Forum:TC:Template:WIP

Forums > Trash compactor archive > TC:Template:WIP

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 No consensus. TanDivoInsignia-SenateMurders AnilSerifoglu (talk) 17:19, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

Template:Wip (talk - history - links - logs - delete - protect)

This is very much a duplicate of Template:Inuse and is redundant. Wok142 (talk) 20:05, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Delete

  1. Wok142 (talk) 20:05, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
  2. 01miki10 Open comlink 20:09, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
  3. Rsand 30 (talk) 20:11, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
  4. —spookywillowwtalk 20:12, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
  5. TanDivoInsignia-SenateMurders AnilSerifoglu (talk) 20:14, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
  6. Janomoogo (talk) 20:26, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
  7. NanoLuukeCloning Facility 20:38, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
  8. I can't think of a good use for this template that isn't already covered by another maintenance template. Xd1358 (Talk) 20:50, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
  9. Tommy-Macaroni (he/they) 21:07, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
  10. Per my comments on Discord I think the time to retire both is long since past Fan26 (Talk) 21:08, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
  11. Zed42 Wolfpack emblem (talk) 21:41, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
  12. I've personally never seen a need for this one, as every article on Wook is a WIP. Master FredceriqueCommerce Guild(talk) (he/him) 17:26, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Keep

  1. ngl, I quite like having the choice between these two templates OOM 224 (he/him) 20:22, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
  2. I like both of them - maybe we can merge into one and give the option to choose via parameters. JediMasterMacaroni(Talk) 21:43, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
  3. They are very much not the same. Inuse informs readers that the article is actively undergoing a major edit at that moment, so should not be edited at that moment. WIP informs readers that the article is generally under construction after being recently created, so major changes are to be expected unless Inuse is displayed above it. Both templates serve different niches. SorcererSupreme21 (talk) 22:19, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
  4. I think they have distinct and different purposes Panther436 RedNihilEye (talk) 00:09, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
  5. Per Jedi Master Mac and SorcererSupreme. - JMAS Jolly Trooper Hey, it's me! 00:32, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
  6. <-Omicron(Leave a message at the BEEP!) 17:53, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
  7. Both templates are valid and distinct. False Dmitri (talk) 02:45, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Comments

  • Adding to comments above for keep. The two templates are for distinctly different purposes. InUse is for active and current editing and means do not edit for any purpose while it is actively being worked on. I also firmly believe this template should have a time limit that it can remain, though it would need to be hashed out how long. But I'm thinking 48 hours at the max. WIP is for a longer term work project, not just for new articles. And it does not outright forbid anyone else from making edits. - JMAS Jolly Trooper Hey, it's me! 00:39, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
    • Tossing in an echo for this; while I quite like the templates in general, my main gripe (and hence vote) is that we've, in recent times, had folk with these tags on for upward of half a year. Really isn't great.—spookywillowwtalk 00:46, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
      • That is an issue that, like JMAS said, can easily be fixed by imposing a time limit akin to something like {{Spoiler}}. It does not change the fact that both templates serve different and, in my opinion, valid functions. SorcererSupreme21 (talk) 02:20, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
        • I completely agree, Spooky. I most focused on the time limit for InUse because it the one for active editing, and tells people not to edit the page - period. But I do not think editors should be be barred from editing any page for an extended period greater than 1 or 2 days (not including administrative locking of course). But like you said, the WIP is sometimes left up for months on end. And while this template leaves the door open for editing while it is in place, it also should have a time limit of say, 1 month. Again, that time limit can be discussed and decided by community consensus. - JMAS Jolly Trooper Hey, it's me! 02:47, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
          • To be completely fair, {{Inuse}} itself has a built-in nomination toggle semi-actively encouraging lengthy usage of the template for indefinite periods of time. I'm assuming from what you're saying about Inuse hopefully not being used that long that we'd opt to vote out the toggle function (thus promoting workbench usage), but I'm personally referring to Inuse's usage over several months with (or without) the nomination parameter, not Wip, since it's much less used nowadays.—spookywillowwtalk 02:51, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
            • Absolutely there would be a vote to remove the toggle. InUse should be clearly specific to only short term use of 1 or 2 days max, and respectfully requesting no one else make any edits in that time. WIP is for lengthier projects, with a max term limit (to be determined), which does allow editing by anyone, but requests caution to limit to minor edits to respect the work of the one who placed the template. - JMAS Jolly Trooper Hey, it's me! 03:00, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
    • In that case I think WIP should be rewritten. Currently it says "please do not make edits to this article while this message is displayed", which is the exact same message as Inuse. That pretty clearly says not to edit the page, so if WIP should allow people to make minor edits (per the discussion above) then the message should be changed. Rsand 30 (talk) 15:52, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
      • Agreed. Perhaps it could say something like "Unless {{Inuse}} is displayed above, feel free to contribute to the construction of this article." SorcererSupreme21 (talk) 05:30, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
  • Per above, I think wip becomes kind of a problem if used for lengthy periods of time, which it definitely has been. From my point of view, inuse adequately can do the job for short time periods, and a short time period is really the only ideal use of the template become otherwise it can become an excuse to leave pages very messy. I see some that are of the opinion that they have slightly different niches, but in my opinion, the niche that wip currently occupies needs to be changed, and that niche has already been filled by inuse (if that makes sense). Wok142 (talk) 16:18, 3 June 2024 (UTC)