Forum:HyperVFD

Forums: Index > Village Dump > HyperVFD

Note: This topic has been unedited for 5872 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.

So, I've identified 86 pages (so far) that I think should be, well, 86'ed. See: User:Hyperbole/HyperVFD

Now, I was going to take them, a few at a time, to VFD. But that would take forever and kind of consume VFD entirely.

Sycamore thinks I should take them to QVFD. I wonder if they need a second or third pair of eyes before that happens.

What does everyone else think? pillow talk 23:52, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

As annoying as templates are, some people really like them, and would miss them if they're gone. Put them through VFD for the most part, unless it's only used on one article and such. --Mr. Monkey Pant-hoot here. 00:09, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

We think no. Or at least I do. I had that discussion with MrN several times in the past. Unless it's unused templates, I don't see a reason for a shortcutting VFD for anyone, as respectable user as they may be. With any unused templates, we can take a look more closely if you'd like to direct me to them. This is why FFW was turned down for several times now, most of us don't like mass deletions. ~ 00:11, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

I took another look at the list - you got some classics there. No way this is not going through VFD. Sorry. ~ 00:24, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

I don't have a problem with that. I guess my next question is whether it would be impolite to make it so that all 20 active VFD nominations are mine for an extended period of time. By the time I'm done with this, I'm probably going to have 150 noms or more. pillow talk 00:34, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Try to avoid flooding VFD with those. ~ 00:36, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Ugh. So, basically, this is going to take months. I'm not entirely sure I want to sign on for that. Actually, I have an alternate proposal...

Alternate proposal

1. I finish nomming all the rest of the questionable templates
2. I come back here when I'm done and invite everyone to vote right on the HyperVFD page, as though it were VFD
3. We take care of it right over there.

Do-able? pillow talk 00:42, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

I smell a power catching devic...err....hi! :D Sure, why not? - Admiral Enzo Aquarius-Dial the Gate 00:56, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Just go by the system. It takes time, but it works. To expand on what Mordillo was saying up there... mass deletions turn into a kind of production line, so that we're just rubber-stamping pages to be deleted, and not necessarily giving them the reviewing time they need. I'd argue that VFD's slowness is a positive factor, to a certain extent; the original author, if there is one, usually has time to drop by, and plenty of users should have a chance to give a page the old once-over before it is either redeemed or sent to the scrap heap to be recycled into kilobytes for newer articles. Just take your time, and let VFD run its course. What's the rush? - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 05:08, Nov 4

Patience, young padawan. Er, yeah, just nom some when there's space - I've been doing that for ages now, and at one time I had a very extensive list. And MrN had tons to get rid of when he was on his shortpages mission. A bit like me now, on my lonelypages mission. I'm still not making massive headway on that, but the crap does eventually shift. And, as has been mentioned elsewhere, people don't like excessive deletion. --UU - natter 08:59, Nov 4

To clarify my view - These templates are ugly and have ruined many pages. The VFD process works well if everthing to do with new pages works well (ICU etc) - with these templates its a different matter - they are invaribly spamed by our less gifted users and they uglyfy the site. I don't get why a mass deletion would not be in order - things change, "classics" is not really an argument or a reason for keeping these shitty ugly templates. In my opinion these templates ruin the site, and are another reaosn to put off contribuiters (its more shit to ruin their articles if they don't keep an eye on them). Am I just evil, or is this making some kind of sense?--Sycamore (Talk) 09:20, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

While I understand your view - it is exactly what you said - your view. And I am very much against starting a private VFD that bypasses the normal channels. Templates, at least some of them, can carry great value to an article - and some of those you listed over there are classics. And yes, it is an argument - we don't need to remove the basics/origins of this site just because we have a different way of working today. I certainly don't think that the templates scare off people. ~ 09:53, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Indeed, some of us are deeply, deeply aroused by templates. Not me. A friend. You don't know him. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 11:08, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

I know him, he's called Hans McTithead from Falkirk - the infamy of him has spread all over Scotland:)--Sycamore (Talk) 11:21, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry but you're thinking of an entirely different Hans McTithead from Falkirk. It's a common mistake. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 11:29, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

is this some kind of canadian thing? SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 15:35, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

/me puts on pants Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 17:11, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Formal proposal

/me gets down on one knee David, I want to spend the rest of my life with you. Will you join hands with me in this...gay marriage?

I don't know, son. What about this VFD thing?

Oh yeah, sorry dad. I'll get to that.

While I cannot attest to the recent state of VFD (considering I have not looked at it since August) I think it is safe to assume that flooding it with 86 articles would be, well, excessive. Templates wouldn't be a bad idea, but many people like to either ignore those or freak out at the sight of them and...I dunno. I'm so out of touch. But I think in the past we have seen user-generated VFD lists like this one (I point to thee, MrN) that are simply sorted through in due time and eventually all find their way onto VFD.

Here's the tl;dr version: I don't have a solution. Just leave it and let other users gently move that list over to VFD one bite at a time until the elephant is no more. That's what has worked in the past, anyways. sirsysrq @ 15:03 Nov 5

So anyway...

These are going to go though VFD. Hopefully Hyper is not put off by people criticising his attempt to purge the site of a load of un-wanted templates. It's a good thing you are doing dude. Templates are quick to vote on, and most of them are useless spam. Don't add more than 5 in one go, and always leave at least 2 free spaces on VFD for other nominations. That's what I did when I was killing short pages, and managed to get away without too many people accusing me of "flooding".

I noticed that some people above think that some of the templates on this list are obvious keeps... Well... If anyone wants to look at THE LIST and thinks that any of them should be kept I see no reason why you can't use that page to vote keep. Do not vote delete on an article which is not actually on VFD, but a keep vote is OK. That way, Hyper can put the templates which no one appears to care about onto VFD first, and maybe not bother with the others... MrN 21:17, Nov 7

"Templates are quick to vote on, and most of them are useless spam." and they're a pain in the ass to delete (since I have to go to "What links here" and clean it off of those pages, as well). In other words, I hate the people who vote to delete templates. Jerks. Also, continue the good work. Kudos! Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 21:27, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, if you are offering to remove the red links that's cool. I had assumed it would be a combined effort between myself, UU and Hyper. Many of them have very few links to anyway and those with lots are likely to be kept. MrN 21:49, Nov 7

I figured that it would be easier (eg: tougher to mess up) for the same person who huffed the template to kill the redlinks. I do that, sometimes. Figure, I mean. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 22:02, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, I will keep an eye out for them as I archive. Any which you miss I will clean up. If the link is in user space, I'm not that bothered, and will probably leave it... MrN 22:06, Nov 7

If it's in userspace, I say we take off, and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 22:21, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Userpages

I just want to make sure that as we do this, a VFD vote for cleansing means we'll clear it out of the mainspace, not out of userpages. Some people have templates that the rest of us think are stupid and unnecessary, but we shouldn't completely delete them and not allow them to use it. Therefore, when we delete templates, make sure to either subst them in on user's personal pages or just clean them off of mainspace templates. Let's make sure we don't meddle with people's userpages any more than we have to. --Mr. Monkey Pant-hoot here. 23:24, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

“In userspace, no one can hear you scream.”

~ Alien

If it's in userspace, I say we take off, and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 23:31, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm... I could swear I've heard someone say that before... Oh yeah! It was a line from Aliens, right? I really should see those movies again... - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 00:43, Nov 9

They mostly come at night... mostly. -- Sir Codeine K·H·P·B·M·N·C·U·Bu. · (Harangue) 00:48, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

But take my advice, you don't stand a chance

Freaks are so bad they got their own dance

So if you wanna live a nice quiet life

Do yourself a favor, don't come out at night, 'cause

The freaks come out at night

The freaks come out at night

The freaks come out at night

(the freaks come out)

The freaks come out at night
Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 01:07, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

We should only be voting on stuff that's in the mainspace anyways. User templates... there's no need to delete those, ever. – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 01:02 Nov 09, 2008

The templates are in mainspace, but some users have them on their userpages. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 01:07, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

I recommend that bad templates which are exclusivity spammed in mainspace, but used a lot in userspace be kept, and removed from Uncyclopedia:Templates. Also, we are never going to stop people spamming templates by deleting a few of the bad offenders, but we might be able to cut it back a little bit. MrN 01:13, Nov 9

No (except for the bit about removal from Uncyclopedia:Templates). Instead, from now on when deleting templates, I will paste their code onto the userpages that use them (and, for any ones that were huffed before I said this thing that I'm saying right now, the users can just ask an admin to dig up the code and do the same). Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 01:19, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

I think we may not be understanding each other. What did you disagree about what I said??? It was my eyes again wasn't it? You got lost in my eyes again... :-) MrN 01:26, Nov 9

Template gets deleted from mainspace. Template gets deleted from Uncyclopedia:Templates. Template gets deleted from userpage and replaced with code from template. So, I agree with you and also disagree with you, with a 20% chance of rain. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 02:13, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, I disagree that we disagree, but then I thought about it, and realised that by disagreeing about what may or may not be a disagreement it was in-fact better to just shoot myself. /me shoots self... MrN 12:42, Nov 9

I doubt this will prove worthwhile thing whilst the "Cabal embargo" on Preparation H is in place. Shame.--Sycamore (Talk) 12:45, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

There is no embargo. MrN 12:55, Nov 9

MrN9001

I have managed to get my bot working now. It can relatively easily do mass removals of deleted templates, or replace templates with code (If that's what we want to do). Hopefully, that will make things a bit easier. MrN 00:43, Nov 10

But is it programmed to kill all humans, or did its observations of us teach it the emotion that humans call love? Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 00:47, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, most of its observations were of me, so I suspect we are in serious trouble... MrN 00:53, Nov 10

So, it learned this thing that humans call furry fandom. You've damned us all. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 00:59, 10 November 2008 (UTC)