Template talk:agree

RFD

The following information has failed Wiktionary's deletion process.

It should not be re-entered without careful consideration.

---

Template:agree

Unneeded template-itis. We don't need templates for each and every word. Note also the lack of a {{disagree}}. -- Liliana • 20:16, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

It seems less silly than many. It would be useful if one is not voting on an explicit proposal but on some statement. It could help make clear the direction of sometimes cryptic comments. I don't see why would wouldn't have {{disagree}}, too. DCDuring TALK 20:27, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Also, I think you might mean hypertemplatism, or did you find this template inflammatory? DCDuring TALK 20:30, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

I've always thought that we had too many templatomas leading to gigantotemplatism and bradytemplatism. DCDuring TALK 20:35, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

... - -sche (discuss) 16:26, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

1. Agree Mglovesfun (talk) 18:32, 2 March 2013 (UTC), delete. Mglovesfun (talk) 18:32, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

 Delete. Seems redundant of {{support}}, which would better be given a text parameter like {{vote keep}}. ~ Röbin Liönheart (talk) 21:13, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Comment: I intended to use this in polls. When the question read like "I prefer option A over option B", "support" sounded wrong, yet I wanted the agreement to be formally graphically marked up, like in {{support}}. "Disagree" was not needed, as "I prefer option A over option B" was complemented with "I prefer option B over option A" or the like. Admittedly, the template is not used much, and almost no one creates polls anyway. Whatever the case, the wording of deletion rationale seems to be an instance of pure rhetoric: "each and every word"? --Dan Polansky (talk) 12:19, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

1. Template:agree I think having a bold counter on votes is convenient, but the template is a practical failure. The appended signature is out of place if the editor chooses to comment, as we are encouraged to do, and it is incompatible with the custom signature feature in Special:Preferences. Fix or delete. —Michael Z. 2013-03-15 18:54 z

   Aaaand, this is a new kind of failure. Usually it enters a redundant sig for me. —Michael Z. 2013-03-15 18:56 z

   Because you didn't subst:. Mglovesfun (talk) 20:10, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

   1. Agree  —Michael Z. 2013-03-15 20:36 z 20:36, 15 March 2013 (UTC) Ah. Don’t recall substing it before, though. Add lack of documentation and unhelpful failure state to this template’s deficiencies. —Michael Z. 2013-03-15 20:36 z

Deleted, edited {{support}} as suggested above. Mglovesfun (talk) 13:44, 27 March 2013 (UTC)