Forum:QVFDs

Forums: Index > Ministry of Love > QVFDs

Note: This topic has been unedited for 5649 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.

Why don't we have quick deletion templates like ENWP and SEWP? Wouldn't they be easier? SwirlBoy39 00:38, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

• QVFD. We have a button--Lieutenant THEDUDEMAN Dude ... Totally UOTM KUN GotA F@H 00:40, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Did I install it right? If so, how do I use it? SwirlBoy39 00:44, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

To test it out, I'd just go to a shitty page (a la newpages) and click the tab that says 'QVFD' that should have appeared. Keep in mind, though, that QVFD is for a lowest of the low, namely pages that are less than 5 lines, spam, or vanity. - Don Leddy the Crunch (Nyah, see, nyah!) 00:49, May 23

I thought Wikipedia formed an ad hoc committee to decide which deletion template is appropriate to place? — Sir Manticore 00:53, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

(Edit conflict w/ Manticore) Sorry, I'm a n00b herez. I cleared my cache and still can't find a QVFD tab. Also what do you mean "Keep in mind, though, that QVFD is for a lowest of the low" SwirlBoy39 00:55, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Because we don't have quick deletion templates. We have slow deletion templates. Namely, {{ICU}}. If a page contains little to no effort and isn't being improved, it goes to QVFD. However, if the page seems like the author tried to make it or if the author is continually editing it, but it still sucks, we add the ICU tag, which marks the page to be reviewed in 7 days. If it still sucks, the admin deletes it. In any case, QVFD is reserved for the crap that isn't being improved or doesn't deserve the improvement it's getting (in the case of vanity articles). Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 01:16, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, that's about what I mean by the lowest of the low. Also, thanks very much for taking interest in helping out the admins! :) - Don Leddy the Crunch (Nyah, see, nyah!) 01:52, May 23

Oh, I thought you meant that QVFD was only used by people who were really low. Dam those nasty people. MrN 03:07, May 23

Actually, that was just a poorly conceived "your mom" joke. - Don Leddy the Crunch (Nyah, see, nyah!) 03:17, May 23

Of course! See, I am comedic in real life, but writing an article would be hard and would be huffed. If you would like to see my area of expertise and other wiki involvement please see these: me at ENWP, me at Simple, and me as a staffer here. SwirlBoy39 02:18, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

I particularly like your first link: "This page does not exist on this wiki.". On the second; wikipedia is not a badge of honour here. They aren't so great, and frankly they aren't funny at all. As for page writing, and the hardness thereof, take your time on such things and start small. Try to improve an existing page that's on a subject in which you are knowledgeable before you step out on your own and write an original page, for example. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 02:41, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

The reason you don't see the qvfd button like everybody else is becuase you placed the js in User/monobook.js. While our skin does resemble wikipedias monobook, we draw the skin as uncyclopedia, and as a result the js and css files go under User/uncyclopedia.js or css. --Lieutenant THEDUDEMAN Dude ... Totally UOTM KUN GotA F@H 03:25, 23 May 2008 (UTC)