Difference between revisions of "Template talk:Clr"
From LGPedia
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
:: Renegade, there's really no reason for that tone. Zoey said, "if no objections," but you objected so, no big deal, we'll keep it. Zoey meant no harm and absolutely no offense. When you first made your point about no template catalogue I directed you to [[:category:Templates]] — months later it continues to function as our template catalogue. The categories are, in fact, sorted by function and their names should make their purpose fairly obvious. If you'd like to further document the templates, you're more than welcome to. --[[User:JayHenry|JayHenry]] 22:23, 2 June 2007 (CDT) | :: Renegade, there's really no reason for that tone. Zoey said, "if no objections," but you objected so, no big deal, we'll keep it. Zoey meant no harm and absolutely no offense. When you first made your point about no template catalogue I directed you to [[:category:Templates]] — months later it continues to function as our template catalogue. The categories are, in fact, sorted by function and their names should make their purpose fairly obvious. If you'd like to further document the templates, you're more than welcome to. --[[User:JayHenry|JayHenry]] 22:23, 2 June 2007 (CDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | :::What "tone"? Those were very valid question. There is no reason to delete this template, deleting it would serve no purpose at all, and yet she's pushing through with an objection time of a mere 24 hours. | ||
| + | :::What if I had been away over the weekend, hm? Then the template would've been gone by tonight and I wouldn't even ''know'' about the deletion, and would have had no way to object. wtf kind of tactic is that? | ||
| + | ::::~ [[User:Renegade|Renegade]] ([[User talk:Renegade|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Renegade|contribs]]) 07:31, 3 June 2007 (CDT) | ||
Revision as of 12:31, 3 June 2007
If there are no objections in 24 hours I will delete :) --Zoey 18:54, 2 June 2007 (CDT)
- Objection? Why the hell would you want to force people to write <br clear="all"> if they don't even know wth they're doing or what either <br> or clear does?
- It's a convenience template, and it probably doesn't even eat a KB of space...so why delete it?
- If it's not used, that's probably only due to lack of propaganda...people just don't know it exists. (Which returns us back to the point I made months ago...LGPedia is lacking a central templates catalogue. Seeing 100 pages starting with Template: in a category listing doesn't tell me what they all do.)
- And if they do know it exists, they'll be confused when they need it, 'cause it'll be gone.
- Deleting this template serves no purpose at all.
- Renegade, there's really no reason for that tone. Zoey said, "if no objections," but you objected so, no big deal, we'll keep it. Zoey meant no harm and absolutely no offense. When you first made your point about no template catalogue I directed you to category:Templates — months later it continues to function as our template catalogue. The categories are, in fact, sorted by function and their names should make their purpose fairly obvious. If you'd like to further document the templates, you're more than welcome to. --JayHenry 22:23, 2 June 2007 (CDT)
- What "tone"? Those were very valid question. There is no reason to delete this template, deleting it would serve no purpose at all, and yet she's pushing through with an objection time of a mere 24 hours.
- What if I had been away over the weekend, hm? Then the template would've been gone by tonight and I wouldn't even know about the deletion, and would have had no way to object. wtf kind of tactic is that?
