Template talk:Challenge

I like a template as much as the next person who enjoys templates, but what does this do? Go on the person's talkpage? Why not just leave a note saying "stop being an arse and post on the talkpage"? -  π     09:30, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I think it's a preemptive strike against wheel warring. The point is to issue a test that should be met before anyone has a right to complain. Used currently on the Freeman-on-the-land article as an experimental test-case for it. Scarlet A.pngbomination 09:50, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I saw it on the Freeman on the land article, and assumed it was an old template that hadn't gotten around to properly dying yet :-/   11:08, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * We'll see if anything happens with it, it's worth experimenting. I mean, how many BoN edits do we get to articles because they think it's "wrong"? If we can say "here's the evidence you need to give" it at least directs the conversation and prevents us moving the goalposts. An alternative is to, instead of templating the articles, to create a list, say RationalWiki:Challenges, to include them all. It would effectively be like James Randi's million-dollar challenge but A) with a wider remit and B) no prize money, only the ability to overturn a wiki article. Scarlet A.pngpathetic 13:57, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * This should be in an edit notice, not cluttering up articles. -- Nx  / talk 14:02, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Good idea. Scarlet A.pngmoral 14:04, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * In fact, it's the result of a suggestion I made here.  The idea was that something with challenged Freemen should come early in the article.  David then had a go at generalising the idea.--BobSpring is sprung! 15:15, 19 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I put it up as an experiment to see if it would reduce page-blanking or whaargarbl all over the page from freemen. Putting it into an edit notice may appeal to our sense of bureaucracy, but it will barely be noticed. This way it also asks for what the whaargarblers keep not providing - David Gerard (talk) 18:02, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * The reason to put it into an edit notice is that this is only relevant to somebody trying to edit the article, and it only clutters up the article for readers. -- Nx  / talk 20:17, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * It is part of the content - it's relevant that non-fans keep whaargarbling all over it - David Gerard (talk) 09:03, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually, the edit notice issue is that people don't always click "edit" to bitch. They take it off-site and whine on their own forums. BUT, I can see how it would be tidier and more relevant as an edit notice, as that does clean up the appearance a lot. Instead of the massive honking template, we could just replace it with a hatnote. Scarlet A.pnggnostic 11:56, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Something about this template rubs me the wrong way, I think it weakens an article as far as the "visceral" feel of its authenticity and accuracy goes. Tmtoulouse (talk) 14:25, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
 * It doesn't seem to have done much for the drive-by editors. Though today's at least created a username - David Gerard (talk) 17:27, 25 January 2012 (UTC)