User:Syndrome/Mnbvspiel

Why Comment templates are discouraged

Looking at your talk page, it appears that no one has explained why we don't like this type of template. Bear in mind that although I am a moderately experienced user, I am not an admin, and there are several non-admin users who are more experienced than myself.

Basically, try to avoid creating templates that function as a "canned joke" and lack any other use. "Canned joke" templates (also called comment templates) are never funny, for the simple fact that a joke gets old when it appears on dozens of pages in the exact same form. Most comment templates fall into 4 basic types:

Approves/Disapproves templates

for example:

Moses Loves This Article

Moses, the man known far and wide for his abilities to arbitrarily part any legs he feels (including those of your mom, your sister, and that one bitch you used to date), has approved this article. Those who dispute his approval shall feel the wrath of the Ten Commandments, Captain Jesus, and the modern Moses.

---

These templates say that a given person/organization/thing approves, disapproves, likes, hates, etc the article. These templates generally tell the reader what the article is about, albeit, in a round about manner. However, in most instances, the reader can surmise the subject from the title. This means that the template is conveying Even when this type of template reveals the subject matter, that knowledge is not needed, and has the potential to ruin jokes.

Written By templates

for example: This are like Approves/disapproves templates. They can sometimes tell the reader what the article is about, but that information is either already revealed by the title, useless, or ruins jokes that appear later in the article.

This is "X"

for example:

This article contains material related to Japanese animation and was done by an Otaku. Don't be scared by the huge eyes and enormous tits.

These templates are like the written by or approves/disapproves templates. Although they are more direct than the two above, the also convey no information.

Pseudo-Warning templates

for example: These are close to warning templates; however, a pseudo-warning template points out the presence of something that the reader wouldn't find offensive or disturbing. In other words, if a warning template was the equivalent of a "Beware of Guard Dog" sign in real life, a pseudo-warning template would be a "Beware of 5 lB Furball lapdog" sign.

Your template is a "approves template", obviously. Anyway, here are why templates are discouraged:

1. As I already mentioned, a comment template is at best a "canned jokes", and canned jokes never work
2. templates are difficult to remove once they get established. Templates can be spammed almost as quickly as they can be removed, whereas bad writing takes longer to write than it does to undo. Additionally,
3. templates tend to make pages ugly. One to two templates look ok, but an article with several templates looks ugly.

Additionally, as a rule, don't place userspace templates in mainspace articles. And definitely don't spam userspace templates in mainspace. Uncyclopedia has a policy against deleting userspace pages, so this "template" is immune from {{ICU}}, VFD, and other quality control mechanisms. If this was mainspace, it would have probably gotten an ICU tag, or at least a "do we really need this" message on its talk page, and the unfortunate instance could have been avoided. --Mnb'z 01:55, 11 May 2009 (UTC)