Template talk:Quality

Revert?

Hey,

I'd like to revert this back to a pre-date parameter version, since I've been seeing so many undated warnings pop up, but I'd like to discuss first. Yes? No? Reasons? chiefbozx • talk • contribs 22:46, 26 April 2014 (EDT)

Meh KittyCat11231 (talk) 02:59, 27 April 2014 (EDT)

I would like to NOT have quality dating as its pointless and isn't a rating enough. Also if we wanted to check who did rated it, couldn't we just look at the history of the page to check the date, time & person? Music3 0 (talk) 03:07, 27 April 2014 (EDT)

I concurr, and I will go further to say that the quality ratings themselves are pointless jphgolf4321 (talk) 07:09, 27 April 2014 (EDT)

I think that it is a goodish idea, but we should not have warnings popping up everywhere. It should be purely in the metadata of the page. --Logiblocs (talk) 04:55, 27 April 2014 (EDT)

My apologies for not responding to this earlier, as I have been extremely busy with university exams over the past week and haven't had the chance to do anything MRT-related as of late. My stance was that since rating-based deletion was a staff-determined policy, an indicator helping to identify which pages qualified for that would be found useful, especially since after several page updates it becomes difficult to remember which update contained the rating when looking for the date. I added a notification for pages that are past the date to give editors some form of advance warning that their page will be deleted soon and why (as opposed to staff having to manually add the deletion template to every page past the threshold and then give that page another two weeks leeway), and I added a notification for undated pages in order to make it clearer why a page would be immediately marked as pending deletion should a user not date the page correctly after the initial three weeks/months of the timer being in place (without making use of MediaWiki extensions it is impossible to tell if a page is undated because it existed before the timer was added or if it was not dated properly when created). If people are still open to it then it would be easy enough to adjust the code to category-only notifications for one or both of these scenarios, but if the entire concept of rating-based deletion is what people are opposed to I suggest the policy itself be reconsidered rather than just its implementation. --Hunter X (talk) 10:27, 5 May 2014 (EDT)