Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Template:Vote removed

Template:Vote removed
Along with all its subpages.

This template has no basis for being used in policy, despite the constant pestering by a specific user admins do not just go around randomly deleting votes and comments from discussions because they are "invalid" or because someone else doesn't like them. If a vote is poorly argued or has no basis in policy then admins are allowed to use their discretion and ignore/devalue it, that's why these sites run on consensus, not votes.

This template is poorly thought out and doesn't work very well, you can feed it extra parameters, e.g. you can use, in which case it produces the text "Vote redacted due to severe violations of the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of service", but with four lines crossing it out. In what situation does it make sense to leave a message explaining why you have removed a vote but then deliberately make the message unreadable?

In situations where there are valid reasons to remove a message (e.g. because it's offensive, by a banned user, trolling ...) then this template just serves to feed the trolls and give them attention. Leaving a massive, quadruple struck through message to the effect of "A TROLL LEFT A MESSAGE HERE. IT'S BEEN DELETED, BUT THERE WAS TROLLING HERE BY A BANNED USER" just serves to Streisand effect the deleted content. — 192.76.8.85 18:35, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

Vote closes: 19:00, 26 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep if this template should be deleted, then shouldn't the redacted template on Wikipedia be deleted for the same reasons? – Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 12:53, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Thoughts? – Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 13:31, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I have no thoughts on any Wikipedia templates - I am not an admin there nor am I anything more than a casual user of the site. I certainly wouldn't presume to know what templates should or should not be in use there. ~ UDScott (talk) 13:37, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Wikiquote shares most of its policy with Wikipedia, right? – Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 17:54, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Thoughts? – Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 14:23, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Thoughts? – Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 17:53, 20 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete, per the reasons cited in the nom. ~ UDScott (talk) 13:37, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete, concur with UDScott. --AC9016 (talk) 23:28, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
 * If the template should be deleted, then why does the redacted template on Wikipedia exist? – Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 23:30, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Rubbish computer (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 21:42, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
 * NOTE The template I originally nominated for deletion has been moved to Template:Removed and now powers Template:Vote removed and Template:Comment removed. On the basis that these are all the same thing and that the split occurred after I started this discussion I think all three of these template can be considered to be part of this nomination now? 192.76.8.85 15:00, 23 July 2022 (UTC)