feel that along with patriotism for one's country, love for earth as a planet is essential in order to prevent its destruction by pollution and other human factors. This user box expresses the love for our planet and urges one's global citizenship and gives a message that no one country can claim to be separate from rest of the world. Szhaider 17:39, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- Comment I've a funny feeling many people responding on this page haven't read the discussions in full. Please see my response to Sechzehn above regarding the issue of global citizenship. Xiner 19:07, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep/GUS Are you absolutely sure all wikipedians are from Earth? Can you prove it? This shouldn't be deleted, for the simple reason that there are so many people who want to keep it. If it's such a big problem keeping it in template space, just GUS it. - Valarauka^(T/C) 19:15, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I bet I can find another issue that encounters significant opposition despite its correctness, on Wikipedia, online or off. It's funny how no one's taken the little time it requires to userfy this. Xiner 20:45, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Userfied. I'm curious - why didn't you just do it yourself, instead of starting these TfDs and then taking the time to counter everyone's objections? Would've been much quicker for everyone involved. In any case, it's done. - Valarauka^(T/C) 21:44, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Amazing. This post does it. Is every TfD nominator now expected to userfy userboxes with which they disagree, sometimes strongly? Frankly and I'm not being personal here, if I had known about the level of discourse that'd stem from these two nominations, I'd not have taken the trouble of answering the objections. Xiner 22:30, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot to add, as I have throughout this debate, there is a curious ratio of the number of people who voiced various objections versus the number who actually did something about what they stood for. I'm amazed no one on the other side of the debate has asked those people about it, while I've been asked to userfy this box. Xiner 22:34, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, ordinarily they're not. On the other hand, you're the one who first expressed surprise that no one had taken "the little time it requires" to do so, in the face of which the question is natural, since you're the one spending the most time here. In any case, the matter is closed, since I actually did userfy the boxes myself. I wasn't asking you to, just why you hadn't already till now, once it became clear a lot of people wanted it kept... - Valarauka^(T/C) 23:11, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I really don't see the point of discussing this any further. - Valarauka^(T/C) 00:58, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was just responding to your curiosity about why I didn't userfy this userbox. I don't think you can express your curiosity about someone else's behavior and shut their mouth at the same time. I hope you'll now see my responding to every objection here not as time I could've spent on userfying what I perceive to be useless userboxes, but as the degree to which I object to their existence. I don't think it's logical then to expect me to do something I so strongly oppose, in the Template namespace or elsewhere. Btw, GUS is not undebatable either, but I'll put off that discussion for another day. Xiner 13:22, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Am I understanding you to say that, although this seems to be settled, in the future you are going to raise new objections? If so, do that now, and let's just get this this all taken care of. --Wordbuilder 22:36, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That is not what I said. Xiner 02:07, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, what you said was, "GUS is not undebatable either, but I'll put off that discussion for another day." What I'm asking is, what do you mean by that? --Wordbuilder 03:44, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What it says, no more and no less. Xiner 13:31, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your reply is non-responsive. --Wordbuilder 13:59, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A reply is by definition a response, although being inanimate it cannot be responsive. I guess you're right. Xiner 15:08, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Although this isn't a courtroom, I was using the term in a legal manner. As such, your answer was unresponsive to the question asked. You've still not answered, so I can't tell if you're going for funny or for obtuse. --Wordbuilder 20:24, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My worst fears about the the American justice system have been realized. Xiner 00:07, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One more note before the rest of Wikipedia starts flaming us, I urge you, Wordbuilder, to take this to my talk page. If you're wondering whether I'll answer your latest question, the answer is no. I believe I'd answered it before you asked. You can still talk to me off this page, as I don't think other people appreciate our little chat here very much. Thanks. Xiner 00:13, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Point taken. Thanks! --Wordbuilder 00:24, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, ok, thanks for that explanation. That is what I was asking. I wasn't trying to shut your mouth, but your replies until now hadn't answered my question and just came across to me as rather combative, and I didn't want to keep an unnecessary and fruitless discussion going. The logic behind my expectation was simply that sometimes it's good to do things you might personally oppose, strongly even, if it help preserve harmony. - Valarauka^(T/C) 17:55, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was combative because you wrote, "I'm curious - why didn't you..." and when I responded, you wrote another post while at the same time writing in the Edit Summary "it's done already... move on".[1] When I said just a bit subtlely that that is not the way to end discussions, you told me again to move on, as if it were my fault. Xiner 02:07, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One last suggestion. I have not objected to humour in itself; and clearly, BJAODN is one of the places for humour within this project. Following User:Jesse Viviano, I do suggest that one of the large number of discussion partakers who seem to find the two earthling templates funny copy them to some appropriate old or new BJAODN page, before the GUSsing is completed. JoergenB 15:16, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Though I am not one of those who see this debate as "funny" vs "not funny" I would like to ask you to elaborate on your suggestion. I have already updated my personal page after Valarauka had made the necessary changes to the template and everything seems to be working just fine. Would your proposal involve another change to my personal page or is this a mere technicality? I am asking as Xiner's objection to this template residing in Wikipedia space has apparently been dealt with. RedZebra 15:42, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This userbox represents people who like Star Trek and its values, and thus does not potentially represent all wikipedians. You gotta take one step beyond and see where it comes from and what it means, and not just take it at face value. Raystorm 23:39, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As it stood, it was a template that violated one of the few rules for such creatures and was thus moved to userspace. Are you arguing for a move back to the Template namespace? Xiner 19:11, 13 October 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.