User:Gatewaycat/sandbox

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  • Straus Park, Duke Ellington Blvd 106th St
  • Ansonia, Verdi Park, 72nd St
  • Lincoln Center, San Juan Hill, 66th St
  • Columbus Circle, 59th St
  • Times Square, 42nd St
  • Herald Square, 34th St
  • Flatiron District, Madison Square Park, 23rd St
  • Union Square, 14th St

{{reflist|2}}

UWT:

bad-faith 1st edit, {{blatant vandal}}, {{welcome-anon-vandal}} (very soft) good-faith; no edit summary -- {{uw-delete1}} (not good-faith enough, more concentration of edit summary omission/unclear summary) first edit text deletion, no edit summary

{{uw-unsourced1}} -- no trivia sections i remember being very confused by the name UTM, prefer UWT

{{VCRW}} (Do not remove verified content from pages without reason) {{Vandalblock}} (your account is only being used for vandalism, so it has been blocked indefinitely) {{Vww}} (Please don't accuse editors of vandalism unless you're absolutely sure)

{{uw-error1}} assumes good-faith the wrong way, that the misinformation was a test, instead of an accident, maybe {{Verror-m}} is better

{{uw-thankyou}}--why two uses? (cleanup, apology); i dont like having a template, too impersonal, seeing as the apology was probably by hand (or do we have an apology template?)

de-categorise, don't mass MfD UTM's in the user namespace

i like {{Anon vandal}}

{{Userfied}} cute

keep the welcome pages, becuase people have favorites, support bc having too-many/duplicate/non-uniformly-named UWT is confusing

{{Welcome-anon-vandal}} {{User-OR}}








Template:user has a bunch of good templates

2007 Natural Calendar

2007 Natural Calendar (Booklet)

Ideas:

  • Recessions of the 1990s article series
  • UWT for bad-faith first edits; {{blatant vandal}}?, had to use welcome anon-vandal (too soft)
  • UWT for good-faith edits with no edit summary
  • UWT for first edit, text deletion with no edit summary (ie, libel, incorrect)

replace "--" and " - " with "—"

WPSW: List of Manhattan neighborhoods, HCHS (yet to do)

Some useful Wikipedia project pages:

  • WP:UWT—User warning templates
    • {{uw-spam1}}—for adding spam external links (contrary to WP:SPAM, WP:LINKS, WP:COI; please note, all three articles consider the other two main articles, I suggest making WP:SPAM the main one and WP:COI a see also)
    • {{uw-biog1}}—for libel (contrary to WP:LIVING)

Some userful Wikipedia project policy pages:

  • WP:TRIV—no trivia sections (we need a {{uw-triv1}} including welcome for new users plus higher UWTs)
  • WP:CONTEXT—don't go crazy with the wikilinks

My Immediatist tenancies: if an article is four pages long, extremely well written, nuanced, encyclopedic, neutral, and has 60 footnotes, it should be given the benefit of the doubt for Notability (and to a lesser extent, WP:OR) because as an article, it makes Wikipedia look good in the eyes of the public! Notability was originally invented to keep out Physics cranks. Usually non-notable articles are crap, and notability is used as the (good) excuse to delete it.

Maybe each UWT could be corresponded with a WP policy page


I agree with that admin (who i can't remember) that hates cleanup templates in some ways. For example, {{trivia}} should never be used—integrate the trivia yourself, or if the section is too big, delete the trivial (haha) content and then integrate, or if you're really short of time, add a invisible note, perhaps in huge uppercase letters, but DONT just add {{trivia}} because it may just sit there for months