The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
I am nominating this for deletion through MfD because these are not templates; these are template sandboxes, and thus do not belong in TfD.
These sandboxes only have 1-10 edits to them on average.
I do not have the time and effort to add MfD tags to these template sandboxes, and Twinkle will not do them for me. I also do not want the pages blanked accidentally by a bot...
I think having 20 template sandboxes is enough. The template sandboxes {{x1}} to {{x20}} all serve their purpose for the rare scenario where you need to test a deletion template or a warning/block notice. Having 30 more template sandboxes is unnecessary. We rarely ever have to test deletion and block templates. It makes no sense whatsoever that we need to create 30 more template sandboxes for something that we rarely do. Courtesy ping the creator of these pages
Evad37. Aasim12:48, 3 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Keep all Id someone had proposed creating these, I would probably have said that there is no need. But they exist. Deleting them will save no server space, prevent no harm, and do no good. The nomination wastes server space and volunteer time. ThEre is no policy-based reason for deletion, and none appears in the nomination statement. If the nominator cannot be bothered even to add an MfD template to each page, why should anyone be bothered to do the deletion? If someone does use one of these or has it on a watch list, how will that person know it is up for deletion. What purpose would such a deletion serve? None that I can see.
DES(talk)DESiegel Contribs13:36, 3 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Comment: I just added the tags an hour ago. I nominated these pages for deletion because of lack of use in the past six months and because we already have 20 sandboxes. It is not helpful to just add more areas to test. Of course, a nomination for deletion does not guarantee its deletion, but I do not see a use for having 30 more template sandboxes when even the original X1-X20 barely get used at all. Aasim14:30, 3 June 2020 (UTC)reply
I have struck my comment about the lack of tags. But "not being used" is not a valid reason for deletion. "Would not be used" is a valid reason not to create more of these, but oncfe they are here, it is far better to just ignore them than to nominate them for deletion. What benefit will deletion gain? Deleted pages still take up room on the servers, indeed a bit more room than if they were not deleted, because the deletion log entry is also stored.
DES(talk)DESiegel Contribs15:03, 3 June 2020 (UTC)reply
If the page is not used, or only used in extremely rare circumstances, then there is no point in having it. Of course, if we get this influx of editors that are interested in template editing we can always undelete it, I am not concerned about storage, but I do not think having 52 template sandboxes is going to be any more helpful than having 20. In fact, only template sandboxes X1-X20 are monitored by Cyberbot I, the issue with other template sandboxes is if
vandalism or
personal information or
attacks are posted there and no editor notices and it is not removed by the bot. Look at the
page information for X52. There are fewer than 30 watchers and the page has gotten less than four views in 30 days.
X1 has gotten many more page views and has a good few hundred watchers. There does not seem to be a point in having public pages that no one will ever use. In fact, as soon as we hit
X10 we are under 30 watchers. Aasim18:25, 3 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Comment - I created these because at the time I needed to test and fix how
XFDcloser was behaving when there were 50+ nominated pages in an XFD discussion. I don't have to any strong opinion as to what should happen to them now. - Evad37[
talk23:05, 3 June 2020 (UTC)reply
I think this user is making a point talking about how pointless creating so many template sandboxes is. I think the point is we keep the number of template sandboxes to a minimum so it does not create a huge mess to clean up.
GeoffreyT2000 you can definitely clarify that.
On a side note, I am seeing all these "weak keep" arguments. The purpose of template sandboxes is to test code before creating a template. And yes, I know, this user is an admin and is a good faith editor. In fact, they are a veteran editor who is known for their XFD closer script. I have nothing against this admin, I know we all make mistakes, and forget to clean up after testing sometimes...
If there is consensus to keep these templates, I won't care, but at least it is good that we have this discussion in the first place. If
Evad37 deletes the pages themself, I won't care either, and if there is consensus to delete, I won't care. I still think we can wait 7 days and see how this plays out, maybe we come to a consensus as to how many template sandboxes we should have. Maybe we don't. However it goes, at least it is good that we are having this discussion and those pages won't be nominated for deletion for a while should the page be kept. Aasim04:47, 4 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Weak Keep - I don't understand the purpose of the template sandboxes, probably because I don't need to understand their purpose. I don't understand the purpose of the deletion, and deletion of stuff being used by a real editor should have a purpose.
Robert McClenon (
talk)
02:42, 4 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Wrong venue Should be at TfD instead. Nevertheless, Delete all as clearly excessive; the vast majority of these have no edits other than their initial creation and Awesome Aasim's addition of MfD tags, which is akin to being unused, and unused templates are routinely deleted at TfD.
* Pppery *it has begun...18:33, 5 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Comment: I listed this here because they are not templates; they are sandboxes. Anyway, it does not matter as much because MfD is also for pages where there is a dispute as to the correct deletion venue. Aasim01:47, 7 June 2020 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.