Forum:TC:Template:Pos

Forums > Trash compactor archive > TC:Template:Pos
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page or, if the page was deleted, in the Senate Hall rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was delete. As I pointed out below, I do not recommend orphaning this by a bot to delete it as fast as possible. Instead, the immediate effect of this closure should be a consensus to not use the template anymore and encouragement for users to review the existing usages of the template to determine whether the associated appearance needs to be removed as well. In many cases, access to the source in question will be needed to properly determine whether the subject can be duck-tested or not. Once that is complete, the template can then be speedy deleted per this consensus, but there is no urgent rush.
Master JonathanCouncil Chambers
06:15 UTC ThuJune 26, 2014

Template:Pos (history - links - logs - delete - protect)

I am nominating this template for deletion, because I do not believe that there is any legitimate reason to use it. Placing "possible appearance" on a page is speculation and should not be allowed or encouraged through the use of a template. If we know something appears, then we say so in the appropriate section, anything else is speculation.--Exiled Jedi Oldrepublic crest (Greetings) 02:17, June 18, 2014 (UTC)

Delete

  1. As nominator.--Exiled Jedi Oldrepublic crest (Greetings) 02:17, June 18, 2014 (UTC)
  2. This is one of the worst 2007-era (or, in this case, 2006) relics still in existence around here. As EJ says, it breeds nothing but the exact opposite of what we strive for here: confirmed accuracy of source material. Wookieepedia doesn't deal in "possible appearance" speculation. Time for this to go. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 02:23, June 18, 2014 (UTC)
  3. what could you POSSIBLY use this for? --praguepride (Talk) 02:23, June 18, 2014 (UTC)
  4. This should not exist. Its very existence is to engender speculation. IFYLOFD (Enter the Floydome) 02:24, June 18, 2014 (UTC)
  5. If there's some question about a subject's appearance, either leave it out as pure speculation or explain it in the BTS section with footnotes (and then probably think better of it and leave it out anyway.) —Silly Dan (talk) 02:25, June 18, 2014 (UTC)
  6. We deal in facts, not assumptions. Supreme Emperor (talk) 02:26, June 18, 2014 (UTC)
  7. <-Omicron(Leave a message at the BEEP!) 02:29, June 18, 2014 (UTC)
  8. Cade GalacticRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit Calrayn 02:36, June 18, 2014 (UTC)
  9. Template:Pos? More like Template:Piece of sJorrelWiki-shrinkableFraajic 04:40, June 18, 2014 (UTC)
  10. Trip391 (talk) 04:52, June 18, 2014 (UTC)
  11. 1358 (Talk) 08:49, June 18, 2014 (UTC)
  12. Clone Commander Lee Talk 09:51, June 18, 2014 (UTC)
  13. Provided the 546 transclusions are manually reviewed, not just wiped out by a bot, to ensure that we properly determine which appearances can stay and which need to go, because given the age of this template and the shifts in our policies since then, it's quite possible that we could now list some of these appearances outright by the duck test.
    Master JonathanCouncil Chambers
    03:43 UTC ThuJune 19, 2014
  14. Per Tope JangFett (Talk) 11:21, June 20, 2014 (UTC)
  15. Grand Moff Tranner Imperial Department of Military Research (Comlink) 15:40, June 20, 2014 (UTC)
  16. Per MJ. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 16:31, June 21, 2014 (UTC)
  17. Ayrehead02 (talk) 18:26, June 21, 2014 (UTC)
  18. Corellian PremierJedi symbolThe Force will be with you always 20:58, June 21, 2014 (UTC)
  19. Pew pew pew. 501st dogma(talk) 23:59, June 21, 2014 (UTC)
  20. Winterz (talk) 17:34, June 23, 2014 (UTC)

Keep

Discussion

  • Watch out for this potential problem: People might use {{C|Possible appearance}} as a way to continue its usage. JangFett (Talk) 11:24, June 20, 2014 (UTC)
  • I made that template back in the day when the Wook was characterized by a different attitude towards possible appearances; it was never intended to be used for wild speculation. If the rule now is that possible appearances are not allowed to be indicated, then I don't see why this template should not be speedied. KEJ (talk) 23:43, June 21, 2014 (UTC)