Template:albm – The deletion of these template redirects is endorsed. While there was some early discomfort about the WP:T3 speedy deletion, the argument that this was a recreation of a similar redirect already deleted via RfD, and consequently a valid WP:G4 deletion, has convinced every subsequent participant. Sandstein 06:57, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The following is an archived debate of the deletion review of the page above. Please do not modify it.
Reply - @RoySmith:, if you look at my contributions during early May 2020 and late April 2020, you will see that I added {{albm}} to over a dozen articles, but that it has since been replaced. In any event, something like this needs to go through WP:RFD --Jax 0677 (talk) 21:08, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Meh. WP:T3 talks about, Templates that are substantial duplications of another template. These certainly fit that definition; they're just a roundabout way of writing {{album}}, which in turn is a roundabout way of writing {{WikiProject Albums}}. On the other hand, WP:CSD are supposed to be uncontroversial. If you want to waste a week arguing about this at XfD before it's deleted, whatever. -- RoySmith(talk)21:26, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Jax 0677: Putting aside procedural questions, is there anything substantive you are seeking to keep here (either in terms of a template that will be used, or in terms of the history)? Your bringing this to DRV may be worthwhile if the answer is yes, but not otherwise. The purpose of deletion discussions should to decide whether to keep or delete content, not whether the forms have been filled out correctly, so your clarifying this will be helpful. Thank you, Newyorkbrad (talk) 22:19, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Reply - Laziness is the entire point of using redirects, and this redirect is a plausible typo which saves typing each time, which I have used on dozens of occasions over the past months. I tried creating {{abm}}, but that got deleted. --Jax 0677 (talk) 23:38, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Jax 0677, Typing an extra character takes almost no time. On the other side of the equation, most things in the wiki are read-mostly. For every page you add a template to, many people will look at that page later while doing maintenance. If I see {{album}} (especially on a page that's obviously about an album), I immediately know what's going on. If I see {{abm}}, I have to spend time to figure it out. -- RoySmith(talk)16:37, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Endorse CSDs are supposed to be uncontroversial. I think recently we've been defining that as "if someone objects to a CSD, send it to *fD." I think we should be defining it as "if the CSD was indisputably correct, it wasn't uncontroversial." This was clearly a correct CSD. I also object to the notion that redirects exist out of "laziness." SportingFlyerT·C01:44, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I've read the RfD that Cryptic linked twice now and I still have no idea why this user isn't allowed to use an unused template redirect to save themselves a few keystrokes. The decision makes no sense to me at all. It's a template that a good faith editor wants to use, and nobody else is using. I cannot therefore see why "there is no need for it" would carry any weight at all. I'm also not entirely comfortable with the fact that this editor is being asked to justify starting a DRV.—S MarshallT/C 11:31, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
