Template talk:Outdated

Now this template is raped Enteryourusername (talk) 00:18, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

Can't Cobblestone at least review what he's deleting? I understand he wants to destroy ban evader's work but still. North (talk) 00:31, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

I agree. Not everything should be deleted just because one was ban evading Fenriris 🐺 00:33, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

i fixed it, but yeah I agree. North (talk) 00:34, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

Thirding, just because a ban evader touched something doesn't mean it warrants being nuked, especially if said content would have been fine had literally anyone else added it. Mass edit nuking should be reserved for editors that clearly weren't here to contribute in the first place; the rest should be a case by case basis as to whether or not a given edit gets nuked. GauntletThrown (clittyleakage zone) 22:03, 28 December 2025 (UTC)

Trve but you’re 2 days late and the template is fixed Enteryourusername (talk) 01:21, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

Response

I automatically deleted all of the files uploaded by an evader, but forgot to check if this particular file was in use. I'll still nuke the edits of serial ban evaders if that matters btw because I don't want pedophiles using the wiki, and I don't care if their edits are good. Cobblestone (talk) 01:56, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

>My response to the situation…

Enteryourusername (talk) 02:02, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

Bonus response

"Mass edit nuking should be reserved for editors that clearly weren't here to contribute in the first place; the rest should be a case by case basis as to whether or not a given edit gets nuked." <--- This is a non-solution because the evaders would just make new accounts and continue editing once they realized you let their edits stay after you uncover their alts. The only way to deter serial evaders is to destroy their work and make it pointless for them to edit in the first place. I don't even need to mention that many of the evaders are pedophiles who could embed CP into their files (and have actually done this before, you're just unaware.)

So basically, I don't care if the edits done by a ban-evading pedophile are good or bad edits, since they're banned they shouldn't be editing at all and deleting their work just undoes edits that shouldn't have happened to begin with. Cobblestone (talk) 02:04, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

Unrelated: How about you host another template question? North (talk) 02:20, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

I think that you should try talking to editors here and see what they think about your solution, sort of like how the template question worked. It's clear that mass reversion of edits is controversial as it's destroying the wiki for one obsessed faggot.

So basically it comes down to this: Do you prefer information over punishing the people who wrote said information?

- Goopz 02:17, 29 December 2025 (UTC)