Template talk:Hangon

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please note: This page is only for discussion of the "hangon" template. Please do not place reasons for why your page should not be deleted here. Such comments are unlikely to be noticed by the relevant persons. If you have come here in order to write an explanation of why some page should not be deleted, please go instead to the talk page for the page in question.

[edit] User:Kim Bruning

You know, you'd think that if people now have to post HangOn on a page, that eventualism would be dead. I guess we should monitor use of this template. If it gets used much at all, it might be nescesary to drastically curb speedy deletion. Kim Bruning

It's about time people had this. If it's contested, that's what VFD is for. DyslexicEditor 06:38, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Color of the template.

Shouldn't this template's color be one that is contrasting to the speedy delete templates. Looking at it quickly, it is mistaken for part of the speedy del. template. I propose a light blue, perhaps. → J@red  00:33, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

You mean something like:

{{hangon|bgcolor=lightblue}}

I disagree; that's a good thing. We don't want to have a zillion rainbow-colored tags on an article. --Rory096 23:36, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

I disagree with User:Rory096's comment. The {{hangon}} tag is only supposed to be on an article for a short time, and the advantage that a contrasting colour would provide by reducing confusion is far bigger than the disadvantage by making a page look slightly worse for a short time. I will change the background colour to aqua. Polonium 18:13, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Does it have to be aqua? It's contrasting yes, but, not exactly easy on the eyes. Can it be a more... conventional blue like originally suggested? --Signed and Sealed, JJJJust (T C) 20:44, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Ouch my eyes! Blue or Green are good ideas but can we please have something a bit darker? It's very hard when strolling through the hangons! J.J.Sagnella 21:05, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

It does not matter what colour it is (in my opinion) as long as it contrasts with the colour used on CSD templates. If you prefer green or some other colour, you may change it, as long as it still contrasts. Polonium 22:38, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

I changed it to lightblue. Polonium 22:39, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Comment

Hangon is normally used for people who don't want their article to be deleted, or thinks differently about stuff, people still can remove the speedy tag if they don't clearly qualify for one, they just can't remove it if it's there own article or if the person is not that sure if it qualifies. I still do that for example. Thanks Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 18:09, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Talk page or at Wikipedia:Speedy deletions

I would prefer commmentary to be written only on the talk page. Is there a good reason to have to check two places for possible discussion before deletion? Kusma (討論) 19:33, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

I wholeheartedly agree with this sensible suggestion. Furthermore, the speedy delete box contains a list of reminders to the deleting admin of things to check. The article's talk page should be one of the entries on this list. lowercase 19:42, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A request

Sorry about the confustion. I am a new article writer for Wikipedia and am still learning the ropes. However, the article about the plague is ment to inform the reader on various ways one may get infected and prevention methods. Please let me know if this meets the critera.

Have a great day!

[edit] Categorization

Why does this template categorize pages into Category:Candidates for speedy deletion? Stifle (talk) 02:15, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure that this is the actual reason, but: The people who write speedy-deletable pages tend to be newbies who don't yet know Wikipedia procedure, and might very well replace a speedy deletion tag with a {{hangon}} tag. The extra categorization tag keeps the page from falling through the cracks in this case. (When the template is used properly, the categorization tag appears twice, but this causes no real harm.) lowercase 03:13, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Looks like you nailed it: [1] -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 02:48, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Possibly add current date

Does anyone here think that it could be helpful to have {{Hangon}} show the amount of time it was on the page for? This way an administrator could easily tell if it is probably stale. It doesn't seem like it is too challenging to make a template showing this amount of time. -- kenb215 23:09, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

If would have to be substed, wouldn't it? As most people creating speedily deletable pages are new and unacquainted with policy or the use of the site's code, I don't see this as being a good idea, since it would also create more code bloat on pages. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 00:34, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] {{hangon|Comment}}

I've moved part of my original post under this heading from here to Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 04:17, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

I recall now that {{hangon}} is meant to be removed once the explanation is written on the talk page. Is this ever really done? Do admins even check talk pages of speedied articles? Since speedied articles are deleted, uh, speedily, why not just let {{hangon}} hang on until deletion/keeping? -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 01:01, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree, admins do not check the talk page usually. The {{hangon}} tag is the only way to notice that it is controversial. I will remove the notice. Polonium 19:30, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hangon cannot be placed on talk page

This page: Talk:Lori_Klausutis is listed for speedy delete per C8. However, it is impossible to put a "hangon" template in the talk page and the project page is protected. Since there is criteria for speedy deleting a talk page, shouldn't the hangon template be able to be added and show normally? --*Spark* 17:30, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree whole-heartedly. GRrr. Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 08:30, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I just ran into this as well and find it to be very confusing. Please also see discussion on the same problem at the {{db-talk}} talk page. Either:

1. the db-talk template has to change to not refer to the ability to "hangon"
2. or this template needs to be able to be included in talk namespace
3. or a new hangon-talk needs to be instituted and the db-talk template modified to reference that template instead of this one for contesting csd in talk namespace

Thoughts? ju66l3r 21:31, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

I've implemented a version in my sandbox. With my version , you can override this using the tp parameter: {{hangon|tp=1}} shows up as:

This should solve the problem. --Sigma 7 00:43, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Done. Please let me know if it causes any problems. Xiner (talk, email) 20:25, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Madrilenian or Madrilenial Butterfly

Have you heard of the program "The Most Extreme"? It is a program on Animal Planet and I just recently watched an episode named "Bloodsuckers". I am aware that my spelling is incorrect, because I'm not sure about it, wierd name. And I know that there aren't any websites about this species, however ... on the program, they did tell me that this species was recently discovered therefore, I don't think there are any websites on the Internet about this species. But, I'm afraid it's true, this butterfly does suck blood! Go to this website: http://www.tv.com/the-most-extreme/bloodsuckers/episode/620507/recap.html Radical3 23:14, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Radical3"

I appreciate that a lot of effort has gone into developing the guidelines for contesting a decision to delete a submission but the hang on business is still short of being user friendly for the public out there.

[edit] Suggesting a change in wording

The wording "the page may still be deleted if it is considered that the page unquestionably meets the speedy deletion criteria" is clunky. "Considered" by whom? An admin, clearly, in which case "it is considered that" is superfluous: admins have this discretionary power without needing a template to spell it out. The unnecessary passive voice evokes images of shadowy coteries sitting in judgement on every article (so true!). Suggest leaving just "the page may still be deleted if it unquestionably meets etc." — Kaustuv Chaudhuri 02:27, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Sounds reasonable to me. -- Ned Scott 04:43, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

How's "if it is considered by an administrator..."? Nevermind, I read it wrong. Sounds good to me. Luigi30 (Taλk) 18:33, 26 January 2007 (UTC) Luigi30 (Taλk) 18:31, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Removal of hangon tag

I found an instance where a hangon tag was removed from an article by someone who left the speedy deletion template in place. I found this behavior shockingly inconsiderate, and so I have added a note in the tag explaining that the hangon tag should not be removed if the speedy deletion template is to remain. I don't expect this to be controversial, but just in case -- the point of this tag is to allow for a mark on a page to let a reviewing administrator know that the article creator objects and may be working to correct the problem or offer an explanation (or may have already done so). Remember that the article creator is not allowed to remove speedy tags, so they need some way of doing this. Hangon tags should only be removed if the speedy deletion is denied, otherwise, the fact that the article creator wants to mention something should remain obvious on the page. Mangojuice^talk 15:37, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Awkward wording

The last sentence: "Nonetheless, this template should not be removed from a page if it will still be marked with a speedy deletion template."

There should be a better wording. It took me about 20 seconds to realize what this meant, and I wasn't absolutely sure until I read the comment in the history by the user that added this wording.

Perhaps, "Once this {{hang-on}} template has been added, it should not be removed until until an administrator has made a decision and removed the speedy deletion template." Sanchom (talk) 20:32, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

I changed it to "This template should not be removed from a page still marked with a speedy deletion template.". -- Rick Block (talk) 20:29, 25 February 2007 (UTC)