Forum:NRV Too!: The Admin Who Shagged Me

Forums: Index > Village Dump > NRV Too!: The Admin Who Shagged Me

Note: This topic has been unedited for 6448 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over.

---

---

UPDATE: Results are in. The New Tag is now named {{ICU}}, but for the foreseeable future {{NRVmini}} will redirect to it.

The Delection Policy and Ten Commandments have been updated to prefer the usage on ICU over NRV. Please read up on the template and start using it instead of NRV. We'll keep you updated on the progess of this experimental policy change.

Note also, that you can make your own reusable custom messages to use with the template in addition to the ones provided. Just place the code on Template:ICU/yourCustomMessageTemplate and put it on pages with {{ICU|~~~~~|sub=yourCustomMessageTemplate}}.

Signed: ---Rev. Isra (talk) 04:02, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

---

---

A new tag? Gasp!

As a result of discussions here, here, and here, I — along with my trusty side-kick Famine (ducks) — have devised a slightly new tag to use for NRVing. Currently it is called the NRVmini, but Apple is threatening to sue, so we have to change the name. The options are: New, Baby, TAG, BLS, ICU. Or we could just be lazy and use the name NRV, which would mean all existing intances of NRV would just change to the new tag. Either way, we are hoping to depreciate the old version of NRV. We need to hear from you, the CABAL people, about what we should name it. ---Rev. Isra (talk) 01:17, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Deprecate. And are you totally set on the pink-on-blue colour scheme with dashed borders for the pre-set messages on those? Because ugh. I may {{sofixthat}} sometime if not. Otherwise, it's a good idea. I don't think it should replace the other one completely, as the big scary one should still be used on the awful ones that really have no redeming value, and probably won't ever have either. It's better for the ones that have potential or are a good idea, but won't survive in their current form. Also, it needs some kind of indication to the author that they may find the article gone in 7 days if they don't do anything. Just a "edit within 7 days... or else" or something. As for the name, I vote for NRVmini. Just to be awkward. Also because I like it. • Spang • ☃ • talk • 02:05, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

The color is open to changing. And each subtemplate can be different. For the really sucky ones you can use the super secret "sub=original" attribute.---Rev. Isra (talk) 02:09, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Not secret anymore! --thematrixeætsyou, the kickass foo (talk) (flames) 05:19, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Thought: how about a graphic of some sort- a little red cross? Or one of them staff thingies with the snakes? A cute little ambulance?InfiniteMonkey 04:30, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

If you would like to make a sub-template with a Wikipedia:Rod_of_asclepius you are certainly welcome. For the main template itself, there is no graphic because of size concerns.---Rev. Isra (talk) 05:04, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Using the New Tag

If you NRV things, head on over to Template:NRVmini and see what this tag can do. While it will work without any comment, just like regular NRV, we are discouraging that because of the Fourth Commandment of tagging: "Thou shalt be helpful to authors!" Lucky for you, there are already several nifty built-in messages you can use.---Rev. Isra (talk) 01:17, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Naming the Tag

Just plain NRV

Score: -1

• For. ---Rev. Isra (talk) 01:17, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
• For. It keeps continuity and doesn't confuse users. It's worked well enough so far. --Sir ENeGMA (talk) GUN WotM PLS 01:45, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
• Against. The old one is still needed. • Spang • ☃ • talk • 02:10, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
• Against, concur with Spang. --Algorithm 02:25, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
• 'Against. ~ T. (talk) 10:45, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

ICU

Score: +4

• For. I like the implication that the article will die if someone doesn't save its life.--<<>> 01:41, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
• For. Could also work as "I See You writing a sucky article. Here's how to fix it. Sir Famine, Gun ♣ Petition » 02:12, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
• Strong For per Famine. Crazyswordsman...With SAVINGS!!!! (T/C) 03:39, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
• IV. --thematrixeætsyou, the kickass foo (talk) (flames) 05:24, 9 October 2006 (UTC) (and that's the roman numeral for 4, which is Four, which without a "u" it's For.)
• For. I like this idea. Intensive Care Unit strongly implies "care". I mean, of course we don't, this tag it's more of a toe-tag for a cadaver, but it's the appearance that counts. InfiniteMonkey 04:29, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

NRVLite

Score: +1

• For. 22:39, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

TAG

Score: +0

New

Score: +0

NRVmini

Score: +2

• Yea. • Spang • ☃ • talk • 02:10, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
• Yes. --Hrodulf 22:40, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Something else

Score: +0

General Comments

Frankly, I'm not sure this tag is a very good idea in general. The whole point of NRV is to outright say "This page, in its current form, should be deleted. Fix it or else." By making the message as vague as is given above, one runs the risk of not effectively communicating this point to the page author, and thereby making them very confused when deletion occurs a week later. If we want to make the message less harsh, fine; Famine's earlier idea of having several different templates based on the situation is a good one. But if the template is being used as a marker for imminent deletion, it should say so, and say so clearly. In my opinion, having a link to a policy page is insufficient. --Algorithm 02:33, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

The prevailing wisdom around here for some time, which I have grown to agree with, is that blankly stating that an article will be deleted does not proove to be a good motivator. I see more "gonna be deleted? then screw working on it" responses than "oh, crap, i better fix it so it isn't deleted" responses. If a page is deleted and the user is confused, the page can be restored. If the user feels insulted by the tag and never comes back, we can't remedy that. Perhaps it will proove a mistake to word the tag my way (though I've been using the tag myself for a while without getting complaints). If it is a mistake, we'll find out and can go back to the old way. That is one of the reasons I'd like to use the NRV name. That way if this experiment doesn't work, we can just revert and carry on with the old tag. ---Rev. Isra (talk) 02:57, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm all for it, it might give new users some better motivation to improve without scaring good intention noobs away, when they see this big red NRV stamped all over their page. -- Brigadier Sir Mordillo GUN UotY WotM FP UotM AotM MI³ AnotM VFH +S 11:17, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm tickled pink/simply amazed that at least some of you have come to agree with at least some aspects of my opinion on this subject. I'm stunned because this is honestly the first time this has ever happened to me. Seriously. Anyway, yeah, I think like I've been saying all along that we should try to educate and improve rather than punish; you have to give people who are a bit clueless about the site some guidance, rather than essentially attack them for writing badly, if you want to motivate them to do better. At least, we'll see if my theory is right if we put a new policy into practice that aims towards that direction.--Hrodulf 22:42, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Would it help if someone wrote a So you've been NRV'd? article that the template links to, with abuse helpful advice and encouragement? Then the n00b would know immediately where to go for broad help. Or does such a page already exist? 07:41, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

I started one a while ago at User:Spang/Help:What to do about NRV, but kinda got bored, and I think the NRV page has some guidelines and help on it. But I think that such a page is a good idea. • Spang • ☃ • talk • 07:47, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

There's a passage on that in the howto guide also, so I think we have it covered, unless you want to add something. --Hrodulf 07:49, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

I try to address that in UN:NRV which is linked via the template. Feel free to add more. ---Rev. Isra (talk) 09:08, 11 October 2006 (UTC)