Template talk:Not a ballot

Usage:

{{AfdAnons}} generate the standard text with "a friend asked you to do so, or because you saw a message on an online forum asking you to do so"
{{AfdAnons|reason}} replace the text above with "reason"

Note: Please insert this template underneath the heading/link to the article and/or the nomination. Placing the template above the heading makes it look as if the warning is associated with the previous discussion when displayed on the daily AfD listings. -- Saberwyn 22:32, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Additionally, some users may recommend deleting a page based wholly or partially on the fact that a large number of new or anonymous users recommend keeping." Do people actually do this? I would hope they have better reasons to recommend deleting. I don't think this line reflects very well upon the wikipedia AfD process; it will give newcomers a rather strange impression. David Sneek 20:46, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have seen at least two cases of editors explicitely motivating delete with the presence of "new editors". My guess is that some editors that are neutral on a given article become more inclined for deletion in these cases: this sentence is more about the actual rather than the ideal process (if any).- Liberatore(T) 14:23, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your answer. I still believe, though, that the template would be better and newbie-friendlier without that sentence. David Sneek 09:51, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"not a vote"

The text currently says, "please note that this is not a vote on whether or not this article is to be deleted." This is actually kind of confusing; an unaware reader is likely to get the impression that it's trying to say something like "this is not a vote on whether this article is to be deleted; we have no intention of deleting this article at all."

(You may think that's silly; you may think it's obvious that the point is that it's not a vote but rather a consensus-gathering poll, but the reason you think that's obvious is becuase you already know it!)

To the person who doesn't already know this, to the person who assumes (as so many do) that everything is a vote, the sentence is actually pretty unlikely to have the desired effect. I think we should make the intent of the statement much more explicit, with something like:

...please note that this is not a vote on whether or not this article is to be deleted; it is ~~more like a straw~~ a nonbinding poll to gauge consensus on the question.

And even if we don't change the wording, we should at least change the emphasis from "this is not a vote" to "this is not a vote". (In fact, if there are no objections, I think I'll make that small change now; my only reluctance is that I know that one should be wary before editing templates. This one isn't high-use, is it?) —Steve Summit (talk) 14:27, 17 March 2006 (UTC) [tweaked 15:34, 17 March 2006 (UTC)][reply]

The only objection I have is on the "straw poll" part. I would rather say "this is not a vote, but rather a discussion, on whether the article is to be deleted". - Liberatore(T) 14:46, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I meant to admit, mentioning "straw poll" would definitely be poor (it's one of those terms people are always twisting around to mean whatever they want to mean). But at the same time, AfD is clearly more than just a "discussion". Does "nonbinding poll" work any better? —Steve Summit (talk) 15:34, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's better than "straw poll", but still gives the idea of collecting votes. Is there any simple way to say this is a process of collecting opinions instead of votes? For example "...please note that this is not a vote. It is a process of discussing and collecting opinions and ideas about whether the article is to be deleted." The "ideas" part is because sometimes people propose something different than just keep or delete. - Liberatore(T) 16:23, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a vote but neither is it a poll. Note that the Voting is evil is actually a cross-wiki clone of Meta:Polling is evil and that all the section headings talk about "polls", not "votes". It is instead a discussion attempting to reach rough consensus on the appropriateness of the article for the encyclopedia. Rossami (talk) 20:11, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong. Please do not let connotations about "vote" and "poll" block you from correctly that your "articles for deletion" process, like the votes for deletion process for which I have much more familiarity, is both a vote and a poll. This is because each user states whether they want to keep, delete, or do something else. Though some users changed their votes after reading other votes, though some users only provide commons, though in the end the decision is not made by consensus and not counting, though the public at large does not participate, though it is true that "there is no ballot to stuff", it is false to claim in Template:AfdAnons that "this is not a vote".

I have participated in Wikibooks:Votes for deletion, Wikisource:Deletion requests, and MetaWikipedia:Requests for deletion, and freely use the words "poll" or "vote" to refer to this process. The fact that I read "this is not a vote" while reading Wikipedia today indicates that you are using Wikipedian jargon, in a template meant to be read by outsiders. Wow. --Kernigh 08:00, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]