Forum:SH:Replacing Template:Tc

This page is an archive of a community-wide discussion. This page is no longer live. Further comments or questions on this topic should be made in a new Senate Hall page rather than here so that this page is preserved as a historic record. Anıl Şerifoğlu (talk) 02:11, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

---

Hello, all! So, with the recent TC regarding an individual, I noticed that the {{Tc}} tag made it really seem like we were calling the subject of the article, in this case a deceased child, "trash." Of course, this was not the intent, as the template is used on any article and is of course meant to be a humorous reference to the trash compactor scene in A New Hope, but that doesn't change the optics, which could be understandably hurtful when it comes to such sensitive topics. Aside from this, the template is often added to pages created by newer users who may not quite understand the nuances of the notability policy, and referring to their articles as trash, even if humorously, isn't really the most encouraging thing for us to do.

Because of this, I'm suggesting we change the {{Tc}} template to the following, which removes any reference to trash or smells:

I wanted to get some community input on the template before actually proposing it, so feel free to discuss below. Master Fredcerique(talk) (he/him) 04:32, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

Discussion

• This is good stuff. Although I think it should be specifically noted that possible deletion is what is being discussed. Wok142 (talk) 04:57, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
  • That's not all that's discussed, though. Redirecting, merging, and other options are typically discussed, as well, which is why the vague nature of the current text was chosen. Master Fredcerique(talk) (he/him) 05:41, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
    • Ah, makes sense. Do you think it's worth linking to Forum:Trash compactor as well as the notability policy so users can see all that in detail if they want? Wok142 (talk) 07:15, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
      • The template do be already linking both. :P Master Fredcerique(talk) (he/him) 18:18, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
• I don’t think wholesale replacement of the template is necessary. I fully support making this toggleable in the case of sensitive topics but I see no reason why articles that are not topically sensitive can’t still have the “incredible smell” layout. - Thannus (DFaceG) (he/him) (talk) 05:17, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
  • That's why I mentioned the discouraging aspect for new users. The change isn't just for senstitive topics, but also to make the template less unintentionally insulting to newer users whose articles often end up in the TC. Master Fredcerique(talk) (he/him) 05:41, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
• I absolutely agree with making the template more formal and clear (and I think it just looks cleaner as well). One comment (and this is probably really nitpicky so feel free to ignore :P) is that I feel like the tag reads better and is more succinct without the "The nature of" at the start. Either way, though, I'd support this change Zed42 (talk) 07:23, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
  • Swapped the starts of the sentences around. How does that feel? Master Fredcerique(talk) (he/him) 18:18, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
• Thanks Fred for handeling this. I wholefully agree that it is a needed change, both regarding the outlook on OOU individuals and new users. Out of tradition, I would have liked if we could manage to have a quote and picture from the movies associated with the template, if anyone as a good idea about it. NanoLuuke^{Cloning Facility} 08:16, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
  • I would love a good movie quote that gets the point across sensitively. If anyone has one, I'm open to suggestions. Master Fredcerique(talk) (he/him) 18:18, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
• Very much agreed. It's easy for veteran editors to forget to see how things can be seen from a newcomer's perspective, plus I'd argue that associating any article with the phrase "incredible smell" just looks unprofessional. Imperators II^(Talk) 09:01, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
• Looks great Fred, nice work. My only comment is that I do agree that a mention that it might be deleted is probably worth included just so people are immediatly aware that's a possible outcome and pay more attention. Ayrehead02 (talk) 10:13, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
  • Added a note about the topic potentially being removed completely. How does that feel? Master Fredcerique(talk) (he/him) 18:18, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
• This is probably a good option for sensitive topics like the Daniel Fleetwood TC, but in my opinion I don't think we need to completely change it. Rsand 30 (talk) 12:50, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
• 100% agree, this is so much better and more professional. Tommy-Macaroni (he/they) 13:31, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
• From the standpoint of professionalism, yeah I agree. I'm...more skeptical of worrying how a relevant joke reference reference to the movies is a problem-I vividly remember the old "Wipe this pathetic page off the galaxy" and "I object! There is no proof!" templates being applied to early page creations of mine in 2015, when I was a kid just starting out, and all it did was make me frustrated with myself that I couldn't get the site policies. But the need for professionalism (and special cases like the Daniel Fleetwood TC) trumps any concerns over how a joke message in a template could be taken. I sympathise with Thannus and Rsand but it seems like there's enough agreement to change it that I don't feel it's worth it to argue for keeping it fully. Fan26 (Talk) 14:03, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
• Yea, I agree with this change. However, it should say "page" instead of "article" because templates and other non-article things can get TC'd. Even TCs can get TC'd and TC threads are definitely not an "article". ThrawnChiss7 ^{Assembly Cupola} 14:23, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
  • Good catch. I've changed it to say "page." Master Fredcerique(talk) (he/him) 18:18, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
• As much as I like the current version, it doesn't work in all cases and is certainly rude for newer users. I wonder if there's a more respectful quote we can use that's still Star Warsy, maybe along the lines of {{CatNeeded}}. JediMasterMacaroni^(Talk) 18:54, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
  • I think that quote works perfectly here; I would support a change to "What's this?". ThrawnChiss7 ^{Assembly Cupola} 19:29, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
• Yeah per above; trash compactors very often result in redirecting and sometimes fail; and it's rude to call others' work trash by default. Of course, something might not be suitable or notable for Wookieepedia, but professionalism is better off. At minimum it should be toggleable, but in general, it seems like an old joke that should now be retired.—spookywilloww^talk 19:20, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
• Per Fan. Let's do this. OOM 224 (he/him) 00:20, 2 March 2024 (UTC)