Template talk:User dead

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

I don't think anything good can come of this. Can we just delete it? WëäŝëïöïďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 12:21, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Gut feeling tells me I agree with Weasel, problem is I can't think of a logical reason why. - π 12:39, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
EC DAMN YOU PSYGREMLIN!!! It isn't about logic, it's about aste and gut feeling. "Under no circumstances should it be used" kinda negates the whole point of it really. Shall we delete? Totnesmartin (talk) 12:44, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
I dunno, it's kinda creepy. Just delete the user page. That said, should I snuff it any time soon, I will expect RW's mainpage to be solid black, piping mournful midi music, for at least a month. --Ψ GremlinPraat! 12:42, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
Delete. Scarlet A.pngsshole 12:46, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

The original note ended "Under no circumstances should it be used in a non-serious capacity" which looks a lot like "don't stuff beans up your nose". I amended it when I put the delete template up. If we know/suspect a former editor is dead & want to note it on their userpage, I think it's better to put a short note saying when it happened & how we know about it rather than a terse "user is dead" template. ŴêâŝêîôîďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 12:58, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Considering the severity of such an event, it's considerably more tactful to explain it on the page on an ad hoc basis rather than a generic template. Scarlet A.pngsshole 13:18, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
Indeed. Really, I would think that under no circumstances should it be used in a serious capacity. --Cyan mowse 2.png λινυσ() 13:21, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
Better not to have it at all. I think sooner or later this template would have been used flippantly or ambiguously, & it could open a whole can of worms. It's a bit academic as it's now been deleted, but that was my thinking in wanting to delete it. WeaseloidWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 13:26, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
It's an interesting discussion to have, regardless, as it's something we should be prepared for in principle. MySpace and Facebook learned a few years ago that they needed a system in place to deal with situations where a user dies. This is quite important especially as FB deals with fairly real life relationships and intereactions. However, we have a much smaller userbase and the odds are astronomically smaller that we would ever need to deal with it (well, we've been going four years and have a fairly diverse demographic, it's not impossible, as we've seen), so something procedural and regimented isn't really neccessary. As such, you're definitely right that a strict system, e.g., templates, in place would be far more open to misuse than genuine use. Scarlet A.pngsshole 14:28, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
It does make you wonder what happens to people who suddenly stop editing without an explanation. In my early days at WP there was a certain admin who was highly active (and useful). Then he just...stopped. I eventually forgot all about him until the other day when going through an edit history and his name came up. Totnesmartin (talk) 15:53, 6 February 2011 (UTC)