Board Thread:The Panopticon/@comment-5442547-20130420014827/@comment-188432-20130421222915

Just as on Wikipedia, or MemoryAlpha or Wookieepedia, or any other large, popular wiki, templates can be freely created by any user here at Tardis. But there are always templates that get deleted because they're not actually such a good idea, or protected or locked because they're vital.

You are encouraged to create templates, but it's possible that you will be discouraged when I or another admin deletes your hard work.

A way to prevent heartbreak is to talk about your template idea, especially if you're new to template making, here in the forums, or more privately on an admin's talk page.

I have nothing against either of these two new templates, but I don't see them as tremendously useful. doesn't actually automate that much, because the base site doesn't use a consistent nomenclature for its URL pages. You're practically having to manually put the link on the page anyway, so the template, while inoffensive, isn't saving significant time. That's not your fault Cult Of Skaro — you've just discovered the reason why that template wasn't built before. Some websites just aren't built logically, and therefore don't lend themselves to automated linkage.

As for, I'm a little worried, but we'll see how it goes. I think it might get massively overused, since people around here do occasionally mistake "stub" for "short". If this template starts to get used simply because a newbie thinks the article on 24 June is a little short, I probably will move to delete it. Almost every date page is short; few, however, are genuine stubs.