- The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules.Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template'stalk page or in adeletion review).
The result of the discussion wasdelete.Izno (talk)05:23, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I struggle to believe that this template has made any talk page discussions more civil. All it does is to clutter up talk pages and causebanner blindness. There is already a link toWP:Dispute resolution in{{Talk header}}. The banner also comes across patronizing to me; asUser:InedibleHulk put it:That dove pisses me off
.Catalk to me!03:27, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, the bullet points on the side ofTemplate:Talk header make this largely redundant. The talk banner template already mentions “being polite”, “avoiding personal attacks”, and “seeking dispute resolution”, which is all of the things that the “Calm” banner covers.
- (“Be patient when solving issues” is implied with the guidelines of being civil and being welcoming to newcomers.)ApexParagon (talk)21:31, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep.Neutral per charlotte. This is useful in topics where{{ct/tn}} doesn't apply. It serves as a content warning to sensitive editors that the discussion has already devolved into being angry and uncivil.174.138.213.2 (talk)21:47, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]- Delete per ApexParagon. I remember seeing this for the first time and thinking "isn't this already covered in the talk header?" I've come to ignore it now for that reason. Serves a purpose already covered by the talk header, and 174's opinion doesn't convince me.mwwvconverse∫edits01:24, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per those who !vote the same way above.Polygnotus (talk)03:53, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak keep. I think this template does a good job of emphasizing civility, although I have no real data behind that assessment. Precisely because of banner blindness I think editors are unlikely to read the aforementioned advice about civility on the Talk header template, so this template can make that noticeable (although less so when there's already a ton of Talk page templates, as is often the case for large articles). I for one had forgotten the civility advice on the Talk header template (but in any case I'm unlikely to get heated in discussions :P). In addition, I think the tone of the text is good, not patronizing.The Sophocrat (talk)06:40, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: seems extra-redundant to{{Talk header}}.Vestrian24Bio08:43, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per ApexParagon.Callanecc (talk •contribs •logs)10:28, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: I see the intention, but this hasn't really helped. Re 174, we already have{{controversial}}, which I think relays the same message.charlotte👸♥23:16, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Redundant and clutters the talk page.SigillumVert (talk)14:46, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. The content and image are good but it reiterates the talk header too much and whenever it is included, a talk header should be included as well, making this redundant.—Alalch E.16:56, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion.Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
