Template talk:Welkome

Someone is convinced that there are already too many editors here... ;-) Editor at CP^{for a change} 09:30, 7 April 2008 (EDT)

Just covering our Asses! SusanG 09:34, 7 April 2008 (EDT)

Delete

Personal vanity template, that does not further the goals of RW at all, just the ranting of one user. Serves no general good... ħuman 02:16, 29 July 2008 (EDT)

Look @ the history, it's got your input.   ^Contribs_Talk 02:19, 29 July 2008 (EDT)

Er, to fix the width? It's junk, delete it, or defend it. ħuman 02:22, 29 July 2008 (EDT)

No to add contewnt   ^Contribs_Talk 02:26, 29 July 2008 (EDT)

Looks like I mostly reduced cwowntwewnt? Anyway, this template is silly. ħuman 02:40, 29 July 2008 (EDT)

Look H, we all know that you're always right so delete it.   ^Contribs_Talk 02:41, 29 July 2008 (EDT)

Oh, let's have cup of tea and reconsider ;) I be gone for mine... ħuman 02:43, 29 July 2008 (EDT)

AND if you stick things on a template that's transcluded, as this one is, then PLEASE noinclude 'em.   ^Contribs_Talk 10:26, 5 August 2008 (EDT)

I must say this template doesn't do a lot for me.--Bob^{bing up} 10:37, 5 August 2008 (EDT)

As there's been no action, I suggest removing the delete template, even if this doesn't get used again. Wéáśéĺóíď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 19:54, 22 January 2009 (EST)

Well, the template is there if someone wants to use it. If they don't want to use it, they don't use it. So I assume keep? ArmondikoV^pathetic 09:09, 23 January 2009 (EST)

This is way better than the welcome/IP one. I'm using this one from now on for anonymous editors. - User $\scriptstyle {\sqrt {12}}\sum _{n=0}^{\infty }(-3)^{-n}(2n+1)^{-1}$ 09:18, 23 January 2009 (EST)