Template talk:Delete

I took a look at the current Delete template, and it is very plain jane. I wrote an extra line to link the user to the talk page (to discuss deletion), which could be added underneath the current message, so that users can discuss deletions. I haven't implimented it yet, as I wanted some input beforehand. The code is:
''To debate the deletion of this article, visit the [[{{TALKPAGENAME}}|talk page]].''
–Preceding unsigned comment was added by Xrodak (talk • contribs) at 01:51, 5 February 2011 (UTC). Please sign your posts with ~~~~

I agree the situation should be better explained. Good idea linking to the talk page, but I suggest this wording:

This page has been tagged for deletion by a user for the following reason:
{{{1}}}
To contest this deletion, create a topic on the [[{{TALKPAGENAME}}|talk page]] and change this template to {{contestdelete}}

Then a different template called Template:Contestdelete should be made so that if a user does contest the deletion, the admin (and other editors) will know to check for backing up arguments before making a final decision. Is this a good idea or should it just be kept to one template? --Gnu32 02:20, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Eh, I don't think you really need to have a contested (even a parameter). The admin should check if there is discussion or the delete reason is valid. --JonTheMon 04:15, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

I think it'd be appropriate to change the color of the delete template to the same color as the disclaimer template, so it stands out from the other message-boxes and shows its importance. Does anyone agree?--Quatroking - MCWiki Administrator 15:25, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Can the arg "nocat=1" be added as includeonly so that templates tagged with this do not add to the categroy "notice templates"? –KnightMiner ^(t·c) 22:17, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

I think author requests should have there own template. It would be as follows:

{{msgbox
|bgcol=#FFCCCC
|linecol=#FFAAAA
|tilte=This page has been tagged for and is currently pending deletion.
|text=This is an author request {{{1|for an unknown reason}}}.
}}<includeonly>[[Category:Pending deletion]]</includeonly><noinclude>{{Documenation}}</noinclude>

71.212.10.80 01:00, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Another template really isn't necessary. Just use {{delete|author request}}. -- Orthotope^talk 01:50, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

The thing about doing it that way is that if it is an author request, the discuss part is irrelevant. The other possibility is to add a parameter that reformats the template if defined.71.212.10.80 15:51, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

The discussion link ends up being irrelevant in the majority of deletion taggings (and not just here, but across most wikis, even including Wikipedia). In such cases, there is zero harm in having the link anyways and it just being ignored. On the other hand, there are valid cases where a page tagged for deletion by author request should be discussed before being deleted, so not only would adding code to automatically detect author requested deletions and hide the discussion link just be unnecessary extra complexity, but there would have to be still more complexity added to allow said hiding to be overridden when needed. 「ディノ奴千？！」^{? · ☎ Dinoguy1000} 18:48, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Why use <i>{{{1}}}</i>? Just use '''{{{1}}}''' – Dentedharp90041^tce 16:50, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Because you can't add HTML classes to wikitext. 「ディノ奴千？！」^{? · ☎ Dinoguy1000} 02:46, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

A little earlier today, Chungui23 changed the icon to 👁 Image
, I started a brief discussion on their talk page about it as I dislike that as icon because it is not a Minecraft object.

I instead suggested a cauldron (👁 Image
) or composter (👁 Image
) as they kinda look like trash cans.

What do all of you think? Trash can, cauldron, composter or (currently) BE structure void? Dhranios (talk) (Join the wiki videos project!) 19:39, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

The structure void is fine but I feel that it should resemble not like a warning or something red (like what the structure void does) but a trash can in minecraft (suggested by Dhranios) I would support a composter (👁 Image
} that has 5 layers of compost. Maybe even an open jungle trapdoor on top?Humiebee (talk) 19:40, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

The closest I got to a trash can with a lid was this:

👁 Image

👁 Image

I really don't think we need a lid so I change my mind about the lid part, I still support a composter half-fulled though.Humiebee (talk) 19:49, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

How about that icon in the creative inventory in the survival mode tab, 👁 the X here
? It is where you put items to remove them. Gameking1happy (talk) 13:25, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

My concern with that is that it will be seen as merely an X, and not getting the connection with the creative inventory. Dhranios (talk) (Join the wiki videos project!) 15:21, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Possibly a structure void cuz it looks like an x. Chungui23 (talk) 18:09, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Maybe the cactus which can destroy every single item in the game.Humiebee (talk) 22:05, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Maybe that X but with a paper over it, it would be understandable what it means and the paper will represent a page. --GK1H ^(P/T/C) 13:14, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support but how would you represent that?Humiebee^{talk contribs} 13:16, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Let's use this instead of paper: 👁 Invicon Woodland Explorer Map BE.png: Sprite image for Woodland Explorer Map BE in Minecraft
(Woodland Explorer Map BE), it has black lines that look like writing. --GK1H ^(P/T/C) 13:35, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Well, I think that the point below will work, and yeah for now these are my proposals until more specific icons are made:

• {{delete when}}: 👁 Image
  
• {{delete}}: 👁 Image
  
• {{speedy delete}}: 👁 Image
  

What do you think? The structure void is for that template, for this template a barrier block would be better, and for speedy delete a TNT block fits perfectly that purpose. Supeika (talk) 13:44, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

I 👁 Image
 Support this as TNT is like ready to explode (and that is what speedy deletion is), barrier means stop which is kind of like delete and delete when is fine.Humiebee^{talk contribs} 13:46, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Someone changed the icon to wither rose. I 👁 Image
 Oppose the wither rose. 👁 Image
 Support changing to a barrier. As for the other two, I also 👁 Image
 Support them. TheGreatSpring (talk | contribs) (Tagalog translation) 06:34, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

How about changing to the creeper? (It can explode the page lol) KirillVT (talk) 10:31, 2 December 2025 (UTC)

Not the charged one like on the speedy del KirillVT (talk) 10:34, 2 December 2025 (UTC)

Honestly with all the inconsistencies, I'd love to make new vector icons for the wiki. Perhaps I'll be able to in a few months (:P). For now, I'd suggest using what the community decided to. – ItsPlantseed ⟨₰|₢⟩ 13:32, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Recently the color was changed from #FECDDD to #feaaaa. The reason of why I did change the color is because it has to be a point between {{delete when}} and {{speedy delete}}. I'll change them back, but this color changes should be discussed.

Edit: I actually modified the other two templates, but please discuss this before. Supeika (talk) 13:30, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

I an thinking "this page has been tagged for and is currently pending deletion per user request" is grammatically incorrect because it incorrectly omits the word "deletion".

Just noticed, the phrase, "tagged for" should be "nominated for deletion"

What about "this page has been nominated for deletion and is currently pending deletion per user request?" 👁 Image
User ID 12345 (Talk Page) 01:48, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

I think the current title is unncessarily long. "has been tagged for and is currently pending deletion" feels like it could just be shortened to "is pending deletion", as "has been tagged for deletion" and "is currently pending deletion" mean the same thing.

And I don't see the point in "per user request". Who could be requesting the deletion other than a user?

I think "This {{SUBJECTSPACE formatted}} is pending deletion." would be clear enough while avoiding the confusing wording of "beed tagged for and is pending deletion". Thefrostypixel (talk) 18:27, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

{{Speedy delete}} has a more simplified title; perhaps this template can also be adapted to have a similar style.

The message "This is due to a violation of the rules [...]" doesn't make much sense; if a page did violate the wiki's rules, then {{Speedy delete}} would've been used instead. –RedX (talk) 18:51, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

I agree, I think it would make more sense to not have a second line at all when no reason has been provided.

Alternatively it could fall back to "The reason for this can be discussed on the [[{{TALKPAGENAME}} talk page]].", though the discussion link is already in the title so this wouldn't add much value. Thefrostypixel (talk) 22:04, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

Maybe we could also require users to provide a reason for deletion -- i.e. if they don't provide one, a message like "No reason given. Please edit the template and provide a reason." is displayed. Thoughts? Mitsos (talk) 22:11, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

Requiring a reason like Template:Missing information sounds good, though I think a wording like "Reason: None. Please provide a reason." to link to an explanation or "Please give a reason by adding |reason=… to this template." to directly explain it would be more helpful.

Also this would make it less consistent with the other templates like Move that don't require a reason, but we could add the reason requirement to all of them or just ignore the inconsistency. Thefrostypixel (talk) 07:27, 24 January 2026 (UTC)