Template talk:Articles for improvement five weekly selections notice

Safe to delete?

@Northamerica1000: This looks like a fork of {{AFI weekly selection notice}}. If it's not in use, could we delete it, and if it is in use, could we wrapperify it? {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 05:01, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Sdkb: I recommend tagging with the {{historical}} template. That way, people can see how the project has progressed, and also refer to the page if the project discusses changes to how many weekly articles are being presented. In fact, I would hesitate to nominate any project pages for deletion for lack of being used, because this also deletes reference points for how the project has evolved, and if people want to refer to older ideas, they won't be available. I can see how some are eager to improve the project, but said improvements, such as renaming the project, has caused significant problems, problems that I would rather not have to deal with. Still, I continue to have to do so anyway, as denoted, for example here. No offense, but it is not on the top of my list of fun things I want to do on Wikipedia, but nobody else fixes the problems that were created, so I'm left having to point them out. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:44, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Northamerica1000, okay, I tagged historical as suggested.

Regarding your more general point, I understand the frustration; it's never ideal when anything breaks, even temporarily. I really don't think there's anyone to blame, though. All I did was make the move nomination, which does not carry any extra obligation with it since it's just starting a discussion. All the closer did was assess the consensus in the discussion, and all the implementer did was carry out the close. After it became clear that there was a lot more cleanup than expected, I volunteered my time to help since I want to see this project succeed, but it was a choice since I'm a volunteer, not an obligation, and to be blunt with you, I'd rather be thanked for the amount of work I've put into this way beyond what I initially signed up for than blamed for the fact that there are still kinks to iron out. Sure, it would have been nice if someone had noted the amount of cleanup during the RM, but that didn't happen and it's water under the bridge now, and having this project have a name that actually reflects our functioning will help a lot with getting it more active again. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 20:48, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Sdkb: Thanks for the follow-up regarding matters. I too am a volunteer, and the point of automating TAFI, in part, was to make it easier to manage, which I used to spend a lot of time performing when everything was manual. It was not my intention to lay blame. Rather, just to point out that when a project with lots of subpages and templates is renamed, it is important for everything to be moved accordingly, rather than having errors in place. Sorry for any misunderstanding. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:57, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]