Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:UBX/CPL-FCE
- 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.
The result of the discussion was: no consensus. —ScottyWong— 23:55, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
Unusused userbox that is inconsistent with the established naming convention of "CanPL-Team name". Also appears that "UBX/CPL-Team name" is used for a minor league baseball league. Nothing wrong with the template, but since it is unused and conflicted with another naming convention I felt for consistency sake this could be deleted. Jay eyem (talk) 16:36, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
- Redirect to User:UBX/CanPL-FCE. No need for two FCE userboxes, but I want people who use this one to still have a UBX displayed. Tom Danson (talk) 13:34, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
- Do not delete. This is an unappealing userbox ("not" things are not useful), and userbox guidlines could be tightened. Bold redirecting to a better version should be encouraged, but MfD does not exist to support this sort of thing. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:23, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
- I am confused as to why this is a problematic proposal. In the "Information on the process" section it includes userboxes, and this is one that is unused and breaks the current naming convention, both of which I know are common rationales for deletion (for templates at least). Where else would I have brought this discussion if not MfD? Jay eyem (talk) 05:10, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
- You are OK to bring this to MfD because you are asking for deletion. I argue against because I don't think you have exhausted WP:ATD options, and I do not see deletion as justified. (but note that the stakes involved are trivially small)
- By default, I think the standard for deletion is that it was wrong to have made it in the first place. Otherwise, archive, or archive by redirection, or do nothing.
- The thing that I mean MfD is not for is deciding which userbox should be redirected to which other userbox. There may be other options. One problem with having that discussion in a formal MfD discussion is that later, if someone objects, it is too easy for some people to thnk that the MfD discussion with its formal close carries heavy weight. So, on the question of what gets redirected where, discuss that on one of the userbox talk pages.
- I don't mean to tell you that this is a "problematic proposal". SmokeyJoe (talk) 05:33, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
- Ok cool, I just wasn't really sure because I've only made a few MfD nominations in the past. Thanks! Jay eyem (talk) 15:04, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
- I am confused as to why this is a problematic proposal. In the "Information on the process" section it includes userboxes, and this is one that is unused and breaks the current naming convention, both of which I know are common rationales for deletion (for templates at least). Where else would I have brought this discussion if not MfD? Jay eyem (talk) 05:10, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
- 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.