FANDOM


Needed? Єяøהħ 16:37, 13 September 2007 (CEST)

Yes. Deleting talk pages is a big deal, and care must be taken before discussions about why the article itself was deleted are removed - they might be useful to reference in the future. --MasterPatricko 17:55, 23 September 2007 (CEST)
But wouldn't a standard delete tag do that just fine? Єяøהħ 20:37, 23 September 2007 (CEST)
The difference is that the standard delete tag has a link to the current page's talk page. This template has a link to the current page (since it should be a talk page). --MasterPatricko 22:02, 23 September 2007 (CEST)
You can't link a page to itself, see. So there's really no point to linking to itself. I dunno, I'm sure if we worked at it we could design a single thing.

Perhaps {{delete|reason|talk}}. Leaving the talk spot blank treats the delete tag like a standard one, while putting talk into that spot changes it to a talk page delete. Єяøהħ 22:14, 23 September 2007 (CEST)

You are correct, you could engineer a solution like that. The question is, is there really any point? We have this working, and having one extra template really isn't a big deal. Don't misunderstand me, I understand where you're coming from, but it's really not worth the effort - we've got bigger issues to deal with. For example a few of us are now trying to write guides ... dunno whether that will work. Needs some community input on whether that is something we want to do seriously. --MasterPatricko 23:09, 23 September 2007 (CEST)
Community content is available under CC-BY-NC-SA 2.5 unless otherwise noted.