Deletion discussions |
---|
|
Articles |
Templates |
Files |
Categories |
Redirects |
Miscellany |
Speedy deletion |
Proposed deletion |
On this page, the deletion or merging of templates, except as noted below, is discussed. To propose the renaming of a template or templates, use Wikipedia:Requested moves.
How to use this page
What not to propose for discussion here
The majority of deletion and merger proposals concerning pages in the template namespace should be listed on this page. However, there are a few exceptions:
- Stub templates
- Stub templates and categories should be listed at Categories for discussion, as these templates are merely containers for their categories, unless the stub template does not come with a category and is being nominated by itself.
- Userboxes
- Userboxes should be listed at Miscellany for deletion, regardless of the namespace in which they reside.
- Speedy deletion candidates
- If the template clearly satisfies a "general" or "template" criterion for speedy deletion, tag it with a speedy deletion template. For example, if the template is a recreation of a template already deleted by consensus here at Tfd, tag it with {{Db-repost}}. If you wrote the template and request its deletion, tag it with {{Db-author}}.
- Policy or guideline templates
- Templates that are associated with particular Wikipedia policies or guidelines, such as the speedy deletion templates, cannot be listed at Tfd separately. They should be discussed on the talk page of the relevant guideline.
- Template redirects
- List at Redirects for discussion.
Reasons to delete a template
- The template violates some part of the template namespace guidelines, and can't be altered to be in compliance
- The template is redundant to a better-designed template
- The template is not used, either directly or by template substitution (the latter cannot be concluded from the absence of backlinks), and has no likelihood of being used
- The template violates a policy such as Neutral point of view or Civility and it can't be fixed through normal editing
Templates should not be nominated if the issue can be fixed by normal editing. Instead, you should edit the template to fix its problems. If the template is complex and you don't know how to fix it, WikiProject Templates may be able to help.
Templates for which none of these apply may be deleted by consensus here. If a template is being misused, consider clarifying its documentation to indicate the correct use, or informing those that misuse it, rather than nominating it for deletion. Initiate a discussion on the template talk page if the correct use itself is under debate.
Listing a template
To list a template for deletion or merging, follow this three-step process. Note that the "Template:" prefix should not be included anywhere when carrying out these steps (unless otherwise specified).
I | Tag the template. |
---|---|
Add one of the following codes to the top of the template page:
Multiple templates: If you are nominating multiple related templates, choose a meaningful title for the discussion (like "American films by decade templates"). Tag every template with Related categories: If including template-populated tracking categories in the Tfd nomination, add |
|
II | List the template at Tfd. |
Follow to edit today's Tfd log.
Add this text at the top, just below the If the template has had previous Tfds, you can add Use an edit summary such as Multiple templates: If this is a deletion proposal involving multiple templates, use the following:
You can add up to 50 template names (separated by vertical bar characters If this is a merger proposal involving more than two templates, use the following:
You can add up to 50 template names (separated by vertical bar characters Related categories: If this is a deletion proposal involving a template and a category populated solely by templates, add this code after the |
|
III | Notify users. |
Please notify the creator of the template nominated (as well as the creator of the target template, if proposing a merger). It is helpful to also notify the main contributors of the template that you are nominating. To find them, look in the page history or talk page of the template. Then, add one of the following:
to the talk pages of the template creator (and the creator of the other template for a merger) and the talk pages of the main contributors. It is also helpful to notify any interested WikiProjects (look on the top of the template's talk page) that do not use Article alerts, so that they are aware of the discussion. Multiple templates: There is no template for notifying an editor about a multiple-template nomination: please write a personal message in these cases. |
Consider adding any templates you nominate for Tfd to your watchlist. This will help ensure that the Tfd tag is not removed.
Twinkle
Twinkle is a convenient tool that can perform many of the functions of notification automatically. However, at present, it does not notify the creator of the other template in the case of a merger, so this step has to be performed manually. Twinkle also does not notify WikiProjects, although many of them have automatic alerts. It is helpful to notify any interested WikiProjects that don't receive alerts, but this has to be done manually.
Discussion
Anyone can join the discussion, but please understand the deletion policy and explain your reasoning.
People will sometimes also recommend subst or subst and delete and similar. This means the template text should be "merged" into the articles that use it. Depending on the content, the template page may then be deleted; if preserving the edit history for attribution is desirable, it may be history-merged with the target article or moved to mainspace and redirected.
Templates are rarely orphaned—that is, removed from pages that transclude them—before the discussion is closed. A list of open discussions eligible for closure can be found at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Old unclosed discussions.
Contents
- 1 How to use this page
- 2 Discussion
- 3 Current discussions
- 3.1 July 22
- 3.2 July 21
- 3.2.1 Template:Scott Walker series
- 3.2.2 Template:EIIRseries
- 3.2.3 Template:Lst
- 3.2.4 Template:Dhaka Dynamites
- 3.2.5 Template:Rangpur Riders current squad
- 3.2.6 Template:Sylhet Super Stars squad
- 3.2.7 Template:Sylhet Super Stars current squad
- 3.2.8 Template:Sylhet Royals squad
- 3.2.9 Template:Largest metropolitan areas of Tamil Nadu
- 3.2.10 Template:Intoacircle
- 3.2.11 Template:PD-musical scale
- 3.2.12 Template:Pitchfork10.0
- 3.2.13 Template:Pac-12 Conference men's soccer seasons navbox
- 3.2.14 Template:Atlantic 10 Conference Baseball Player of the Year navbox
- 3.2.15 Template:Hidden title
- 3.3 July 20
- 3.4 July 19
- 3.5 July 18
- 3.6 July 17
- 3.7 July 16
- 3.8 July 15
- 3.8.1 Template:User Best Banana
- 3.8.2 Template:User Grade Ten
- 3.8.3 Template:User likes Dog
- 3.8.4 Template:Wake Forest Demon Deacons men's soccer coach navbox
- 3.8.5 Template:Villanova Wildcats men's soccer coach navbox
- 3.8.6 Template:VCU Rams men's soccer coach navbox
- 3.8.7 Template:UMBC Retrievers men's soccer coach navbox
- 3.8.8 Template:UCF Knights men's soccer coach navbox
- 3.8.9 Template:UC Santa Barbara Gauchos men's soccer coach navbox
- 3.8.10 Template:Tulsa Golden Hurricane men's soccer coach navbox
- 3.8.11 Template:St. John's Red Storm men's soccer coach navbox
- 3.8.12 Template:South Florida Bulls men's soccer coach navbox
- 3.8.13 Template:SMU Mustangs men's soccer coach navbox
- 3.8.14 Template:Saint Joseph's Hawks men's soccer coach navbox
- 3.8.15 Template:Rutgers Scarlet Knights men's soccer coach navbox
- 3.8.16 Template:Providence Friars men's soccer coach navbox
- 3.8.17 Template:Ohio State Buckeyes men's soccer coach navbox
- 3.8.18 Template:New Hampshire Wildcats men's soccer coach navbox
- 3.8.19 Template:NC State Wolfpack men's soccer coach navbox
- 3.8.20 Template:Michigan Wolverines men's soccer coach navbox
- 3.8.21 Template:Memphis Tigers men's soccer coach navbox
- 3.8.22 Template:Fordham Rams men's soccer coach navbox
- 3.8.23 Template:East Tennessee State Buccaneers men's soccer coach navbox
- 3.8.24 Template:Duke Blue Devils men's soccer coach navbox
- 3.8.25 Template:Delaware Fightin' Blue Hens men's soccer coach navbox
- 3.8.26 Template:Dayton Flyers men's soccer coach navbox
- 3.8.27 Template:Davidson Wildcats men's soccer coach navbox
- 3.8.28 Template:Campbell Fighting Camels men's soccer coach navbox
- 3.8.29 Template:California Golden Bears men's soccer coach navbox
- 3.8.30 Template:Cal Poly Mustangs men's soccer coach navbox
- 3.8.31 Template:Butler Bulldogs men's soccer coach navbox
- 3.8.32 Template:Texas Tech Red Raiders women's soccer coach navbox
- 3.8.33 Template:Clone Wars
- 3.8.34 Template:ARSS
- 3.8.35 Template:ABS-CBN News personalities
- 3.8.36 Template:Florida Gulf Coast Eagles men's soccer coach navbox
- 3.8.37 Template:St. Bonaventure Bonnies men's soccer coach navbox
- 3.8.38 Template:Human sexuality
- 4 Old discussions
- 4.1 July 14
- 4.2 July 11
- 4.3 July 10
- 4.3.1 Template:San Diego freeways
- 4.3.2 Template:PD-USGov-DOE-ANL
- 4.3.3 Template:Last Comic Standing 1
- 4.3.4 Template:Yeshivas in New Jersey
- 4.3.5 Template:Mesivtas
- 4.3.6 Template:KP QWP & others
- 4.3.7 Template:Apex Online Racing
- 4.3.8 Template:Hungary squad 1997 FIFA World Youth Championship
- 4.3.9 Template:Corruption in India
- 4.4 July 9
- 4.5 July 8
- 4.5.1 Excess Gospel of John–related templates
- 4.5.2 Chemical elements named after ...
- 4.5.3 Template:New Jersey school district spending table
- 4.5.4 Template:Dates for Easter
- 4.5.5 Template:WikiProject Temperature extremes
- 4.5.6 Template:Pending changes table (expanded)
- 4.5.7 Template:PD-CA-State-Capitol-Museum
- 4.5.8 Template:Denmark national football team matches
- 4.6 July 4
- 4.6.1 Template:Infobox animanga/MediaMix
- 4.6.2 Template:List of Top 10 Radio Songs in 2016
- 4.6.3 Template:No political diagram
- 4.6.4 Template:Blip
- 4.6.5 Template:Orphan image
- 4.6.6 Template:Atlantic Sun Conference men's soccer coach navbox
- 4.6.7 Template:2013 Atlantic Sun Conference men's soccer navbox
- 4.6.8 Template:ABS-CBN News personalities
- 5 Completed discussions
- 6 Archive and Indices
Current discussions
July 22
Template:Blocked user
- Template:Blocked user ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
There is no legitimate need for this template. If any user tries to make an edit to a blocked user's talk page, they are automatically presented with a very prominent red banner which states "This user is currently blocked" along with the most recent block log entry for the user. The same red banner is automatically presented when a blocked user's contributions are viewed. Additionally, there is definitely a badge-of-shame aura to this template (potentially constitutes harassment/gravedancing for the blocked user); a similar concern prompted the redesign of Template:Banned user and caused Template:BannedMeansBanned to be deleted at this TfD. For now, I can understand the informative nature of {{Sockpuppet}} and {{Banned user}}, but it seems that there is no scenario where a template like this would be absolutely necessary to inform the community that a user is blocked, especially given the potential badge-of-shame aspect of the template. Mz7 (talk) 04:00, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
- Keep for now but see about converting existing uses to {{Sock}} and {{IPsock}}, which appears to be what most are currently used for. I'd rather do those conversions first (which would need to be done anyway as part of deleting) and then re-evaluate what's left to see if there's a real need for this. It's difficult at the moment to wade through the sockpuppetry stuff to find any non-sock usage of this template. I have a feeling I'll wind up at delete (as will most people), but it seems sensible to get a better idea of what these are currently used for before going ahead with a "final" decision. Thoughts on this, Mz7? ~ Rob13Talk 04:35, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
-
- Hi BU Rob13. I seem to have the opposite problem: it's difficult for me to wade through all the tags for non-sockpuppetry to find the ones where there is a clear sock master and {{sock}} would be better. I just randomly spot-checked six or so of the transclusions, though. I wouldn't mind doing those conversions first as long as it would be a practical task to do. Mz7 (talk) 04:49, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
Already too large for useful navigation and getting larger every year. One player from each team is added per year. This is not a defining characteristic for most of these players, so editors are left with two choices: give in to navbox cruft or don't transclude it on certain players' pages. The former is laughable (imagine placing this on Peyton Manning!) and the latter is against the guideline at WP:BIDIRECTIONAL. ~ Rob13Talk 02:34, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:STATS FCS Coach of the Year
- Template:STATS FCS Coach of the Year ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:STATS FCS Defensive Player of the Year ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:STATS FCS Freshman Player of the Year ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:STATS FCS Offensive Player of the Year ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
No useful navigation; premature. ~ Rob13Talk 02:29, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:Rudy Award (collegiate)
- Template:Rudy Award (collegiate) ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
No useful navigation. Only two links. ~ Rob13Talk 02:22, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
July 21
Template:Scott Walker series
- Template:Scott Walker series ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
unused and only connects two articles. Frietjes (talk) 16:12, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:EIIRseries
- Template:EIIRseries ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
unused. Frietjes (talk) 15:05, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:Lst
- Template:Lst ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Unnecessary template. Why is it necessary to abstract a link to Help:Labeled section transclusion into a template? Pppery (talk) 13:29, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:Dhaka Dynamites
- Template:Dhaka Dynamites ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:Comilla Victorians current squad ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:Chittagong Vikings ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:Barisal Bulls squad ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
out-of-date roster, no use for future (if any) editions of the competition Regards, Naz | talk | contribs 12:38, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
- Comment These four identical nominations have been combined into one nomination. Primefac (talk) 20:20, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:Rangpur Riders current squad
- Template:Rangpur Riders current squad ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
This being duplication of Template:Rangpur Riders Roster and is anyway out of date and of no useful purpose for future (if any) editions of BPL Regards, Naz | talk | contribs 12:36, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:Sylhet Super Stars squad
- Template:Sylhet Super Stars squad ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
This being duplication of Template:Sylhet Super Stars current squad and is anyway out of date and of no useful purpose for future (if any) editions of BPL Regards, Naz | talk | contribs 12:33, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:Sylhet Super Stars current squad
- Template:Sylhet Super Stars current squad ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
This being duplication of Template:Sylhet Super Stars squad and is anyway out of date and of no useful purpose for future (if any) editions of BPL Regards, Naz | talk | contribs 12:33, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:Sylhet Royals squad
- Template:Sylhet Royals squad ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:Khulna Royal Bengal squad ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:Duronto Rajshahi squad ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:Dhaka Gladiators squad ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:Chittagong Kings squad ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:Rangpur Riders Roster ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:Chittagong Kings Roster ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:Barisal Burners squad ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Sylhet Royals ceasing to exist in 2013, there being no "current" squad for defunct team Regards, Naz | talk | contribs 12:27, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
- Comment As all of these nominations are for identical reasons (and the type is the same) I have combined them into one nomination. Note that while this nomination specifically mentions Sylhet Royals, each individual nomination gave the name of the team. Primefac (talk) 20:16, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:Largest metropolitan areas of Tamil Nadu
- Template:Largest metropolitan areas of Tamil Nadu ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
'Largest' is POV. Looking at the title, only Chennai would qualify for the 'metropolitan' status. —Vensatry (talk) 11:07, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:Intoacircle
- Template:Intoacircle ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Navigation template with only two articles, therefore not necessary as an aid to navigation between the two articles. anemoneprojectors 07:25, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:PD-musical scale
- Template:PD-musical scale ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:PD-musical interval ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:PD-chord progression ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:PD-chord ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:PD-tone row ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Unused license tag, replaceable by {{PD-ineligible}}
FASTILY 06:28, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
- Comment These five separate nominations have been combined into one, as the rationale (and type) are all identical. Primefac (talk) 20:11, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:Pitchfork10.0
- Template:Pitchfork10.0 ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
I don't see this as being encyclopedic. If there can be an navbox on this, what's stopping people from making navboxes for albums Rolling Stone or AllMusic have rated five stars, or half-stars, or three stars, etc.? FamblyCat94 (talk) 02:41, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
Two links... Corkythehornetfan 05:35, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
- Keep per WP:REDLINK (not broken) with clear WP:GNG subjects. UW Dawgs (talk) 15:52, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete as per WP:EXISTING and WP:NAVBOX. We don't use navboxes for non-existent articles because our guidelines say navboxes are used to (quoting NAVBOX) "facilitate navigation between ... articles". Per WP:REDNOT, excessive red links are not used in navboxes. ~ Rob13Talk 04:41, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 02:26, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
- Premature, delete or userfy at least until another year turns blue (preferably both unlinked years) —PC-XT+ 03:57, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
Two links not enough to navigate... Corkythehornetfan 05:16, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
- Keep per WP:REDLINK (not broken) with clear WP:GNG subjects. UW Dawgs (talk) 15:52, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
- Meh, weak keep at 3 blue links, now. If more are coming, this can stay. I'm not opposed to keeping a few of these short term. —PC-XT+ 07:25, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete as per WP:EXISTING and WP:NAVBOX. We don't use navboxes for non-existent articles because our guidelines say navboxes are used to (quoting NAVBOX) "facilitate navigation between ... articles". Per WP:REDNOT, excessive red links are not used in navboxes. No prejudice against immediately recreating this when we have 4-5 links, but it's not clear that more of these articles will be written soon. ~ Rob13Talk 04:48, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 02:26, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:Hidden title
- Template:Hidden title ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Template doesn't make sense to me. Under what circumstance would one want to completely hide a page's title. In at least two occurences (User:Jojit fb, User talk:Jojit fb), this template is being used to circumvent the restrictions on the {{DISPLAYTITLE}} parser function, making the title in the header not resolve to the actual page name. Such fake titles also have counter-intuitive behavior when one tries to select the title. Pppery (talk) 01:00, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
- Comment This template is used entirely on The Wikipedia Adventure on their subpages, ostensibly to avoid having titles like Wikipedia:TWA/1/Reasons/The Mission used on the top of the page.
The example given by the nom does not use this template.While I am neutral on whether this is kept or deleted, at this point in time I think that if kept it should be moved into TWA as a subpage and used only for that purpose. Primefac (talk) 02:24, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
- Keep if moved per Primefac, as there aren't many/any uses for this outside of TWA, otherwise subst and delete could be an option, though a template may be easier to track (It looks like the user page code could be based on the template or some related code, somewhere.) —PC-XT+ 04:14, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
- Keep @Pppery: Did you look at what links here (103 uses cases)? This template is intended for design purposes and it's used on Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Adventure. Besides BTW everyone can decide how his own userpage should look like. --RezonansowyakaRezy (talk | contribs) 09:54, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
July 20
Template:Dreezy
- Template:Dreezy ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
As it stands, this navbox isn't necessary as it does not enhance or improve upon navigation. No prejudice against recreation if sufficient related articles are created. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 16:24, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete as premature per nom and as redundant to basic links unless more related articles are created —PC-XT+ 04:55, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:Tüür operas
- Template:Tüür operas ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Not enough navigation links (only two). MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 04:41, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
- ...and one is the main composer page: delete as premature or redundant to basic links —PC-XT+ 04:58, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:The Recoys
- Template:The Recoys ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Not enough links for navigation. MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 04:36, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete or userfy for now as premature until more articles are created —PC-XT+ 04:59, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
July 19
Template:Final
- Template:Final ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
I see no use for it and on the two articles it was added it has been removed, so it is not currently used. Tried to open discussion with creator at their talkpage to find out the idea behind it, but no response. Qed237 (talk) 15:48, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete - I'm not seeing a good use case for this template that can't be handled without a template. --Izno (talk) 16:35, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete - Unnecessary, I was planning on deleting as well. Secret Agent Julio (talk) 18:41, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:Ocean Girl
- Template:Ocean Girl ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Only links two articles. Not enough to provide useful navigation. Rob Sinden (talk) 12:47, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
- With a possibility for a third article, it seems... still not useful and fails the soft WP:NENAN threshold. Delete. --Izno (talk) 16:36, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete. Two articles is not enough for navigational purpose. Regards, James (talk/contribs) 19:15, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:Major US Cities
- Template:Major US Cities ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Fails WP:TG point 6 (See List of United States cities by population) as well as WP:NAVBOX #1, 2, 3, and 5. Per the previous policies, this topic is better served by an already-existing list than by an overloaded template. Regards, James (talk/contribs) 05:36, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
- I'm not sure I care one way or another. Based on prior talk page discussion, I'll offer a suggestion. You could shorten it by grouping only by region, eliminating the by-state groupings. Also limiting it to current cities over 100,000. The template I currently see gives me some insight about historical population/migration trends, but obviously there's far better venues to present that information than in a navbox. Also renaming it to match the other templates in Category:United States city rankings by population templates. There's a possiblity of it being useful by that point, even though it's still linking a large number of articles and I wouldn't necessarily argue with anyone who has already pointed out that this linking is perhaps indiscriminate. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 14:57, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete. Any future variant of the template should probably be based on another of the templates in the category. TG#6 is often a dubious nomination criterion for this kind of template, but the NAVBOX references are sufficient here. --Izno (talk) 16:38, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete, per nom / WP:NAVBOX. However, I could also live with reducing the scope to around 34 cities with 500,000+ pop and keeping the heading link to the "featured list" article List of United States cities by population. 300+ cities and including former 100,000+ cities is pretty much useless. I doubt anyone reading an article about Kenosha, WI would feel the need to sift through the 300+ cities in the template and click on Canton, OH. Both are included in this list, but neither are still above 100,000 and have little else in common. Maybe better as a category? When the bot deletes it swap it for a category? --Dual Freq (talk) 00:06, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
- Keep and reformat – This template is informative and does no harm, however it is indeed a bit too large for comfort. I would support the suggestion of removing the subdivisions by state, and perhaps listing cities in the form "Henderson, NV" to still give a clue to readers about relative frequency of large cities in each state. Remove formerly-large cities too. — JFG talk 21:26, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
-
- Here's how it would look. — JFG talk 22:04, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:Skellefteå AIK seasons
- Template:Skellefteå AIK seasons ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Doesn't link to anything. No useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 02:57, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:Luleå HF seasons
- Template:Luleå HF seasons ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Doesn't link to anything. No useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 02:57, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:Linköpings HC seasons
- Template:Linköpings HC seasons ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Doesn't link to anything. No useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 02:57, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:Armenian Bread
- Template:Armenian Bread ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Not enough links in the template. MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:52, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
July 18
Template:Conflicting image use
- Template:Conflicting image use ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Doesn't appear to have been in use since 2012, when the category was renamed. No-one ever noticed that this template wasn't populating an existing category since then, so it's clear this isn't in modern use. It's not clear what the template is meant to accomplish, either, since a file being used to illustrate different things in different articles isn't an issue. ~ Rob13Talk 20:45, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. --Izno (talk) 16:51, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
- Is it talking about conflicting descriptions, such as saying a picture was taken at different times or places in different articles? —PC-XT+ 07:26, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:Yeshivas in New Jersey
- Template:Yeshivas in New Jersey ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
1. Stated incomplete. 2. Redundant to Category:Orthodox yeshivas in New Jersey, where all but one of the articles (apparently not Orthodox) are already present. Debresser (talk) 12:18, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
- Keep Per Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and navigation templates, the purpose of lists, categories and templates is to work in synergistic fashion; there is no "redundancy" and we are not forced to choose only one or the other. If we depended on all of Wikipedia being complete, we'd have nothing. Alansohn (talk) 14:23, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
- As I said in a related discussion, that guideline says clearly that redundancy between templates and categories is used as a deletion argument, and I have seen it countless times here at Tfd and Cfd. Debresser (talk) 20:10, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Rob13Talk 16:44, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
- Keep. The template seems to provide an element of navigation presently not redundant to the category, which is that it intersects the categories 'X things in county Y' and 'Yeshivas in NJ'. A navbox does not need to be complete, and in fact I have just now removed the red links. --Izno (talk) 16:48, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:Last Comic Standing 1
- Template:Last Comic Standing 1 ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:Last Comic Standing 2 ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:Last Comic Standing 4 ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Also nominating Template:Last Comic Standing 2, Template:Last Comic Standing 4 and Template:Last Comic Standing 4: Not everything needs a navbox, and these certainly don't. Launchballer 17:48, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Rob13Talk 16:43, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
- I'm sitting here feeling a little puzzled about the nomination rationale here. Why do you think these don't need a navbox? --Izno (talk) 16:44, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:Wolf-Williams Racing
- Template:Wolf-Williams Racing ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
An unnecessary template begun by an editor known to the F1 project who persists in attempting to create pages etc. for Wolf-Williams, despite consensus to the contrary. This team is not a separate entity to Frank Williams Racing Cars; it is not treated as such by the sport's governing body and is covered by the FWRC Wiki page. This has been communicated to the creator of the page on several occasions, but to no avail. Eagleash (talk) 12:40, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
- Keep. I'm not seeing a reason for deletion in your comment. If it's part of that team, why are the links in the template proposed for deletion not in the navbox for FWRC, which is {{Frank Williams Racing Cars}}? --Izno (talk) 17:02, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:Konami Rebirth series
- Template:Konami Rebirth series ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
A navbox for three video game articles, the ReBirth games. Gradius ReBirth is part of the Gradius series, Contra ReBirth is part of the Contra series and Castlevania: The Adventure ReBirth is part of the Castlevania series. What these three games have in common is that they were developed by M2 and that they were released through the Wii Shop Channel. There is no article on the ReBirth games, they're not connected through their respective intellectual properties, and there is no "single, coherent subject" (see WP:NAVBOX). soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 14:07, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:WikiProject Vespidae
- Template:WikiProject Vespidae ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
WikiProject Vespidae has been rolled into WikiProject Insects/Hymenoptera task force. This template is no longer required. M. A. Broussard (talk) 04:15, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete if/when its use is deprecated as appropriate. --Izno (talk) 16:48, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
- Comment: The only pages currently linking to this template are those discussing its deletion and transclusions thereof. It is no longer in use. M. A. Broussard (talk) 01:53, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:Chester and Holyhead Railway RDT
- Template:Chester and Holyhead Railway RDT ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Unused template that essentially duplicates Template:North Wales Coast Line RDT. Useddenim (talk) 00:46, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
July 17
Defunct conference shouldn't be linked anymore and therefore not useful for navigation. UCO2009bluejay (talk) 22:02, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Corkythehornetfan 22:23, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
-
- The author has been notified. Corkythehornetfan 22:51, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete it's basically orphaned now anyway. Msjraz64 (talk) 21:56, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
- Why should the conference being defunct causes us to delete a navbox? --Izno (talk) 17:29, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
- It has been discussed here Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football/Archive 17#Defunct conferences.UCO2009bluejay (talk) 00:44, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:Packers Retired Numbers Banners
- Template:Packers Retired Numbers Banners ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
No longer used in any articles. Was previously used in Green Bay Packers and List of Green Bay Packers retired numbers. I have redesigned List of Green Bay Packers retired numbers to a more standard tabular format and replaced the template in Green Bay Packers with the actual template content. Also, somewhat of a duplicate of {{Packers Retired Numbers}}. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 16:12, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:Hong Kong football squad 1958 Asian Games
- Template:Hong Kong football squad 1958 Asian Games ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Less than four links. No useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 05:42, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
- Keep. There are links for professional footballer played for top-rank-league professional football teams and national football teams for major tournaments. We can see that some of links are using.hoising (talk) 03:21, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete per WP:EXISTING. Corkythehornetfan 04:11, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete per nom and Corky. --Izno (talk) 17:28, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:Hong Kong football squad 1954 Asian Games
- Template:Hong Kong football squad 1954 Asian Games ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Less than four links. No useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 05:41, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
- Keep. There are links for professional footballer played for top-rank-league professional football teams and national football teams for major tournaments. We can see that some of links are using.hoising (talk) 03:21, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete per WP:EXISTING. Corkythehornetfan 04:11, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete per nom and Corky. --Izno (talk) 17:28, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
Conference is no longer in existence. Therefore, this navbox is no longer needed. All schools have joined another conference or are independent. Corkythehornetfan 03:53, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
- Support and think about Template:West Virginia Intercollegiate Athletic Conference navbox as well–UCO2009bluejay (talk) 20:34, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
- Why is the conference going defunct a reason not to have a navbox related to the conference? --Izno (talk) 17:28, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
July 16
Template:Interwiki redirect
- Template:Interwiki redirect ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:Soft redirect ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Propose merging Template:Interwiki redirect with Template:Soft redirect.
Only 67 transclusions and {{soft redirect}} can do the job fine. I don't think it's necessary to have a separate template for this. nyuszika7h (talk) 19:34, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
- Support. {{Interwiki redirect}} seems pointless. Anarchyte (work | talk) 08:13, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
- Support. When is a soft redirect not an interwiki redirect? The cases I can think of have their own templates like
{{category redirect}}
, or just also use the standard{{soft redirect}}
, as at Wikipedia:Don't feed the divas. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 20:32, 17 July 2016 (UTC) - Support The two templates have the same use and {{Interwiki redirect}} has only 67 transclusions. — Music1201 talk 17:33, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
- Support a deletion of "interwiki redirect". That said, I think we should maybe consider updating "soft redirect" to be a little less ancient in its reference to the redirection arrow, which is unlikely to be intuitive. --Izno (talk) 17:30, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
- Support merge as redundant per nom —PC-XT+ 05:51, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
- Merge; redundant. Enterprisey (talk!) (formerly APerson) 04:06, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:Tprod
- Template:Tprod ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Undocumented template draft, created in May 2006 in the wake of the Userbox War, this template was apparently supposed to be an inline version of {{Prod}} intended to be used for PRODing templates. Proposed in the now historical Wikipedia talk:T1 and T2 debates, the idea newer was implemented. Sam Sailor Talk! 19:14, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete per nom as an unused template. --Izno (talk) 17:31, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete as unused test that probably shouldn't be marked historical since it was never implemented —PC-XT+ 06:08, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:Prod-reason
- Template:Prod-reason ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Redundant to the slightly older {{Prod hint}}. Used 13 times between 2006 and 2009, and once in 2012. Sam Sailor Talk! 17:53, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete or perhaps redirect as redundant because it seems inferior in that it doesn't include a header (I can't think of a reason why we would need a separate template without a header) and the wording doesn't sound better —PC-XT+ 06:22, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:PRODWarning-notalk
- Template:PRODWarning-notalk ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Redundant to {{Proposed deletion}}, only used on three occasions, and not used since 2008. Sam Sailor Talk! 16:26, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
Not enough links to provide useful navigation (two bowl games or less). ~ Rob13Talk 15:46, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete. I've replaced the Davidson navbox on 1969 Tangerine Bowl with the program navbox. Mackensen (talk) 15:51, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
- Keep. Rob doesn't cite a policy nor guideline which defines it. Also, what if the boxes are deleted and the program subsequently makes it to a third bowl game afterwards? Tom Danson (talk) 15:58, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
-
- @Tom Danson: then the navbox will (rightfully) be recreated?UCO2009bluejay (talk) 20:31, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
- @Tom Danson: The above ping likely didn't work due to technical limitations, so I'm pinging on UCO2009bluejay's behalf. (The ping has to be on a new line with a new signature.) nyuszika7h (talk) 20:40, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
- @Tom Danson: then the navbox will (rightfully) be recreated?UCO2009bluejay (talk) 20:31, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
-
- See WP:EXISTING. While it isn't written into a guideline, there's a plethora of TfD precedent that four links is a minimum for navboxes. If there are more coaches in the future, the navbox can be undeleted. ~ Rob13Talk 05:43, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete per WP:EXISTING. Corkythehornetfan 18:20, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Cbl62 (talk) 13:40, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
- Comment. If these are deleted, the bowl games should be added to the existing football team navboxes and those boxes should replace the bowl game navboxes on the individual bowl game articles. I'll happily volunteer for such duty once this discussion is over. Also, keep Alcorn State. It has four bowl appearances but several of the articles are unwritten at present. Mackensen (talk) 13:51, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
- Conditional merge per Mackensen provided WP:CFB creates standardized allowance for teams with less than the number of minimum number of bowl games necessary for the navbox (more than 4-5 should be granted their own navbox). If exception is tabled or rejected then deleteUCO2009bluejay (talk) 20:31, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
Not enough links to make navigation worthwhile (two linked coaches or less). ~ Rob13Talk 15:38, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
- Keep. Again, Rob doesn't cite a policy nor guideline which backs up his standards for "worthwhile navigation. Also, what if the boxes are deleted and the programs subsequently hire a third lacrosse coach soon afterwards? Tom Danson (talk) 16:01, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
- See WP:EXISTING. While it isn't written into a guideline, there's a plethora of TfD precedent that four links is a minimum for navboxes. If there are more coaches in the future, the navbox can be undeleted. ~ Rob13Talk 05:43, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete per WP:EXISTING. Corkythehornetfan 18:21, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:President of the Philippines timeline
- Template:President of the Philippines timeline ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Unnecessary template. We don't need a template for this. I replaced the timeline in the "President of the Philippines" article, which was this template's only article namespace link, with a better-designed version. — Mediran [talk] 10:54, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
- Keep The template was kept there to protect the article from WP:Vandalism and WP:Edit wars. Shhhhwwww!! (talk) 18:18, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
- @Shhhhwwww!!: That's not a valid reason. Request page protection at WP:RPP and/or report the edit warriors at WP:AN3 if necessary. nyuszika7h (talk) 20:01, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete per nom and his further discussion. --Izno (talk) 17:34, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
Redundant template. Formerly used in the infobox of TV season articles, however convention is to just link to the main episode list, per infobox instructions. All seasons are linked in {{Top Gear}} which is the navbox used in these articles. There is no need for two templates that link to all season articles. AussieLegend (✉) 09:46, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
July 15
Template:User Best Banana
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
The result of the discussion was speedy keep. No argument for deletion and wrong venue. Userboxes are discussed at WP:MfD. ~ Rob13Talk 17:01, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
- Template:User Best Banana ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
— VarunFEB2003 I am Online 13:00, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
- Keep as you have made no argument at all for deletion. Pppery (talk) 15:06, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
- wrong venue. per the instructions at the top of WP:TFD, user boxes are discussed at WP:MFD. Frietjes (talk) 16:58, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
Template:User Grade Ten
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
The result of the discussion was speedy keep. No argument for deletion and wrong venue. Userboxes are discussed at WP:MfD. ~ Rob13Talk 17:01, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
- Template:User Grade Ten ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
— VarunFEB2003 I am Online 12:59, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
- Keep as you have made no argument at all for deletion. Pppery (talk) 15:06, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
- wrong venue. per the instructions at the top of WP:TFD, user boxes are discussed at WP:MFD. Frietjes (talk) 16:58, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
Template:User likes Dog
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
The result of the discussion was speedy keep. No argument for deletion and wrong venue. Userboxes are discussed at WP:MfD. ~ Rob13Talk 17:01, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
- Template:User likes Dog ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
— VarunFEB2003 I am Online 12:58, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
- Keep as you have made no argument at all for deletion. Pppery (talk) 15:06, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
- wrong venue. per the instructions at the top of WP:TFD, user boxes are discussed at WP:MFD. Frietjes (talk) 16:58, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:53, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:53, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:53, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:53, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete per nominator....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 10:11, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:53, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:53, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:53, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:52, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:52, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:52, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:52, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:51, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:51, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:51, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:51, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:51, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:50, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:50, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:50, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:50, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:49, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:49, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:49, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:49, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:49, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:49, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:48, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:48, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:48, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
-
-
- See WP:EXISTING. There is plenty of TfD precedent that four links is a minimum for a useful navbox. ~ Rob13Talk 05:45, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
- So, if I create articles to get rid of, at least, 2 red links, there would be no need to delete this template. --Wordbuilder (talk) 17:34, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
-
Template:Clone Wars
- Template:Clone Wars ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Unnecessary template that lists the media that is set in or around one in-universe event of Star Wars, the Clone Wars. It fails WP:NAVBOX No. 1, as they are, collectively, not a "single, coherent subject". It is redundant because the content of this navbox is covered by several navboxes already. The main {{Star Wars}} navbox provides links to general articles, Category:Star Wars film navigational boxes has navboxes based upon Star Wars films, {{Star Wars games}} mentions video games, {{Star Wars comics}} comics, {{Star Wars Legends novels}} links to the "expanded universe" literature, while {{Star Wars canon novels}} mentions the "official canon" ones. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 09:05, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
Relisting comment: I've notified WP:WikiProject Star Wars to receive their input.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Rob13Talk 03:23, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:ARSS
- Template:ARSS ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:ARSS/1 ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
This template that seems rather unnecessary for a few reasons. For one, it's only purpose seems to be to link to pages within Wikipedia with built-in paragraph formatting; this is redundant to manually linking pages within Wikipedia with paragraph formatting. And secondly, per the way Template:ARSS/1 is currently built, those internal pages within Wikipedia are set up as external links instead of internal links. (Even if this were to be fixed, this template still seems unnecessary. Also, the template's instructions since 2009 were to substitute the template ... which creates over a hundred lines of unnecessary code.) Steel1943 (talk) 21:31, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Rob13Talk 03:21, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:ABS-CBN News personalities
- Template:ABS-CBN News personalities ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Bad idea. We don't create cast navboxes. 98.230.192.179 (talk) 00:04, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
- Keep. Did the IP user even bother to click the article it links to and see that it's not just some cast for a movie or a TV show (like Template:SNLCurrentCast or Template:AmericanMorningHosts), it is actually just as helpful for navigation like Template:NBC News personalities, Template:ABC News Personalities, Template:CNN Anchors,Template:Fox News personalities, Template:Al Jazeera America anchors and reporters, and Template:CBS News Personalities.--RioHondo (talk) 03:20, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete. I think this kind of navbox sets a bad precedent, for the same reason we don't have cast navboxes. However, along with the additional examples above, there are many others like this for reality shows, etc, which also are a bad idea, that should all be deleted under the same reasoning. --Rob Sinden (talk) 08:19, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
- Keep – these are helpful templates. Corkythehornetfan 22:08, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Rob13Talk 03:02, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:01, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:01, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:Human sexuality
- Template:Human sexuality ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
To be merged with {{Sex}}. ~ Sharif uddin (talk) 10:11, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
- Pinging Flyer22 Reborn, Johnuniq, NeilN, Zad68, Grayfell, Cullen328 and Nigelj and for their input. Sharif uddin (talk) 10:16, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
- This appears to be an attempt to rewrite history. A hard-to-follow rename request at Template talk:Sex#Rename was closed as "no consensus" by Jenks24 on 5 July 2016. There is no clear rationale for a change, and indeed it's not clear what the proposal is. However, only Sharif uddin supports a change. Johnuniq (talk) 10:23, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
- Pro forma Oppose as no reason for the merge has been given. --NeilN talk to me 13:34, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Old discussions
July 14
Template:Catholic mysticism
- Template:Catholic mysticism ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:Christian mysticism ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Propose merging Template:Catholic mysticism with Template:Christian mysticism.
Since User:Jujutsuan failed to gain WP:CON to rename Template:Christian mysticism in this discussion, he chose create Template:Catholic mysticism as a duplicate of it instead (see WP:FORK). While he has added some new Catholic-related links to the (already long) Christian Template, the template itself is added to the bottom/top of some pages that already have the first template. It just makes no sense to have two template on the same pages with most link duplicated in both. One obvious fix would be to only keep the currently duplicated links in just one template or the other, Jujutsuan objects to this as unnecessary. Jujutsuan has (so far) mostly added the Template:Catholic mysticism template to pages (that he thinks are) about mysticism literature, but has never given a reason to have the two similar templates. tahc chat 16:16, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
- The reason is WP:SUBPOV. This was actually Chicbyaccident's idea, not mine. The original version of this, which was quickly redirected to {{Christian mysticism}} to let the RM finish, was deleted to make way for the un-userfying of the current version, but you can check out its talk page and the RM to see that it's true. I'd say I added a lot of new links, to plenty of people as well as literature. I don't just think they're relevant, they were all (or virtually all) in categories that indicated their relevance. I mean, we could merge Christian mysticism into Catholic mysticism, but then the template would be undeniably Catholic-oriented. (Tell me, are any of the links in the Catholic one not about Catholicism?) So here's the choice, Tahc: change the name to "Catholic mysticism" and merge, or have two separate templates, one as an overview, one more comprehensive about the Catholic SUBPOV. Jujutsuan (Please notify with {{re}} talk | contribs) 17:31, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
- Either merge into the Christian mysticism template or, better, change the Catholic template to a footer. Side and footer templates are used on the same page, even if they contain duplicate listings, so to differentiate the two that would be one solution. As said, if not a footer, merge into Christian mysticism (maybe some of the literature should be in both templates as well). Randy Kryn 13:06, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:Mercom Capital Group
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
The result of the discussion was Delete; deleted as G2 by Mackensen (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 13:09, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
- Template:Mercom Capital Group ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
A template with no content other than the letter "H". Not being used on any pages. North America1000 06:58, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
- Speedy delete as test page; appears to be an accidental creation from their sandbox —PC-XT+ 07:51, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
Series overview and Episode table subtemplates
- Template:Series overview/special ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:Series overview/split ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:Series overview/row ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:Series overview/special/doc ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:Series overview/split/doc ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:Series overview/doc2 ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:Episode table/cell ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:Episode table/reference ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Sub-templates and their documentations (as well as the documentation test page doc2) no longer required after main templates were converted to modules and these particular sub-templates became deprecated and no longer supported. Alex|The|Whovian? 06:39, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete them as redundant to their replacement —PC-XT+ 07:53, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete per nom; redundant and obsolete. Jujutsuan (Please notify with {{re}} talk | contribs) 17:37, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 22:49, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
July 11
Template:Rfd-t
- Template:Rfd-t ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:Rfd ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Propose merging Template:Rfd-t with Template:Rfd.
A late June 2014 edit made the {{rfd}} template work for template redirects, so a specific `use for template redirects` template is not necessary. Pppery (talk) 21:35, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:Other people2
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
The result of the discussion was merge. (non-admin closure) Primefac (talk) 02:46, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
- Template:Other people2 ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:Other people ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Propose merging Template:Other people2 with Template:Other people.
{{Other people2}} is very similar to one of the forms taken by {{other people}}:
{{other people||PAGE}}
(note the double pipe) →For other people with the same name, see PAGE.{{other people2|PAGE}}
→For other people of the same name, see PAGE.
Moreover, {{other people}} is implemented in Lua, meaning it's far more flexible and can handle cases {{other people2}} can't:
{{other people||PAGE1|PAGE2|PAGE3}}
→{{other people2|PAGE1|PAGE2|PAGE3}}
→For other people of the same name, see PAGE1.
The system of hatnotes is simpler when there are fewer templates to choose from and maintain. This template is redundant, so we should merge and delete it.
For context, this TfD is part of a series of TfDs I've filed to improve the hatnote system. See also About3 & About4; Redirect6; Details3 & For-on-see; and Redirect4, redirect5, redirect7, and redirect11, to redirect-multi. {{Nihiltres |talk |edits}} 20:27, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
- Keep, just because there is a very large drive to merge templates. Extensive discussion is also needed. -Mardus /talk 18:36, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
- Merge. Per Mardus above. I also find it redundant. Not to mention confusing. So I think a merge would provide both clarity and simplicity. On those bases, I support it. X4n6 (talk) 21:55, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
- Merge to reduce the number of variations and make it easier to decide which one to use —PC-XT+ 03:56, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
- Merge as per nom. -- Ianblair23 (talk) 05:22, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
- Keep. Since they serve different functions, if you actually read them. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:29, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
- @Necrothesp: How does changing "of" to "with", or vice versa, change the function? {{Nihiltres |talk |edits}} 16:39, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
- I can't help thinking you haven't actually tested (or read the pages on) the two templates you want to merge. Give it a go. You'll find it doesn't produce the results you seem to think it does! Have you not noticed that one produces a disambiguation suffix and one doesn't? -- Necrothesp (talk) 21:51, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
- @Necrothesp: Um, I wrote Module:Other people. The first parameter of {{other people}} produces the disambiguation suffix since it changes the defaulting, but the second parameter doesn't, and in fact overrides that behaviour from the first if present. Look at the examples I gave in the nomination: they show the overlap in functionality. {{Nihiltres |talk |edits}} 22:46, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
- I can't help thinking you haven't actually tested (or read the pages on) the two templates you want to merge. Give it a go. You'll find it doesn't produce the results you seem to think it does! Have you not noticed that one produces a disambiguation suffix and one doesn't? -- Necrothesp (talk) 21:51, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
- @Necrothesp: How does changing "of" to "with", or vice versa, change the function? {{Nihiltres |talk |edits}} 16:39, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
- Merge Seems redundant.--EchetusXe 20:07, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
Template:Edinburgh City F.C. squad
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
The result of the discussion was delete. ~ Rob13Talk 02:47, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
- Template:Edinburgh City F.C. squad ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Does not navigate between sufficient number of bluelinks, does not merit squad navigation template. GiantSnowman 17:24, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 17:25, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. May well become worthwhile in the future, should they acquire more notable players, but not right now. Jellyman (talk) 12:05, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete - per WP:NENAN, not a useful aid to navigation. Fenix down (talk) 07:37, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
Template:Filipino film directors
- Template:Filipino film directors ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
duplicates the category. the category doesn't suffer from POV decisions regarding who is included. Frietjes (talk) 16:23, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:Iranian-Americans
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
The result of the discussion was delete both. ~ Rob13Talk 02:49, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
- Template:Iranian-Americans ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:List of Iranian-Americans ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Basically a copy of List of Iranian Americans. Too large and broad to serve as a proper navigation tool. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 14:35, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
- Keep Template:Iranian-Americans alive . i will fix it as a shorter an better soon . thank so much for your notes . that was helpful Amir Muhammad 14:44, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
-
- Which one - one is just a copy of the other.Peter Rehse (talk) 14:46, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
- i mean the Template . i wanna made a Template to consider Iranian-Americans, for example famous Iranian-Americans who are most academic immigrants of the US( base on MIT reports at 2011}. if my last works was wrong please tell me how can to fix it . dear @PRehse: thank you so much for mentioning me . health n wealth dear Amir Muhammad 14:53, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
- 100% delete per Gonzo_fan2007. Has absolutely no purpose and is problematic in numerous regards. PS: I just noticed he already spammed it on all those articles, and thus some bot manually deleting it would be appreciated. - LouisAragon (talk) 15:11, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
-
- @LouisAragon: thank you for your helps in Iran Project related pages . as im an Iranian how can i make this template better as real and encyclopedic ?? can you help me to make ?? however im so appreciated to work with you fellows . you are so smart and kind and helpful . im waiting for your next present dear buddy . it can be nice of you . wish you the best by now Amir Muhammad 15:34, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
- Comment dear Gonzo please Delete Template:List of Iranian-Americans and Keep Template:Iranian-Americans . im working on it to improve it to not be so large and broad . a thing like Template:People from Russia .thanks Amir Muhammad 15:25, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
- @AmirMuhammad1: {{People from Russia}} is a redirect to {{Lists of Russians}}. As you can see, {{Lists of Russians}} doesn't link people, it links relevant list articles about Russian people. Your template is a list of Iranian people. It is not useful as a template, because the template would become infinitely large and complex with so many people in it. Templates serve to help people naviagte. Hope this helps you understand. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 18:19, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
- Comment i fix it . pls look at Template:Iranian-Americans . if its ok to keep please mention if its not pls what is its problem . tnx Amir Muhammad 16:11, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
- I have deleted {{List of Iranian-Americans}} per your request. I will let the discussion determine the fate of the remaining template. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 16:15, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
- delete, not how we do things. we use categories and list articles for this purpose. Frietjes (talk) 16:23, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
-
- @Frietjes: thanx . and we can have a Template for this purpose :) we have some other case like this that have Template and article etc in the same time .however your comment can be so helpful to me. health n wealth . Amir Muhammad 16:55, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
- @Frietjes: thank you so much for considering this topic as your mention. your opinion can help me find out more . your sincerely Amir Muhammad 18:29, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete: this template is in the form of a navbox, but is far too broad to be a useful navigation tool. I'd be more open to it if it had a similar form to {{Lists of Russians}}, but either way it's both oddly broad and oddly specific (intersection of two nationalities). {{Nihiltres |talk |edits}} 21:10, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete, per Gonzo_fan2007. Pahlevun (talk) 12:25, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
Template:General Soleimani
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
The result of the discussion was Delete; deleted as G6 by Gonzo fan2007 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 16:09, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
- Template:General Soleimani ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Has no encyclopedic value. At best it probably is considered a userbox that would need to be moved to the userspace. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 14:30, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
- Comment I do wrong to make a userbox instead of a Template . if its possible for you tell me how i can make a userbox like this, before deletion? Amir Muhammad 14:38, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete. dear @Gonzo fan2007: you can delete it now . i made an Userbox for this here . that was my fault . thank you for your help . wish you the best buddy . be healthy and wealthy :) Amir Muhammad 14:47, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
- @AmirMuhammad1: I moved it to your userspace here: User:AmirMuhammad1/Userbox General Soleimani. These type of userboxes need to be in your userspace. They can still be transcluded by putting the name in brackets, i.e. {{User:AmirMuhammad1/Userbox General Soleimani}}. Thanks, « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 14:52, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
-
- @Gonzo fan2007: thank you so much man! you are so kind and helpful . God save you for us. Amir Muhammad 14:55, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
Template:Green aviation
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
The result of the discussion was delete. ~ Rob13Talk 02:53, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
- Template:Green aviation ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
A discussion of this template at WikiProject Aircraft resulted in a consensus that the template has no focus, no inclusion criteria and that there is no Wikipedia topic for Green aviation, nor any idea what that might include. The items included in the nav box are just random and mostly unrelated. The titular topic is piped to Environmental impact of aviation, which, while related, is not the same subject. - Ahunt (talk) 12:54, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
- delete, no parent article and the piping violates WP:EGG. Frietjes (talk) 16:25, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete for having too many problems for too little benefit —PC-XT+ 20:53, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
Template:Modo Hockey seasons
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
The result of the discussion was delete. ~ Rob13Talk 02:55, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
- Template:Modo Hockey seasons ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Does not link to anywhere MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 05:02, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete Zero links....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 11:35, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete for now or userfy as premature with support for restoration once it has several blue year links —PC-XT+ 20:57, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
Template:MRT Line 3
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
The result of the discussion was delete. ~ Rob13Talk 02:57, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
- Template:MRT Line 3 ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:MRT Line 2 ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Templates are not disambiguation pages MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 04:57, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete This does not belong in template space. Pppery (talk) 01:49, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete as redundant to see also links, basically —PC-XT+ 21:04, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
July 10
Template:San Diego freeways
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
The result of the discussion was delete. ~ Rob13Talk 02:19, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
- Template:San Diego freeways ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Better suited by a category. Also see similar discussions for DC, Philadelphia, and San Antonio. Rschen7754 21:46, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete—per nom and past precedents. Imzadi 1979 → 23:24, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
Template:PD-USGov-DOE-ANL
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
The result of the discussion was delete. ~ Rob13Talk 02:18, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
- Template:PD-USGov-DOE-ANL ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
See Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2016 July 10#File:Argonnelablogo.PNG. Stefan2 (talk) 21:26, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete - Invalid license template. License terms disallow third party derivative & commercial use which is a big no-no. -FASTILY 23:36, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete per Fastily. There's limits to how far the PD USGov licensing extends, and this laboratory is not under that umbrella. --Hammersoft (talk) 20:10, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
Template:Last Comic Standing 1
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
The result of the discussion was relisted here. ~ Rob13Talk 16:43, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
- Template:Last Comic Standing 1 ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:Last Comic Standing 2 ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:Last Comic Standing 4 ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Also nominating Template:Last Comic Standing 2, Template:Last Comic Standing 4 and Template:Last Comic Standing 4: Not everything needs a navbox, and these certainly don't. Launchballer 17:48, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
Template:Yeshivas in New Jersey
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
The result of the discussion was relisted here. ~ Rob13Talk 16:44, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
- Template:Yeshivas in New Jersey ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
1. Stated incomplete. 2. Redundant to Category:Orthodox yeshivas in New Jersey, where all but one of the articles (apparently not Orthodox) are already present. Debresser (talk) 12:18, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
- Keep Per Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and navigation templates, the purpose of lists, categories and templates is to work in synergistic fashion; there is no "redundancy" and we are not forced to choose only one or the other. If we depended on all of Wikipedia being complete, we'd have nothing. Alansohn (talk) 14:23, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
Template:Mesivtas
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
The result of the discussion was delete. The arguments that this template is redundant and would be too large to maintain are strongly based in the guidelines at WP:NAVBOX. ~ Rob13Talk 16:46, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
- Template:Mesivtas ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
There must be literally tens or hundreds of mesivtas worldwide. This template has only one for the whole of Israel, which is laughable. Keeping that in mind: 1. There is no need to have a template for them all. 2. It is not feasible to have a template for them all, because nobody can make a template of all of them, and because it would be too big. 3. It is not fair to have only part of them in a template on Wikipedia. Debresser (talk) 12:10, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
- Rename, Repurpose and Keep Eliminate the entries outside of the United States and rename it to "Mesivtas in the United States". As only those mesivtas with articles would be listed, this would be an effective navigation tool for a far-more-limited number of schools. Alansohn (talk) 13:53, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
-
- And you think that there is an editor who can do this job, list more or less all mesivtas in the USA? I couldn't. I think it would be better to make a category Category:Mesivtas, and add all the articles to it. That is something I had considered already regardless of this discussion. The template would be redundant to that category. That way it is not a problem if we miss a few, but in a template, that would not be good or fair. Debresser (talk) 14:02, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
- Per Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and navigation templates, the purpose of lists, categories and templates is to work in synergistic fashion to help ensure that appropriate articles are included and created; there is no "redundancy", one is not "better" than the other and we are not forced to choose only one of the options. If we depended on all of Wikipedia being complete, we'd have nothing. Alansohn (talk) 14:26, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
- And you think that there is an editor who can do this job, list more or less all mesivtas in the USA? I couldn't. I think it would be better to make a category Category:Mesivtas, and add all the articles to it. That is something I had considered already regardless of this discussion. The template would be redundant to that category. That way it is not a problem if we miss a few, but in a template, that would not be good or fair. Debresser (talk) 14:02, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
Comment Now that the category was created, and all articles from the template added to it, the additional argument of redundancy is added to the original proposal. Alansohn has expressed his point of view that he doesn't see that as an argument, but I do, based on practice I have seen for years here at Tfd and the guideline mentioned above. Debresser (talk) 17:21, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete, there are probably hundreds of mesivtas. Do we really need a template listing all and maintaining the template as well? Having a category is good enough. Maybe, just maybe, a template for a localized region would make sense but a global template is not a good idea. Sir Joseph (talk) 19:48, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
- No policy requires categories, lists or templates to be complete and to delete them if not; the best way to build them is one article at a time and to allow the alternative methods to co-exist synergistically. Do we need this template? No. Nor do we "need" anything on Wikipedia. Let's just blow up the whole encyclopedia and no one will have to maintain anything. Limiting the template to the United States restricts the universe of mesivtas significantly and allows the use of the template as an effective aid to navigation. Alansohn (talk) 20:11, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
-
-
- Being complete is definitely a good thing. But in any case, the argument is more that such a template would be monstrously large. And redundant. Debresser (talk) 20:23, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
- I've taken a look at List of mesivtas, and the management task doesn't appear too daunting. If the list / template gets too large, it's easy enough to break them down into smaller geographical areas to keep them manageable. Can you point me to any policy-based argument that we are forced to choose between a category and a template? Is there is "no need for a template" / "do we really need a template" a valid argument based on some Wikipedia policy or am I missing something? Alansohn (talk) 14:56, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
- We don't have to choose, but the 3rd paragraph of Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and navigation templates does say that there is the option to prefer one over the other. In this case, where IMHO a template is not a good idea - including that I think that breaking them up in small templates is also not a good idea, I'd prefer to have the category replace the template, rather than have them coexist. Debresser (talk) 15:05, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
- By the way, there is no inherent reason to restrict this template to the USA. In view of WP:GLOBAL, I do not think that is a good idea. Debresser (talk) 15:06, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
- Take a look at Category:United States shopping mall templates, which lists 94 different templates for what appears to be every state in the United States and a few dozen for various cities and metropolitan areas. Take a look at Template:Shopping malls in California, which lists several dozen malls in that one state. There are orders of magnitude more shopping malls than mesivtas, and we don't have a demand that they all be put on one global template nor would anyone ever insist that it is impossible to split them up into sub-templates at various levels. This is how templates work, and insisting that this template should be deleted merely because you have decided that "[you] do not think that is a good idea" seems to accomplish nothing.
I think you mean to refer to WP:WORLDVIEW (rather than WP:GLOBAL, but the absence of Template:Shopping malls in Zimbabwe (while Category:Shopping malls in Zimbabwe exists) doesn't mandate deletion of all other shopping mall templates. For that matter, List of shopping malls in Zimbabwe has a number of red-linked articles for malls and a continent-wide template for lists of shopping malls in Africa.
WP:CLN does in fact specify that there are some limited circumstances where one choice is better than the others, but there is policy to back up those explicit exceptions.
Given that I and other editors are more than willing to maintain templates at various levels along with the associated articles, why should we delete this merely based on WP:IDONTLIKEIT? Alansohn (talk) 20:19, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
- But there isn't (to the best of my knowledge) a template for Shopping Malls in the US, it's always by State or region. That can be done for Mesivtas I would imagine, but having it worldwide is the issue. I wouldn't have a problem with a template on a much smaller level, like Mesivtas in the US or Mesivtas in NY, etc. Sir Joseph (talk) 20:28, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
- Take a look at Category:United States shopping mall templates, which lists 94 different templates for what appears to be every state in the United States and a few dozen for various cities and metropolitan areas. Take a look at Template:Shopping malls in California, which lists several dozen malls in that one state. There are orders of magnitude more shopping malls than mesivtas, and we don't have a demand that they all be put on one global template nor would anyone ever insist that it is impossible to split them up into sub-templates at various levels. This is how templates work, and insisting that this template should be deleted merely because you have decided that "[you] do not think that is a good idea" seems to accomplish nothing.
I think you mean to refer to WP:WORLDVIEW (rather than WP:GLOBAL, but the absence of Template:Shopping malls in Zimbabwe (while Category:Shopping malls in Zimbabwe exists) doesn't mandate deletion of all other shopping mall templates. For that matter, List of shopping malls in Zimbabwe has a number of red-linked articles for malls and a continent-wide template for lists of shopping malls in Africa.
WP:CLN does in fact specify that there are some limited circumstances where one choice is better than the others, but there is policy to back up those explicit exceptions.
Given that I and other editors are more than willing to maintain templates at various levels along with the associated articles, why should we delete this merely based on WP:IDONTLIKEIT? Alansohn (talk) 20:19, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
- I've taken a look at List of mesivtas, and the management task doesn't appear too daunting. If the list / template gets too large, it's easy enough to break them down into smaller geographical areas to keep them manageable. Can you point me to any policy-based argument that we are forced to choose between a category and a template? Is there is "no need for a template" / "do we really need a template" a valid argument based on some Wikipedia policy or am I missing something? Alansohn (talk) 14:56, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
- Being complete is definitely a good thing. But in any case, the argument is more that such a template would be monstrously large. And redundant. Debresser (talk) 20:23, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
-
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
Template:KP QWP & others
- Template:KP QWP ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:PakNA QWP ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:Punjab PPP ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:KP JI ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:PakSen JIP ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:PakNA JI ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:Punjab JI ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Does not seem to be a reason to put the number in a template rather than just directly in the single article in which it is used. WOSlinker (talk) 09:33, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
- The templates are for use in the political party's article, plus the article for the legislative body. Except for "PakSen JIP" (which was previously created for Senate of Pakistan, these other templates are new and have only been applied to the party-specific articles. Eventually, I will add them to the articles for their corresponding assemblies, where they can also be used for calculated values for the size of ruling & opposition coalitions, as well as a count of total vacant seats. The objective is to reduce editing time, page histories, and errors. Farolif (talk) 15:58, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:Apex Online Racing
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
The result of the discussion was delete. Undeletion may be possible in the future if more articles are created. ~ Rob13Talk 02:15, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
- Template:Apex Online Racing ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Navbox just consists of redlinks, so is not very useful. WOSlinker (talk) 09:27, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
- Wait until the articles have been completed, you'll find their drafts here. Holdenman05 (talk) 05:34, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
Template:Hungary squad 1997 FIFA World Youth Championship
- Template:Hungary squad 1997 FIFA World Youth Championship ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:Hungary squad 2009 FIFA U-20 World Cup Third Place ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:Hungary squad 2008 UEFA European U-19 Championship semi-finalists ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
More of the same; there's multiple instances of consensus against these youth navboxes. See here for the latest. ~ Rob13Talk 03:44, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:Corruption in India
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
The result of the discussion was no consensus to delete, but this may need significant changes to be useful. ~ Rob13Talk 02:13, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
- Template:Corruption in India ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Okay, I'm going to give this another try, because nothing has changed since the previous nomination. You might wonder at this nomination, because it seems at first to be an entirely reasonable topic. However, if you dig a little deeper, you find that a) the main article covers little or none of the subjects in the template, b) the list of scandals and involved individuals is incredibly arbitrary and ad hoc, with no systematic inclusion criteria, and c) the creator and the other major editor have both been indeffed for socking, which strongly suggests that maintaining NPOV was not the highest priority of the folks who created this. Also see WP:TNT; this might be a legitimate topic, but if we need a navbox about it, we need to start over. Vanamonde93 (talk) 14:12, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
- Keep The Template created in 2011 has been edited by multiple editors here not just two and if there is any issue that can be dealt with through normal editing.This is very valid topic.Further if there were any issue with the inclusion criteria or any other issue with the template this could have been raised in the Talk Page of the Template.But None have been raised in over 5 Years even once.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 16:04, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
- Pharaoh of the Wizards, ordinarily, I would agree with you. I do not lightly nominate this for deletion. Yet I spent quite a while figuring out how to make this a reasonable set of links, and come up with nothing. The set of scams is entirely arbitrary, as is the list of people, and the miscellaneous links. The "legislation" section is the only one that makes any sense. Do you have any suggestions? Vanamonde93 (talk) 06:00, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
-
-
- I would suggest deleting all entries in "Scandals" section and only keep List of scandals in India maybe somewhere in footer. From "Anti-corruption activism" I suggest deleting all biographies and keep only articles related to movements/groups etc. Rest whole template seems okay to me. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 11:14, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks for your message .What to add and remove is a content issue ,Anyone can make any change in the template with a Edit summary and talk page message if it is major change.But as other editors are also involved it is better it be the talk page of the template Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 18:04, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
-
- Procedural note: @Pharaoh of the Wizards and Dharmadhyaksha: This is templates for discussion, so a discussion about changing the template's scope is appropriate here. ~ Rob13Talk 03:31, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
Relisting comment: As per the above, this discussion hasn't reached a conclusion with regard to what this template, if kept, should be.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Rob13Talk 03:32, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
July 9
Template:Basketball Fans
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
The result of the discussion was delete. ~ Rob13Talk 05:36, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
- Template:Basketball Fans ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Although I'm not familiar with how Templates work on Wikipedia this doesn't seem particular notable. I was unable to find similar templates for football, baseball, or soccer though I might have been looking in the wrong place. I'm not sure I see the utility in this template. SQGibbon (talk) 22:46, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete. Doesn't seem like a notable or important distinction, besides the assertion would have to be mentioned & sourced within every single biographical article it is appended to...seems mostly like a bit of trivia. Shearonink (talk) 07:25, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
Template:Tailchaser's Song
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
The result of the discussion was delete. ~ Rob13Talk 05:37, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
- Template:Tailchaser's Song ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
This template is populated by redlinks and redirects. Other than a single character article I also just nominated for deletion, only the main work uses the template. There is very little chance of it actually being populated by articles. TTN (talk) 21:16, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete Agree. I think I created most of the articles for the template and the template itself originally years ago, but at the time did not understand how the other articles failed notability. I had actually been considering proposing the remaining article and this template for deletion myself. Nat2 (talk) 00:25, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
- As of now, the other character page has been deleted, and this template serves effectively no purpose. Nat2 (talk) 02:28, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
Template:Speed (film series)
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
The result of the discussion was delete. ~ Rob13Talk 16:00, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
- Template:Speed (film series) ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Given that two of the links are redirects to the film articles, this is a completely unnecessary template for 2 films and one notable character. (The 4th link is to an episode that spoofs the films, but that's it). And as there's no indication of any further sequels in the work, there's no real point for this template. MASEM (t) 17:23, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete Besides the two film links and redirects there are only two other links in the template, both of which are linked in context from the two film articles. The template is completely superfluous. Betty Logan (talk) 19:56, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete Not enough links....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 15:59, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
Template:Infobox KHL team
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
The result of the discussion was merge. ~ Rob13Talk 16:02, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
- Template:Infobox KHL team ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:Infobox hockey team ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
not much in the KHL team template that's not already in the generic hockey team template. so, no real reason for keeping a second infobox template. just merge them. Frietjes (talk) 21:51, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
- Comment. The same can be said about Template:Nationalliga Team and Template:Infobox Pro hockey team as both are useless and rarely used. – Sabbatino (talk) 10:31, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ RobTalk 21:58, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Rob13Talk 06:23, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
- Merge to consolidate, though I'll drop a note at the Ice Hockey WikiProject for more input... —PC-XT+ 20:28, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
Template:EaglesEdBlock
- Template:EaglesEdBlock ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:TexansEdBlock ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
This is a "role model" award. It's very unlikely that anyone would want to navigate between these players on the basis of winning this award. Fails #3 and #5 of WP:NAVBOX, at the very least. ~ Rob13Talk 01:54, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete even though I might use this, it isn't one of the most defining things about being a player, and I'm afraid keeping would contribute to navbox creep —PC-XT+ 06:32, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
July 8
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
The result of the discussion was delete {{Chapters in the Gospel of John}} and merge {{Content of John}}. The latter template will need to be retained due to the attribution requirements of a merge. It can be redirected to the article and tagged with {{R with history}} ~ Rob13Talk 23:55, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
- Template:Content of John ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:Chapters in the Gospel of John ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
These templates are redundant, their content being already contained in the better designed Template:Gospel of John. Jujutsuan (Please notify with {{re}} | talk | contribs) 09:35, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
- Delete Template:Chapters in the Gospel of John per nom; keep Template:Content of John since that was never meant to be anywhere but on the Gospel of John page, and is a convenient way of summarising content there. StAnselm (talk) 09:47, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
-
- Hmm... despite being the nominator, my opinion on this isn't too strong. But wouldn't "Content of John" be better as simply article content, rather than an awkward template off to the side? Jujutsuan (Please notify with {{re}} | talk | contribs) 10:01, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
- Note I've copied Template:Content of John to User:Jujutsuan/Content of John COPY for this purpose in case the template is ultimately deleted. Jujutsuan (Please notify with {{re}} | talk | contribs) 10:13, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
- Keep Template:Gospel of John is not better designed; rather it is confussing more so than the other two. Futhermore, since Template:Gospel of John is a bottom nav box and the other two are side nav boxes they woulf never be used in the same spot. In fact a side nav box would work well on the same articles such as the various chapter of john pages. Deleate at most either Template:Content of John or Template:Chapters in the Gospel of John. I prefer keeping "Chapters in the Gospel of John" somewhat more of the two. tahc chat 21:15, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
-
- On what planet is Template:Gospel of John confusing? And isn't policy to pick between a navbox and a sidebar, not to have both? Jujutsuan (Please notify with {{re}} | talk | contribs) 22:37, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
- Delete Template:Gospel of John is the only one of the four gospels that currently has this type of treatment page. There used to be pages for the other four, but it looks like they were all either deleted or had their content moved back to the parent pages. I created them at the request of another editor, whose name I forget, due to Talk discussions on one of the gospel pages because he and other authors felt that this type of book list was too much for the main Gospel of John page. I've always felt that this info should be on the main page anyway. Ckruschke (talk) 11:28, 29 June 2016 (UTC)Ckruschke
- Merge {{Content of John}} with the article per author, above. Also, there is some precedent to removing sidebars if there is a redundant navbox, though I think sidebars can be useful in some cases. —PC-XT+ 23:36, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:26, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
- delete {{Chapters in the Gospel of John}}. checking John 2, I see that the sidebar is entirely redundant to three other methods for navigating the articles (1) Template:Gospel of John, (2) the sequence links in {{Bible chapter}}, and (3) the {{sequence}} at the foot of the article. And, then merge Template:Content of John with the article. we don't need single use templates. Frietjes (talk) 20:22, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
- Comment Note that votes to merge {{Content of John}} with the article Gospel of John should be interpreted as votes to delete; as I mentioned above, I've userfied a copy of the template for merging purposes, and will complete the merge promptly after the original is deleted. Jujutsuan (Please notify with {{re}} talk | contribs) 19:03, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete the sidebar as redundant per Frietjes after further review (my above !vote was only for the single-use template) —PC-XT+ 22:15, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
- Comment I think this could be SNOW-closed at this point. The article's GA review is waiting on the results of this discussion, but the outcome seems pretty clearly in favor of the nomination; delete both, merge "Content" with the article from the userfied copy. No sense keeping the review waiting. Jujutsuan (Please notify with {{re}} talk | contribs) 20:14, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
-
- @Jujutsuan: It's not really much of a snow close when this nomination's seven days ends at 2 AM tomorrow morning. Pppery (talk) 20:54, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
- Looks like I mis-remembered WP:SNOW; I was thinking more along the lines of its converse. Anyway, my point was that the result is pretty clear, and I don't see the point in waiting until it's "officially" over. Not really a big deal either way. Jujutsuan (Please notify with {{re}} talk | contribs) 20:57, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
- @Jujutsuan: It's not really much of a snow close when this nomination's seven days ends at 2 AM tomorrow morning. Pppery (talk) 20:54, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
- Comment To make this easier for the closer, here's my tally of the votes so far. Feel free to check it for yourself.
-
- {{Content of John}}:
-
- Keep: 2
- Delete / merge into article: 4
-
- Keep: 1
- Delete: 5
- Note that these counts do not include the redundant first !vote from @PC-XT, since he clarified his position in a second vote. They do include my own positions as nominator. Jujutsuan (Please notify with {{re}} talk | contribs) 20:47, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
Chemical elements named after ...
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
The result of the discussion was delete. Those arguing for deletion argued that these navboxes grouped articles by a non-defining characteristic, whereas those arguing for keeping argued WP:NOTDEF only applies to categories and readers may want to navigate between these articles. Both categories and navigation boxes serve the same purpose (to "group articles" as per WP:CLT). Categories are a much less invasive way of linking to articles, as navboxes take up valuable real estate on the article page itself, so it stands to reason that navboxes should be about a more strongly associated group than a category. This is more-or-less written into our guidelines at WP:NAVBOX, where criteria 3 and 5 appear highly relevant. Those criteria grant significant weight to the arguments for deletion; they're the navbox equivalent of NOTDEF. Based on strength of arguments, there's consensus to delete. ~ Rob13Talk 15:13, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
- Template:Chemical elements named after places ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:Chemical elements named after scientists ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
—Delete. The templates do not address a navigable topic. As with similar categorisation, the property listed in each is not defining. (For that reason there also is no navbox "Element names starting with an A"). Any such etymology is well covered in List of elements. DePiep (talk) 15:00, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
- Delete per same argument as DePiep (nominator?). Jujutsuan (Please notify with {{re}} | talk | contribs) 17:26, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose A scientist may play a crucial role in the discovery of a certain element. Scientific community honors such scientists by naming elements after them. I wanted to stress this role in the cat. The example "element names starting with an A" is not analogous to this role. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 19:19, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
- Delete - WP:NOTDEFINING and redundant to the list noted by nom. This is a trivial intersection, and as many of these places or people aren't related to one another other than by the elemental connection displayed in the list article. MSJapan (talk) 04:34, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
- Delete. (And in response to Nedim Ardoğa: usually, elements are not named after the scientists that helped to discover them: seaborgium is currently the only exception, although element 118 will soon be the second when it is renamed oganesson. Some of these scientists were not even chemists, such as Röntgen and Copernicus.) Double sharp (talk) 08:35, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
- The title of the template is not "... after chemists". Thus Röntgen and Copernicus deserve to be in the template. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 08:00, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
- comment WP:NOTDEFINING is for categorization. Christian75 (talk) 08:41, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
- Keep Per the preceding comment, this is not a discussion about a category, it is a discussion about a navbox. Personally, I can see me navigating between Americium and Copper (Copper was named after a place? Cool! Which one?). As for Double sharp's comment: I can sorta agree that adding links to the individuals the elements were named after is unnecessary, but the navbox itself seems useful for navigating between elements named after people. Dunno, I'm kinda on the fence about that one. The List of chemical elements is nice, but if I'm looking for elements named after places, I'm not going to trawl through the entire list to get 'em all. Primefac (talk) 03:43, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:25, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
- Comment: The 2013 discussion for Template:Scientists whose names are used as non SI units may be related. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:25, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
-
-
- re Primefac "this is not a discussion about a category" - but it is about non-defining properties. Both WP:CATDEF and WP:NOTDEFINING are invoked for the principle described: being named after someone/some place is not defining. In this, that is equally valid. After all, a navbox is a grouping too. Then, "I'm looking for elements named after places ..." (how would you arrive at the navbox in the first place? That's pretty much asking for a category -- which it should not be). The point with non-defining properties is that it is not a search entrance. We're not a quiz machine. (Sure one could search for an element that melts near room temperature. But that does not mean we should create a navbox by melting temperatures). -DePiep (talk) 08:29, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
- No its not about non-defining properties (ie. categories). Its about navigation templates. Christian75 (talk) 08:25, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
- The ground for grouping each of these two navigations is a not defining property. Described differently and equally to the point, see WP:NAVBOX for points 1–5. Quite tellingly, there is no article Naming of a chemical element to a scientist. -DePiep (talk) 22:37, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
- No its not about non-defining properties (ie. categories). Its about navigation templates. Christian75 (talk) 08:25, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
- re Primefac "this is not a discussion about a category" - but it is about non-defining properties. Both WP:CATDEF and WP:NOTDEFINING are invoked for the principle described: being named after someone/some place is not defining. In this, that is equally valid. After all, a navbox is a grouping too. Then, "I'm looking for elements named after places ..." (how would you arrive at the navbox in the first place? That's pretty much asking for a category -- which it should not be). The point with non-defining properties is that it is not a search entrance. We're not a quiz machine. (Sure one could search for an element that melts near room temperature. But that does not mean we should create a navbox by melting temperatures). -DePiep (talk) 08:29, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
-
- Keep per Primefac Christian75 (talk) 08:25, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
Template:New Jersey school district spending table
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
The result of the discussion was keep both and do not merge. (non-admin closure) Primefac (talk) 03:16, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
- Template:New Jersey school district spending table ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:Infobox school district ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Propose merging Template:New Jersey school district spending table with Template:Infobox school district.
I found this as an ill formed proposal. Because it makes sense, at first glance at least, I fixed it. The proposal was explained at Template_talk:New_Jersey_school_district_spending_table. Debresser (talk) 17:13, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:18, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
- do not merge, these are entirely different templates. to see, just check any of the transclusions of the NJ template. you will see that the spending table template is a module, while the district infobox is a stand-alone infobox. Frietjes (talk) 20:16, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
- Don't try to merge the different functions of these templates per Frietjes —PC-XT+ 03:14, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
Template:Dates for Easter
- Template:Dates for Easter ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:Table of dates of Easter ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Propose merging Template:Dates for Easter with Template:Table of dates of Easter.
I found this as an ill formed proposal. Because it makes sense, at first glance at least, I fixed it. In addition, the second template includes more information, so this could be turned into a redirect. Both templates are in use on 2-3 articles in all. Debresser (talk) 17:24, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose - Aside from the trivial difference in dates, there's a scope of information problem and a titling problem. Whether or not one wants to generalize over the origin of holidays, merging the full moon date, Passover, "Astronomical Easter" (whatever that's useful for), "Gregorian Easter" (which isn't standard anyway - it's the "Western" date), "Julian Easter" (a calendar definitely fully deprecated by the time the chart starts) and the "Eastern" (Orthodox) vs "Western" (everybody else) dates is a) ridiculously huge, and b) frankly, insulting to non-Christian religions by insinuating they all come from Easter, when in fact the reverse is true in some cases. Just as an FYI, the List of dates for Easter basically could be summed up in two lines instead of repeating the same information three times, and makes very little use of these templates. As far as I'm concerned, they're just in their articles for show and could just as soon be deleted and turned into a table in articles it's needed in, the utility of which is subjective. MSJapan (talk) 04:29, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
- “Astronomical Easter” is the common date proposed by the resolution of the WCC Aleppo conference in 1997, which is linked as a source for Template:Table of dates of Easter. I believe it makes sense to collect such calendrical data in a single place, but I’m not sure it should be either of these templates: Wikidata maybe a better location. — Christoph Päper 05:57, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
- Just for the record, even though I made this nomination only on technical grounds, but I do agree with the merge proposal, and disagree with your arguments: I think neither the template is too large nor do I think that there is any insult in the combination of the information or its wording, and I find that hypersensitivity disturbing rather than helpful. Debresser (talk) 18:41, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
- Comment - Just FYI (because it affects template usage), List of dates for Easter has been redirected to Computus per the merge discussion hat's been sitting there for several months, and has actually fallen off the target talk page. I redirected the page because I discovered that once I dealt with the OR by addressing the redundant trivia (there were separate sections for "earliest", "latest" and "range of" Easter dates, set up with entirely arbitrary years for the trivia to work, and the earliest and latest dates define the range), all the unsourced "article" really said was "Easter ranges between two dates." MSJapan (talk) 06:57, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
- Merge as these are relevant dates in computing Easter. Julian Easter is also known as "Eastern" like Gregorian Easter is also known as "Western", "Astronomical Easter" is the proposed standard, Passover is linked with Easter historically, and the moon date is relevant. They could be merged with an article if only one uses them. —PC-XT+ 23:15, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:16, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
- Comment – * {{Dates for Easter}} invokes Module:Easter for now ± 20 years, whereas {{Table of dates of Easter}} has hard-coded dates from a reliable source for years 2001–2025. My main concern, which resulted in the merge proposal, was the duplication of data, but if both templates could be made to rely upon the Lua module, that problem would vanish. Hiding certain table columns depending on a parameter value is possible, but messy, so two separate templates would be fine with me then. — Christoph Päper 21:28, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:WikiProject Temperature extremes
- Template:WikiProject Temperature extremes ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:WikiProject Meteorology ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Propose merging Template:WikiProject Temperature extremes with Template:WikiProject Meteorology.
This template should be deleted in favor of using a larger Template:WikiProject Meteorology to include the sub-project. This template at Category talk:2009 heat waves for example puts pages into the NA category instead of the cat category that's used at the Meterology project. Rather than keep multiple separate templates that operate differently for the same project, better to have the project use a single template with the sub-project included. Ricky81682 (talk) 00:53, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:15, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:Pending changes table (expanded)
- Template:Pending changes table (expanded) ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
- Template:Pending changes blocks ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Propose merging Template:Pending changes table (expanded) with Template:Pending changes blocks.
Both templates appear to do the same thing (other than naming and coloring differences). Pppery (talk) 13:45, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
Also, since neither template has any transclusions, it might make sense to delete both.Pppery (talk) 14:43, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:13, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
- Comment, the abbreviated template is transcluded on one page. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:13, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
- move to subpages of Wikipedia:Pending changes blocks and mark as historical. Frietjes (talk) 20:15, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:PD-CA-State-Capitol-Museum
- Template:PD-CA-State-Capitol-Museum ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Unused license tag, seems redundant to {{PD-CAGov}}
FASTILY 11:02, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
- {{PD-CAGov}} means that the work was created by someone employed by the State of California and that the work therefore is in the public domain in the United States, although it might not be in the public domain outside the United States. It does not cover works by third parties who have transferred the copyright to the State of California.
- {{PD-CA-State-Capitol-Museum}} seems to be valid in all countries, so it is a 'stronger' tag in cases where the tag applies, and therefore it's better to use this tag instead of {{PD-CAGov}} in all situations where this tag applies. It also seems that this covers works by third parties who have transferred the copyright to the State Capitol Museum.
- I'd recommend checking if there is some situations where {{PD-CAGov}} can be migrated to {{PD-CA-State-Capitol-Museum}}, and thus keeping the template for the foreseeable future. --Stefan2 (talk) 11:49, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:11, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:Denmark national football team matches
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
The result of the discussion was delete as unopposed. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13Talk 05:11, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
- Template:Denmark national football team matches ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Not enough links to navigate Yellow Dingo (talk) 00:13, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
July 4
Template:Infobox animanga/MediaMix
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
The result of the discussion was delete. ~ Rob13Talk 04:38, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
- Template:Infobox animanga/MediaMix ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Unused template, no history of it ever being used, and really there is no use for it either. —Farix (t | c) 20:52, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete as redundant. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:29, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete as I don't really see a use for it, either —PC-XT+ 20:37, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
- I notified the Anime and Manga WikiProject to see if they know what this is —PC-XT+ 22:04, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. SephyTheThird (talk) 23:59, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
Template:List of Top 10 Radio Songs in 2016
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
The result of the discussion was delete. WP:REFUND applies if the user would like this moved into their userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 04:39, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
- Template:List of Top 10 Radio Songs in 2016 ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Content is not appropriate for a template. Creator appears to be doing edit testing here (mostly on the template's talk page) rather than using the sandbox. MPFitz1968 (talk) 20:02, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete as test page. --StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 18:35, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
Template:No political diagram
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
The result of the discussion was keep but use only on talk pages. I will list this at the holding cell for editors to move the existing transclusions to talk pages and then convert the template to display an error in the mainspace. ~ Rob13Talk 20:29, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
- Template:No political diagram ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
This is an unnecessary intrusion on articles – although it can be a useful visual aid there is no requirement whatsoever for them to have political diagrams displaying the political makeup of the legislatures (and it's useless on articles like House of Delegates of Palau where there are no political parties). If some kind of highlighting of articles missing them is required, it can be done via a hidden category. Number 57 19:30, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
- Comment If this template is useful at all (and I'm not at all sure it is) it should be placed on the talk page, like {{Image requested}}, and certainly not on the article itself. Thincat (talk) 20:16, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
- Keep The legislature diagrams are very helpful as they provide an easy way of understanding the relative power of the different parties. It is true that there is no requirement to have them in an article, but by the same token there is no requirement to include any specific information in an article. Certainly, for a typical legislature article to become a featured article, it would require such a diagram.
As for legislatures without political parties, I had assumed that it was standard practice to add diagrams anyway (e.g. Congress of the Federated States of Micronesia, Parliament of Nauru). Orthogonal1 (talk) 03:54, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
- @Orthogonal1: The diagrams are useful in some cases (not all – see the Palau example above), but there is no reason to deface perfectly adequate articles to try and force editors to add them. There are other ways of doing this without plastering a template at the top of articles. Number 57 07:38, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
- @Number 57: I will concede that in cases where there are no political parties, the diagrams are not needed (although then they should probably be removed from the Federated States of Micronesia and Nauru articles as well), but I would argue that in practically all other cases they are needed. I am interested in the other ways that you mentioned. How would you go about doing this? Orthogonal1 (talk) 12:53, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
- @Orthogonal1: If you want to follow Thincat's suggestion, just move it onto the talk page. To create a hidden category, add Category:Political body articles with no political diagram to an article, and then create the category, including the templates {{tracking category}} and {{empty category}}, which will turn it into a hidden category. As an example, see Category:Election and referendum articles with incomplete results. Cheers, Number 57 15:30, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
- @Number 57: I will concede that in cases where there are no political parties, the diagrams are not needed (although then they should probably be removed from the Federated States of Micronesia and Nauru articles as well), but I would argue that in practically all other cases they are needed. I am interested in the other ways that you mentioned. How would you go about doing this? Orthogonal1 (talk) 12:53, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
- @Orthogonal1: The diagrams are useful in some cases (not all – see the Palau example above), but there is no reason to deface perfectly adequate articles to try and force editors to add them. There are other ways of doing this without plastering a template at the top of articles. Number 57 07:38, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
- Keep the template but don't use it to deface articles nilly-willy. It can be on the talk page, as mentioned above. --Pgallert (talk) 09:14, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
Template:Blip
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
The result of the discussion was delete. ~ Rob13Talk 20:31, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
- Template:Blip ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
External link template to website which closed August 2015. Reidgreg (talk) 15:52, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete, possibly after replacing the single use by a link to archive.org's 2014 snapshot, though the 2015 snapshot seems to say the show was removed from blip.tv on November 7, 2013 for not meeting the TOS, this seems to be a generalized message that may not apply? —PC-XT+ 05:36, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
Template:Orphan image
- Template:Orphan image ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
There are many cases where a file would have no incoming usages, but shouldn't be moved to commons or deleted, to whit:
Reasons not to be on Commons:
- Not out of copyright in its home country
- {{Keep Local}}
- Other {{notforcommons}} reason.
- Part of a discussion (e.g. screenshot)
Reason for no inbound file links:
- Uploader followed best practice, and uploaded the original image before editing.
- Uploader followed best practice, and uploaded a PNG version as well as a JPEG.
- Part of a discussion, where it's linked to, but not included, as a thumbnail wouldn't be useful.
Given a bot, User:FastilyBot is adding this everywhere, this template needs to change, and probably should be deleted. It's actively harmful to the project. Adam Cuerden (talk) 13:28, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
- Comment. It looks as if in-use sound files have been tagged[1] on the highly technical grounds that they have "no inbound file usage" when in practical terms they are in use (see American pronunciation in Antidisestablishmentarianism (word)). Last time (two or three years ago?) the orphan tagging was also very bug-ridden and so perfectly proper files were later deleted by a different process with the boilerplate "unused, no foreseeable use" even when they were in use. For File:Pronunciation of 'antidisestablishmentarianism'.ogg I see it is also a target of a redirect so that may be another problem. I'd hoped all this trouble had gone away. Thincat (talk) 14:56, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
- Note: I have addressed Adam's concern by removing the text that suggests a move to commons or FFD. Please note that this template was originally conceived as a machine-friendly way to help analyze and compile statistics about files uploaded to Wikipedia. -FASTILY 21:12, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
- It's a good start - and it's at least not an explicit deletion template now, which it probably was before - but if it's meant to be machine-friendly, why does it need to actually be visible? For example, why not put files into a hidden category, then make sure the category's well-described? Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:37, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
- It never was a deletion template, and the changes I've made to the template make it clear this is not the case. The template already adds files to this hidden category. I'm also not opposed to removing the visible portion if there is consensus for it. -FASTILY 00:28, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
- So I've thought about for a bit, and I'm thinking about removing the visible position of the template because the template as-is does not add any useful information for a reader. If there aren't any objections within the next few days, I'll go ahead and do this -FASTILY 08:07, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
- I'd object to that. When I see this template on a file that I'm considering moving to Commons, it leads me to search for articles the file would benefit. The key word there is "see". I think there's significant value to editors noticing that an image is orphaned. I fully support the changes you've already made to the template with regard to the text change. ~ Rob13Talk 00:36, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
- So I've thought about for a bit, and I'm thinking about removing the visible position of the template because the template as-is does not add any useful information for a reader. If there aren't any objections within the next few days, I'll go ahead and do this -FASTILY 08:07, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
- It never was a deletion template, and the changes I've made to the template make it clear this is not the case. The template already adds files to this hidden category. I'm also not opposed to removing the visible portion if there is consensus for it. -FASTILY 00:28, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
- It's a good start - and it's at least not an explicit deletion template now, which it probably was before - but if it's meant to be machine-friendly, why does it need to actually be visible? For example, why not put files into a hidden category, then make sure the category's well-described? Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:37, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
- Comment What's the purpose of the template? Before recent edits, it seems that the purpose was to track files needing evaluation with respect to WP:NOTIMAGE ("Wikipedia is not a mirror or a repository of links, images, or media files"). This fits the former description of outcomes: the file could be added to an article, or moved to Commons (which is a repository of images and media files), or nominated for deletion. Fastily seems to have some other purpose in mind, though: he seems to want to specifically track files that aren't embedded in other pages whether or not they're used by being linked from elsewhere. And he has been forcing this view via the operation of his bot.
My suggestion as to what should happen here:- The template should be reverted for use by people who still want to track files needing evaluation with respect to WP:NOTIMAGE. Or, if no one wants that anymore, it could just be deleted.
- Fastily should create a template and corresponding category for "files not embedded in any pages" to match what he and his bot are actually doing. And explain his purpose in the template's/category's description to avoid them being brought back to TfD.
- Delete. It's not a deletion notice but a maintenance one and a poorly designed one. Category:Wikipedia orphaned files has over 112k images and what I presume the point of this is to identify a backlog of the images for later review. I support that idea but the template is not the way to do it. Instead, we should have a bot identify the orphaned images (in the category, simply enough) and create a table of the images by upload date or something. From there, that will be a backlog for review that people can work on. If a person find an orphaned image, they can find a use, move it to Commons or suggest it for deletion. Either way, as a maintenance or organizational system, this is not the way to go. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 20:05, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete There are far too many problems with this template (see above). If it were to be kept its text would need to be completely changed to give a careful, non-technical account of its highly idiosyncratic usage. Thincat (talk) 09:51, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete the template but keep all the files in the category. Maybe a bot can go along all the new uploads and check for orphan images, along with removing them from the category if they are used in articles. Anarchyte (work | talk) 05:34, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
- Adam Cuerden identified a few reasons for why a file can't be moved to Commons. However, reasons #1, #2 and #3 do not exempt the file from WP:NOTHOST, and this template may help identifying files which fail WP:NOTHOST. #4 is not a reason for not moving a file to Commons, although such files are low priority MtC candidates in my opinion.
- Thincat noted that file usage sometimes is missing. This isn't a problem with this template but with MediaWiki software or template design, and MediaWiki and/or templates should be fixed instead. If users see nothing in the file usage section, users are likely to nominate the file for deletion as 'unused, useless' or 'orphaned fair use' regardless of whether this template is used or not. In this case, it's the file usage section which should be fixed instead.
- Anomie asked about the purpose of the template. The purpose of the template is, and has always been, to assist in spotting unused files which are in violation of WP:NOTHOST. I believe that this template always has been added and removed by bots based on file usage, but there was a gap of a few years when the template wasn't maintained. Fastily's bot Fbot stopped editing, and the template wasn't added/removed based on recent file usage until Fastily's FastilyBot resumed the task. There is currently no way to mark files which have been confirmed to be orphaned without violating WP:NOTHOST. Maybe the template should have a parameter for this purpose which can be added and removed by evaluating humans.
- If the template is deleted, then it will be more difficult for users who want to find files which potentially violate WP:NOTHOST. I don't know why you would want that. It's possible that we don't need a template but that it would be fine to only list a category on the pages, but uncategorising all pages sounds like a bad idea. In the past, the template used to contain a link to a tool which allowed users to quickly check what the uploader did directly after uploading the file, but that tool stopped working some time ago. This feature was very useful for files without a description as you could easily see when the file was added to an article and whether an image caption was used. If a replacement tool is written, it would be very useful to have a template with a link to that tool. --Stefan2 (talk) 22:09, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
- Keep as a useful maintenance template which encourages editors to find articles which could use the images. This template has prompted me to do that several times, same as an orphan tag for an article would encourage editors to link to that article from other relevant pages. This has nothing to do with tracking images to be deleted, and I'm not sure why we're only talking about that purpose of this template above. ~ Rob13Talk 04:50, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
- Keep as useful. The confusion on its use should be worked out, and maybe a category could be used, instead, but I expect a template will attract more attention. I would certainly like a tool as mentioned by Stefan2 to be recreated and linked as well as WP:NOTHOST —PC-XT+ 05:44, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
- Keep per above, useful for site statistics, in encouraging editors to help find orphaned images homes, and in helping to find files in violation of WP:NOTHOST. -FASTILY 06:53, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
- Keep as a useful template for site statistics, and as a way of encouraging editors to find useful places for unused images. Also, until very recently the template contained a very useful toolserver link to find information on images lacking descriptions. I used that tool all the time to fix file descriptions and I don't understand why that was removed. Kelly hi! 13:24, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
The result of the discussion was delete. ~ Rob13Talk 21:10, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
One link... not enough to navigate. Corkythehornetfan 07:35, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete per nominator....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 00:01, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
The result of the discussion was delete. ~ Rob13Talk 21:08, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
One link... not enough to navigate. Corkythehornetfan 07:33, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete per nominator....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 00:01, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
Template:ABS-CBN News personalities
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
The result of the discussion was relisted here. ~ Rob13Talk 03:02, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
- Template:ABS-CBN News personalities ( · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Bad idea. We don't create cast navboxes. 98.230.192.179 (talk) 00:04, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
- Keep. Did the IP user even bother to click the article it links to and see that it's not just some cast for a movie or a TV show (like Template:SNLCurrentCast or Template:AmericanMorningHosts), it is actually just as helpful for navigation like Template:NBC News personalities, Template:ABC News Personalities, Template:CNN Anchors,Template:Fox News personalities, Template:Al Jazeera America anchors and reporters, and Template:CBS News Personalities.--RioHondo (talk) 03:20, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete. I think this kind of navbox sets a bad precedent, for the same reason we don't have cast navboxes. However, along with the additional examples above, there are many others like this for reality shows, etc, which also are a bad idea, that should all be deleted under the same reasoning. --Rob Sinden (talk) 08:19, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
- Keep – these are helpful templates. Corkythehornetfan 22:08, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
Completed discussions
-
The contents of this section are transcluded from Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Holding cell ()
If process guidelines are met, move templates to the appropriate subsection here to prepare to delete. Before deleting a template, ensure that it is not in use on any pages (other than talk pages where eliminating the link would change the meaning of a prior discussion), by checking Special:Whatlinkshere for '(transclusion)'. Consider placing {{Being deleted}} on the template page.
Closing discussions
The closing procedures are outlined at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Administrator instructions.
To review
Templates for which each transclusion requires individual attention and analysis before the template is deleted.
- 2014 December 29 – Infobox MTR station ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ), replace as indicated in the discussion
- Discussion moved to Template talk:Infobox MTR station#Replacement and deletion. Enterprisey (talk!) (formerly APerson) 17:47, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
- 2015 March 8 – Interlanguage link multi ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ), {{Interlanguage link}}, {{Interlanguage link forced}}, {{Interlanguage link Wikidata}}, {{Link-interwiki}}, {{Red Wikidata link}} ... see discussion.
- Star systems within X-Y light years: move to article space, reformat as an article, replace template transclusions in transcluding articles with a see also or other appropriate link.
- 2015 March 18 – Star systems within 30–35 light-years ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
- Being worked on at Draft:List of star systems within 30-35 light years
- 2015 March 18 – Star systems within 35–40 light-years ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
- Being worked on at Draft:List of star systems within 35-40 light years
- 2015 March 18 – Star systems within 40–45 light-years ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
- Being worked on at Draft:List of star systems within 40-45 light years
- 2015 March 18 – Star systems within 45–50 light-years ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
- Being worked on at Draft:List of star systems within 45-50 light years
- 2015 March 18 – Star systems within 50–55 light-years ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
- Being worked on at Draft:List of star systems within 50-55 light years
- 2015 March 18 – Star systems within 55–60 light-years ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
- Being worked on at Draft:List of star systems within 55-60 light years
- 2015 March 18 – Star systems within 60–65 light-years ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
- Being worked on at Draft:List of star systems within 60-65 light years
- 2015 March 18 – Star systems within 65–70 light-years ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
- Being worked on at Draft:List of star systems within 65-70 light years
- 2015 March 18 – Star systems within 70–75 light-years ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
- Being worked on at Draft:List of star systems within 70-75 light years
- 2015 March 18 – Star systems within 30–35 light-years ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
- 2015 May 2 – Infobox TransAdelaide station ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ), replace with {{Infobox station}}
- 2015 June 21 – SL bottom ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ), {{SL br}}, {{SL div}}, {{SL file}}, {{SL head}}, {{SL multi}}, {{SL pic}}, {{SL row}}, {{SL sep}}, {{SL size}}, {{SL text}}, {{SL top}}, replace as indicated in the discussion.
- Last diagrams in mainspace (on List of New York City Subway terminals) being replaced slowly at User:Jc86035/sandbox. Jc86035 (talk • contribs) Use {{re|Jc86035}} to reply to me 06:14, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
To merge
Templates to be merged into another template.
Arts
- 2015 August 31 – Doctor Who episode list ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) - Merge with {{episode list}}, finding a way to avoid using rowspan but still conveying the information required.
Geography, politics and governance
- 2014 March 18 – Infobox Romanian legislature ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) – Merge with {{Infobox legislative session}} if technically feasible
- 2015 August 2 – Infobox Ukrainian legislative office ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ), merge into {{Infobox officeholder}}
- 2015 December 9 – Geologic Ages Inline ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ), merge into {{Period start}}
- 2016 February 26 – Infobox Romanian political party ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) - merge into {{Infobox political party}}
Religion
- 2016 February 27 – Infobox Jain deity ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) - merge into {{Infobox deity}} per discussion
- Pending discussion at Template talk:Infobox deity on the best way to move forward with this. ~ RobTalk 08:18, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
- 2016 February 24 – Infobox Buddhist temple ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) - merge into {{Infobox religious building}} per discussion
- Pending discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Buddhism to confirm that User:BU Rob13/Buddhist temple merge is an appropriate way to conduct the merge. ~ RobTalk 08:18, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Sports
- 2014 February 19 – Infobox non Test cricket team ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) – Merge with {{Infobox cricket team}}
- 2014 February 19 – Infobox women's national cricket team ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) – Merge with {{Infobox cricket team}}
- 2014 February 19 – Infobox Test team ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) – Merge with {{Infobox cricket team}}
- 2014 February 19 – Infobox college inline hockey team ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) – Merge as indicated in the discussion
- 2014 February 19 – Infobox national roller hockey team ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) – Merge as indicated in the discussion
- 2014 February 19 – Infobox professional inline hockey team ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) – Merge as indicated in the discussion
- 2014 February 19 – Infobox Canadian Floorball Championships ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) – Merge as indicated in the discussion
- 2014 February 19 – Infobox college field hockey team ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) – Merge as indicated in the discussion
- 2014 February 28 – Infobox rugby biography ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) – Merge as indicated in the discussion
- 2014 February 28 – Infobox rugby union biography ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) – Merge as indicated in the discussion
- 2014 February 28 – Infobox Rugby Union biography ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) – Merge as indicated in the discussion
- 2014 March 16 – Infobox Country Mediterranean Games ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) – Merge with {{Infobox country at games}} if technically feasible
- 2014 March 16 – Infobox Country Asian Games ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) – Merge with {{Infobox country at games}} if technically feasible
- 2014 March 16 – Infobox Commonwealth Youth Games Country ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) – Merge with {{Infobox country at games}} if technically feasible
- 2014 March 30 – Infobox joint Tennis Tournament ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) – Merge as indicated in the discussion.
- 2014 April 8 – Infobox FIM Motocross World Championship ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) – Merge as indicated in the discussion.
- 2014 June 8 – Infobox domestic cricket season ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) – Merge into {{Infobox cricket season}}
- 2014 June 9 – Infobox rugby football league season ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) – Merge with {{Infobox rugby league season}}
- 2014 June 9 – Infobox football club season2 ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) – Merge with {{Infobox rugby club season}}
- 2014 June 9 – Infobox NRL Team Season ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) – Merge with {{Infobox rugby league team season}}
- 2015 August 2 – Infobox VFA season ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) - merge with {{Infobox Australian rules football season}}
- 2015 September 13 – Infobox Afbn team ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) - replace with {{Infobox Afbn team}}
- 2016 July 9 – Infobox KHL team ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) - merge with {{Infobox hockey team}}
Transport
- 2014 December 15 – EuroRoute ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ), merge with {{YellowRoute}} and {{RedRoute}} into {{Jct}}.
- 2015 March 15 – Infobox UK Bus Corridor ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ), merge with {{Infobox bus line}}
- 2015 May 9 – China line ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) – merge with {{Rail-interchange}} and {{Rail color box}}
- 2015 May 20 – NYCS-bull-small ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) – merge with {{Rail-interchange}}
- 2015 April 26 – Infobox tram ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) – Merge with {{Infobox train}}
- 2015 May 23 – Taiwan line ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) – Merge as indicated in the discussion
- 2015 September 8 – Infobox Victorian rail line ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) – merge into {{infobox rail line}} as indicated in the discussion
- 2016 March 25 – Infobox MTR ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) - merge into {{Infobox station}} by converting to a wrapper than substituting
- 2016 April 10 – Honda international timeline ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) - merge into {{Modern Honda vehicles}}
Other
- 2013 August 19 – HB Scotland header ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) – Merge into {{HS listed building header}}
- 2013 August 19 – HB Scotland row ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) – Merge into {{HS listed building row}}
- 2014 April 21 – Infobox dava ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) – Merge with {{Infobox ancient site}}.
- Starting on a wrapper at {{Infobox dava/sandbox}}. ~ RobTalk 04:15, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
- 2016 June 26 – Anthropology collapsible ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) - merge into {{Anthropology}}
- 2016 July 15 – Human sexuality ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) – Merge into {{Sex}}
Meta
- 2015 August 30 – Find sources 3 ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ), 2015 August 30 – Find sources 4 ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) and 2015 August 30 – Find sources AFD ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) into {{Find sources}}
- 2016 March 15 – Split from ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) with {{Split to}} to create {{Split article}}
- 2016 July 1 – No redirect conditional ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) with {{No redirect}} as per discussion.
- 2016 July 2 – Multicol ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) and {{Multicol-break}}/{{Multicol-end}} to {{Col-begin}} and related templates
- 2016 July 11 – Other people2 ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) - this is being replaced by {{other people}}
-
- Replace
\{\{other people2 ?\|(?:.*?\{\{!}})(.*?)}}
with{{other people||$1}}
- Unless I missed something, this should catch just about everything (piped and non-piped), and put it as the DAB link whilst saving the original message (i.e. no extra text, links, or wording). Now, this does end up putting things like "Alan Garner (disambiguation)" into the second link, but that might just mean a second run removing one of the pipes. Primefac (talk) 03:26, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
- @Primefac: A few comments:
- You'll need to escape the right curly brackets as well.
- It's always a best practice to use
\s*
frequently for templates to pick up all forms of white space. For instance, some editors include newlines between each parameter or multiple spaces and you need the greedy regex to pick that up. - As written, the regex would take a page that was named "Bob Smith (disambiguation)" but displayed as "Bob Smith" and send them to the actual page named "Bob Smith".
- Your regex didn't consider redirects.
- I haven't tested this, but I think the following regex is closer to what you'll want.
\{\{\s*other ?(?:people|persons) ?2\s*\|\s*((?:[^\{\}]*\{\{\!\}\})?[^\{\}]*)\}\}
with{{other people||$1}}
- As far as running the bot, I could do it or you could. An AWB bot is literally as simple as downloading AWB, filing a WP:BRFA, and then checking the auto-save box that pops up in AWB after your account is flagged as an AWB bot. It's not at all complicated. If it required any coding ability, I wouldn't be able to do it myself. ~ Rob13Talk 03:45, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
- Are we over-thinking this? To keep the text as "For other people with the same name" the {{{1}}} param of {{other people2}} just becomes {{{2}}} of {{other people}}. So... just replace the 2 with a | and it would work. {{!}} has valid use in OP so it shouldn't affect the display. Primefac (talk) 04:39, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
- That would involve similar regex:
\{\{\s*other ?(?:people|persons) ?2\s*\|
to{{other people||
. There needs to be at least a search for the template name and the following pipe to ensure other templates aren't accidentally affected. I'm not familiar with the underlying templates, but it does appear this would be simpler and accomplish the same thing. ~ Rob13Talk 04:58, 21 July 2016 (UTC)- No regex needed; AWB has a template replace tool, so swap OP2 (and its redirects) and use a simple "find 'other people' and replace with 'other people |'" rule afterwards. Primefac (talk) 05:30, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
- @BU Rob13 and Primefac: I've replaced the guts of {{other people2}} with
{{other people||{{{1}}}}}
and filed a BRFA for template substitution at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/NihiltresBot 2. {{Nihiltres |talk |edits}} 15:54, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
- @BU Rob13 and Primefac: I've replaced the guts of {{other people2}} with
- No regex needed; AWB has a template replace tool, so swap OP2 (and its redirects) and use a simple "find 'other people' and replace with 'other people |'" rule afterwards. Primefac (talk) 05:30, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
- That would involve similar regex:
- Are we over-thinking this? To keep the text as "For other people with the same name" the {{{1}}} param of {{other people2}} just becomes {{{2}}} of {{other people}}. So... just replace the 2 with a | and it would work. {{!}} has valid use in OP so it shouldn't affect the display. Primefac (talk) 04:39, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
- @Primefac: A few comments:
- Replace
To convert
Templates for which the consensus is that they ought to be converted to categories, lists or portals are put here until the conversion is completed.
- 2015 November 12 – ISO 3166 name DE-HB ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) – Convert to Lua per the discussion
- I've started working on this in my sandbox this week, though where can the conversion be discussed? Template talk:ISO 3166 name? SiBr4 (talk) 21:42, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
- 2016 May 15 – Toei Animation ( links | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) – Convert to categories and/or navboxes as per the discussion. May require additional discussion to determine the best way forward.
-
- Category:Toei Animation television has been created/populated with the shows found in that section. Primefac (talk) 04:08, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
To substitute
Templates for which the consensus is that all instances should be substituted (i.e. the template should be merged with the article) are put here until the substitutions are completed. After this is done, the template is deleted from template space.
- None currently
To orphan
These templates are to be deleted, but may still be in use on some pages. Somebody (it doesn't need to be an administrator, anyone can do it) should fix and/or remove significant usages from pages so that the templates can be deleted. Note that simple references to them from Talk: pages should not be removed. Add on bottom and remove from top of list (oldest is on top).
- None currently'
Ready for deletion
Templates for which consensus to delete has been reached, and for which orphaning has been completed, can be listed here for an administrator to delete. Remove from this list when an item has been deleted. If these are to be candidates for speedy deletion, please give a specific reason. See also {{Deleted template}}, an option to delete templates while retaining them for displaying old page revisions.
- None currently