Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"WP:TFD" redirects here. For the page used for TimedText or talk page deletion discussions, see Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion.
This page is about discussion of templates. For a list of templates used for discussion, see Wikipedia:List of discussion templates.
Find this page confusing? Just use this link to ask for help on your talk page; a volunteer will visit you there shortly!
XFD backlog
V Sep Oct Nov Dec Total
CfD 0 0 1 29 30
TfD 0 0 0 12 12
MfD 0 0 4 1 5
FfD 0 0 12 8 20
RfD 0 0 41 11 52
AfD 0 0 0 0 0
Deletion discussions
Articles
Templates and modules
Files
Categories
Redirects
Miscellany
Speedy deletion
Proposed deletion

On this page, the deletion or merging of templates and modules, except as noted below, is discussed.

How to use this page

[edit]

What not to propose for discussion here

[edit]
Shortcut

The majority of deletion and merger proposals concerning pages in the template namespace and module 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 criterion for speedy deletion, tag it with a speedy deletion template. For example, 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.
Moving and renaming
Use Wikipedia:Requested moves.

Reasons to delete a template

[edit]
Shortcut
  1. The template violates some part of the template namespace guidelines, and can't be altered to be in compliance.
  2. The template is redundant to a better-designed template.
  3. 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.
  4. 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

[edit]
Shortcuts

To list a template for deletion or merging, adhere to the following three-step process. Utilizing Twinkle is strongly recommended as it automates and simplifies these steps. To use Twinkle, click TW in the toolbar (top right of the page), then select XFD. Do not include the "Template:" prefix in any of the steps, unless specifically instructed otherwise.

Step Instructions
I: Tag the template. Add one of the following codes to the top of the template page:

Note:

  • If it is an inline template, do not add a newline between the TfD notice and the code of the template.
  • If the template to be nominated for deletion is protected, make a request for the TfD tag to be added, by posting on the template's talk page and using the {{editprotected}} template to catch the attention of administrators or template editors.
  • For templates designed to be substituted, add <noinclude>...</noinclude> around the TfD notice to prevent it from being substituted alongside the template.
  • Do not mark the edit as minor.
  • Use an edit summary like
    Nominated for deletion; see [[Wikipedia:Templates for discussion#Template:name of template]]
    or
    Nominated for merging; see [[Wikipedia:Templates for discussion#Template:name of template]].
  • Before saving your edit, preview your edit to ensure the Tfd message is displayed properly.

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 {{subst:Tfd|heading=discussion title}} or {{subst:Tfm|name of other template|heading=discussion title}} instead of the versions given above, replacing discussion title with the title you chose (but still not changing the PAGENAME code).

Related categories: If including template-populated tracking categories in the TfD nomination, add {{Catfd|template name}} to the top of any categories that would be deleted as a result of the TfD, this time replacing template name with the name of the template being nominated. (If you instead chose a meaningful title for a multiple nomination, use {{Catfd|header=title of nomination}} instead.)

TemplateStyles pages: The above templates will not work on TemplateStyles pages. Instead, add a CSS comment to the top of the page:

/* This template is being discussed in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy. Help reach a consensus at its entry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2024_December_12#Template:template_name.css */
II: List the template at TfD. Edit today's TfD log and paste this text to the top of the list:
  • For deletion: {{subst:Tfd2|template name|text=Why you think the template should be deleted. ~~~~}}
  • For merging: {{subst:Tfm2|template name|other template's name|text=Why you think the templates should be merged. ~~~~}}

If the template has had previous TfDs, you can add {{Oldtfdlist|previous TfD without brackets|result of previous TfD}} directly after the |text= before the why (or alternatively, after the }} of the Tfd2/Catfd2).

Use an edit summary such as
Adding [[Template:template name]].

Multiple templates: If this is a deletion proposal involving multiple templates, use the following:

{{subst:Tfd2|template name 1|template name 2 ...|title=meaningful discussion title|text=Why you think the templates should be deleted. ~~~~}}

You can add up to 50 template names (separated by vertical bar characters | ). Make sure to include the same meaningful discussion title that you chose before in Step 1.

If this is a merger proposal involving more than two templates, use the following:

{{subst:Tfm2|template name 1|template name 2 ...|with=main template (optional)|title=meaningful discussion title|text=Why you think the templates should be merged. ~~~~}}

You can add up to 50 template names (separated by vertical bar characters | ), plus one more in |with=. |with= does not need to be used, but should be the template that you want the other templates to be merged into. Make sure to include the same meaningful discussion title that you chose before in Step 1.

Related categories: If this is a deletion proposal involving a template and a category populated solely by templates, add this code in the |text= field of the Tfd2 template but before the text of your rationale:

{{subst:Catfd2|category name}}
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 make any interested WikiProjects aware of the discussion. To do that, make sure the template's talk page is tagged with the banners of any relevant WikiProjects; please consider notifying any of them that do not use Article alerts. Deletion sorting lists are a possible way of doing that.

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.

After nominating: Notify interested projects and editors

[edit]

While it is sufficient to list a template for discussion at TfD (see above), nominators and others sometimes want to attract more attention from and participation by informed editors. All such efforts must comply with Wikipedia's guideline against biased canvassing.

To encourage participation by less experienced editors, please avoid Wikipedia-specific abbreviations in the messages you leave about the discussion, link to any relevant policies or guidelines, and link to the TfD discussion page itself. If you are recommending that a template be speedily deleted, please give the criterion that it meets.

[edit]

WikiProjects are groups of editors that are interested in a particular subject or type of editing. If the article is within the scope of one or more WikiProjects, they may welcome a brief, neutral note on their project's talk page(s) about the TfD. You can use {{subst:Tfd notice}} for this.

Tagging the nominated template's talk page with a relevant Wikiproject's banner will result in the template being listed in that project's Article Alerts automatically, if they subscribe to the system. For instance, tagging a template with {{WikiProject Physics}} will list the discussion in Wikipedia:WikiProject Physics/Article alerts.

Notifying substantial contributors to the template

[edit]

While not required, it is generally considered courteous to notify the good-faith creator and any main contributors of the template and its talkpage that you are nominating for discussion. To find the creator and main contributors, look in the page history or talk page.

At this point, you've done all you need to do as nominator. Sometime after seven days have passed, someone else will either close the discussion or, where needed, "relist" it for another seven days of discussion. (That "someone" may not be you, the nominator.)

Once you have submitted a template here, no further action is necessary on your part. If the nomination is successful it will be added to the Holding Cell until the change is implemented. There is no requirement for nominators to be part of the implementation process, but they are allowed to if they so wish.

Also, consider adding any templates you nominate to your watchlist. This will help ensure that your nomination tag is not mistakenly or deliberately removed.

Twinkle

[edit]

Twinkle is a convenient tool that can perform many of the posting and notification functions automatically, with fewer errors and missed steps than manual editing. To use Twinkle, click its dropdown menu in the toolbar in the top right of the page: TW , and then click 'XFD'.

Note that Twinkle 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

[edit]

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.

Closing discussion

[edit]

Administrators should read the closing instructions before closing a nomination. Note that WP:XFDcloser semi-automates this process and ensures all of the appropriate steps are taken.

Current discussions

[edit]

December 12

[edit]

Template:Page numbers/sandbox/core

[edit]

Unused old sandbox of a non-existing page (no Template:Page numbers/core). Gonnym (talk) 07:14, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


December 11

[edit]

Template:Miss World 1951 delegates

[edit]

Navboxes with only one or two links in the body. Not useful for navigation. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:57, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Non-free use rationale logo-file replaceable

[edit]

No transclusions, documentation, categories, or incoming links. Created in January 2024. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:57, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:PD-Coa-Mexico

[edit]

No transclusions. This template does not appear to be usable on the English Wikipedia, since all files to which it applies, such as File:Flag of Mexico.svg, have been moved to Commons (or could be moved to Commons), where the template is used in over 1,900 pages. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:41, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see that there was a 2017 TFD that was withdrawn for {{PD-Coa-Mexico}} and similar unused PD File templates, but the templates' documentation was not updated to match the justifications. If this template is kept, I recommend that this and similar templates be documented to explain why they are here and how they should (and should not) be used. I have provided example bare-bones documentation at {{PD-Coa-Finland}}, which was involved in the previous TFD. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:44, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep {{PD-Slovenia}}. Slovenia has a shorter term for photographs, so it is possible for there to be an expired photograph of a still-copyrighted architectural work (which is usable on English Wikipedia as {{PD-USonly}}). This was in use briefly for an old photo of a Slovene chapel. It was eventually determined that the chapel was also architecturally acceptable for Commons, but I could foresee a similar case occurring again where an old photograph of a Slovene building could not be uploaded to Commons. It also has potential application for old free photos of non-free content (e.g., statues, murals) used under the NFCC. IronGargoyle (talk) 22:03, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Population genetics glossary

[edit]

No transclusions or documentation. It appears that I substed this single-article content into Population genetics back in 2022. I probably should have brought it to TFD first. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:38, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:National cabinets of Africa

[edit]

No transclusions or incoming links. Linked articles, such as Cabinet of Ivory Coast, use {{Africa topic}} directly. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:31, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Ohio Armed Forces Sidebar

[edit]

No transclusions, documentation, or incoming links to explain why it exists. Created in March 2024. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:29, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WikiProject Proposal/Guide

[edit]

Unused subpage with no documentation or incoming links to explain why it exists. Created in 2009. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:15, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WikiProject Malta/Collab

[edit]

No transclusions. This WikiProject template was removed from its WikiProject page by the creator and maintainer of the template in January 2022. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:11, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WPTC AC

[edit]

No transclusions or documentation. Created in 2020. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:15, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WPMP

[edit]

No transclusions. Created in March 2024. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:15, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User-multi/template/check

[edit]

Unused since this edit. Gonnym (talk) 11:43, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Coord/sandbox2

[edit]

Previously deleted in 2020, still unused and unlinked from anywhere. Gonnym (talk) 09:12, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It belongs with Module:Coordinates/sandbox2 and is intended to demo sandbox vs sandbox2. Template:Coord gets a bit complex and there has been a long time effort to add additional features to it. I don't think it needs to be deleted, but as was proven the last time it was needed again, it can of course very easily be recreated. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 09:26, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The module sandbox has also been abandoned over a year and a half ago. Seeing as how Galobtter edited the normal /sandbox after their edits to /sandbox2, it seems like they aren't using it. Gonnym (talk) 11:47, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:20, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Hongkongers

[edit]

Propose merging Template:Hongkongers with Template:Hongkong Diaspora.
The main article at {{Hongkong Diaspora}}, namely Hong Kong diaspora is a redirect to Hongkongers, so effectively the two navboxes are on the same topic. Also maybe the inconsistent usage of "Hong Kong", "Hongkong", "Hong Kongers" and "Hongkongers" in the links needs to be addressed while we're at it. --woodensuperman 10:10, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:AllMovie name

[edit]

Per WP:ELNO #1 and #12. It now copies Wikipedia and provides little extra information. Nardog (talk) 04:18, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per the above plus #5 as well. Complete irrelevancy aside, even with AdBlockPlus and NoScript, it's still generally an intolerable, unpleasant visit. (All this being said, it still has a leg up on TMDb, Letterboxd's pathetic IMDb wannabe.) -- Cinemaniac86TalkStalk 09:37, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:AllMovie title

[edit]

Per WP:ELNO #1 and #12. It now copies Wikipedia and provides little extra information. Nardog (talk) 04:18, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per the above plus #5 as well. Complete irrelevancy aside, even with AdBlockPlus and NoScript, it's still generally an intolerable, unpleasant visit. (All this being said, it still has a leg up on TMDb, Letterboxd's pathetic IMDb wannabe.) -- Cinemaniac86TalkStalk 09:37, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rotten Tomatoes is a more worthless External Reference, yet it is used.
Stop this deletion syndrome Wikipedia is on!!! Savolya (talk) 13:12, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would argue that the one feature that a film's RT page has going for it is that it has a far more comprehensive list of reviews than any Featured Article could sample. In that way, it is "a unique resource". However, the RT EL template should link directly to every film's "reviews" sub-page, rather than the main page that has the score (often included in the Wikipedia article body) and other features already covered in the Wikipedia article or just commercial content (like "where to watch") that does not belong. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 14:03, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree about RT's more direct linking at the bottom. In fact, there is a specific template that enables direct linkage, so I'd be in favor of enforcing that alongside you. Probably the same should then apply to Metacritic, right? I think both Metacritic and RT are valuable—FYI, Metacritic has more esteem, because these are the more accredited film critics, while RT lets just about anyone with a blog nowadays…meh, I digress, lol. Just wanted to espouse my support for those 2, particularly in the critical response sections of course.
Then regarding IMDb and TCMDb, I wholly 100% support keeping these under all circumstances, as these links are of high caliber. IMDb ofc, thanks to Pro, often has direct updates. Letterboxd is all right too. Beyond those, unless I'm forgetting any, I think most others are easily dismissable as far as film is concerned.
None of this is applicable to the Broadway, adult, and other such niche databases, by the way. Just speaking strictly re: film/TV. --Cinemaniac86TalkStalk 16:45, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I'm incline to agree that Metacritic is better at reviews than RT because it gives better reviews on many films than RT does. Also, RT can be biased on reviewing certain films and such. BattleshipMan (talk) 22:46, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as an even more useless external link than before. Most film-based external link templates warrant deletion because they are often not "a unique resource" to have beyond a film article's ideal Featured-Article status. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 14:01, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support retain,
    • French Wikipedia has one Template that combines all external link templates for movies fed by wikidata.
    • also see Movie Review Query Engine, founded in 1993 by Stewart M. Clamen
    • the search "Description by Wikipedia" site:www.allmovie.com/movie does not include all movies
69.181.17.113 (talk) 19:43, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure what your argument is here regarding point #3.
MRQE, never heard of it before; I like their metric. But it being associated with TMDB, the inferior knock-off IMDb, is precarious. --Cinemaniac86TalkStalk 19:59, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


December 10

[edit]

Template:Only Murders in the Building

[edit]

Redundant template: all links are available at the parent article Only Murders in the Building. Provides no further ease of navigation. -- Alex_21 TALK 23:14, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Current holders of minor Korean Go titles

[edit]

Unused navbox that nobody has shown an interest in keeping up to date for years. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:29, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Current Taiwanese Minor Go title holders

[edit]

will merge – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:27, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Current Taiwanese Major Go title holders

[edit]

Unused navbox with just two blue links in the body. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:27, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:PR-FedRep

[edit]

Unused navbox with just one blue link in the body. Not useful for navigation. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:22, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:University of Leeds Wikimedia

[edit]

No transclusions, documentation, categories, or incoming links. Created in March 2024. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:59, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Usurpation requested2

[edit]

No transclusions, documentation, or incoming links. Created in 2010. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:59, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Mississauga Steelheads

[edit]

The team is now the Brampton Steelheads and no articles directly related to the now-former team including their championship win does not exist. Redudant and outdated navbox. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 17:07, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Miss Supranational 2011 delegates

[edit]

Only two links. Not enough to navigate. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 16:54, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Formula V8 3.5 teams

[edit]

Unused and is just a list of teams and drivers. This information is easily found on the main article. It's not like other sport competition templates that would list winners as in players of a team. Not sure what can be gained from this. Same could go for other racing team templates. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 16:49, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Extremadura UD squad

[edit]

Defunct team. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 16:40, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:FK Rad squad

[edit]

Unused and outdated. No need anymore as it is a fourth tier team and main articles contains no information on current squad. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 16:39, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:AFC Progresul Spartac București squad

[edit]

Unused and outdated. Current squad list on main article contains no links to players. Navbox for team players not needed. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 16:37, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Chelsea Departments

[edit]

Unused and only three links. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 16:23, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Football at the 1912 Summer Olympics

[edit]

All three contain either one link or two. Not enough to navigate with for a sidebar. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 16:15, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Replaced with Template:Football and futsal at the Olympics. Gonnym (talk) 12:14, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Ethnic groups of Korea

[edit]

Inxperienced user seems to be mashing up a lot of these navboxes together, without paying attention as to how navboxes work. I think we need to consider WP:COMPETENCE here. --woodensuperman 15:25, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you show me the manual how to use navboxes? Can you show me the section of the manual telling that this is not how navboxes should be used? Do you expect people to maintain multiple navboxs with huge conceptual overlaps? Leoshuo (talk) 15:33, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NAVBOX; WP:NAVBOXES. This is a mess. Do you expect people to clean up after you? --woodensuperman 15:39, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What mess are you referring to? Are you going to remake the existing navboxes in new navboxes when they are already there? Do you have the navbox manual I am looking for? Is that just your preference or there really is a rule saying we can't put other navboxes into new navboxes? Leoshuo (talk) 16:20, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The mess is the way you have created navboxes as envelopes for other navboxes like you have here, at {{White English-speaking people}}, and elsewhere. This is unnecessary, as any relevant navbox/link should already have the link/transclusion, or it is split into smaller navboxes for a reason. Either consider discussing a proper merge, or leave as discrete navboxes. There is no benefit to nesting in this way. Also see WP:BIDIRECTIONAL. And WP:SMALLTEXT, as each time you nest, the text gets smaller. --woodensuperman 16:30, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can you show me your ideal navbox, with other navbox(es) embedded inside. Nothing to do with {{White English-speaking people}}. We are talking about the {{Template:Ethnic groups of Korea}} Leoshuo (talk) 16:53, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We shouldn't have other navboxes embedded inside, that's the point. Either the navbox is appropriate or it isn't. The correct procedure would be to discuss a full merge. --woodensuperman 17:36, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your suggestions. Nevertheless, after thoroughly reading WP:BIDIRECTIONAL, I understand that it is entirely your personal preference that relevant navboxes cannot be incorporated into other navboxes. After reading WP:SMALLTEXT, I understand that I did not make any mistake against it. Wikipedia:NOTHERE is a strong allegation. Please try to carefully use those allegations. I have agreed that the template for White English-speaking people should be deleted. That was a navbox I made in an earlier stage, but I am satisfied that all other navboxes I created are necessary and consistent with their main articles. I would like to talk with the Administrators for those issues. I appreciate that you have plenty of time and energy, and I would love to see you making more good-quality articles Leoshuo (talk) 19:45, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Ethnic groups in Taiwan

[edit]

Botch job of merging multiple navboxes. This is not how we use navboxes. --woodensuperman 15:23, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you show me the manual how to use navboxes? Can you show me the section of the manual telling that this is not how navboxes should be used? Do you expect people to maintain multiple navboxs with huge conceptual overlaps? Leoshuo (talk) 15:31, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your suggestions. Nevertheless, after thoroughly reading WP:BIDIRECTIONAL, I understand that it is entirely your personal preference that relevant navboxes cannot be incorporated into other navboxes. After reading WP:SMALLTEXT, I understand that I did not make any mistake against it. Wikipedia:NOTHERE is a strong allegation. Please try to carefully use those allegations. I have agreed that the template for White English-speaking people should be deleted. That was a navbox I made in an earlier stage, but I am satisfied that all other navboxes I created are necessary and consistent with their main articles. I would like to talk with the Administrators for those issues. I appreciate that you have plenty of time and energy, and I would love to see you making more good-quality articles Leoshuo (talk) 19:46, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Carter G. Woodson Book Award winners

[edit]

Spot the blue link in an ocean of black... I cannot see how this much unlinked text can provide any meaningful or useful navigational function. There isn't even a list article on the subject. --woodensuperman 13:44, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The more recent entries tend to have links for their authors if not titles, and the template is divided into sections so the oldest ones need not be displayed. The template could be updated to further divide by decade, to reduce the number of displayed entries. Why is existence of a matching list article considered a factor in whether a nav box should exist? A guideline notes their complementary nature, and the irrelevance of deleting one based on presence of another. I don't believe absence should be a factor in deletion either. —ADavidB 16:00, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please see WP:EXISTING, WP:WTAF and all the points of WP:NAVBOX, specifically point #4. There should definitely be an article before we even consider a navbox, not least for WP:VERIFIABILITY reasons, and considering how little linked text there is, we should leave it there, because this is useless for navigation. It would be far more useful as a list with context. --woodensuperman 16:12, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:The Big Sleep

[edit]

Redundant to {{Raymond Chandler}} --woodensuperman 13:02, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Liberal political parties in the Netherlands

[edit]

For the same reason as here: We already have Template:Political parties in the Netherlands and Template:Defunct political parties in the Netherlands. I believe these templates per ideology make the template lists too cluttered, especially for active parties. Dajasj (talk) 12:01, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose This template is far for inclusive than Template:Political parties in the Netherlands and Template:Defunct political parties in the Netherlands The Banner talk 15:54, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Socialist parties in the Netherlands

[edit]

For the same reason as here: We already have Template:Political parties in the Netherlands and Template:Defunct political parties in the Netherlands. I believe these templates per ideology make the template lists too cluttered, especially for active parties. Dajasj (talk) 12:00, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose This template is far for inclusive than Template:Political parties in the Netherlands and Template:Defunct political parties in the Netherlands The Banner talk 15:53, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:US Banknote Contest/new

[edit]

Unused templates for Commons event that ran in 2019. Gonnym (talk) 11:46, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete - The templates were moved to Commons. I thought I had requested deleting years ago. - ZLEA T\C 16:15, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Uzbekistan squad 2024 FIFA Futsal World Cup

[edit]

Unused navigation template with only one player blue link. Even if this were in use there are not enough blue links for a navigation template. Gonnym (talk) 11:43, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:White English-speaking people

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 G7 by Pppery (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 21:15, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused giant navigation template with no real main article. Even if this were in use I'd advocate for its deletion. Gonnym (talk) 11:40, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anglophonic White people will become a main article. This is just a part of preliminary preparation.
What is your reason for "Even if this were in use I'd advocate for its deletion."? Leoshuo (talk) 11:48, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's a huge template, with visually smaller (and imo, ugly) nested navigation templates. Articles should always be created before a navigation template is created. Gonnym (talk) 12:38, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I agree. As long as you are not biased against White people (I am not White btw), your candid suggestions are useful. Please delete the template. I will remake it after I create the article Anglophone White people Leoshuo (talk) 17:57, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:US electricity generation by coal table

[edit]

Unused table. Coal power in the United States seems to be using a different table and format. Gonnym (talk) 11:37, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:TLunarEclipse stat table

[edit]

Unused Lunar eclipse template. Gonnym (talk) 11:33, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:SPIstatusentry/color

[edit]

Unused after being replaced with this edit. Gonnym (talk) 11:20, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:The Eras Tour

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 G4 by Cryptic (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 10:40, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This template was recreated by the same editor and underwent a similar deletion discussion back in November 2023. The rationales in that previous discussion still stand: except for "Opening acts" and "Records broken" (which are miscellaneous lists anyways), all articles can be found in {{Taylor Swift}} or {{Taylor Swift songs}}. And I stand by WP:ATC, this template is not particularly helpful. Ippantekina (talk) 02:35, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The template is for accessing all the articles that are directly relevant to the Eras Tour. Yes, links to all the articles could technically be found in The Eras Tour and Template:Taylor Swift songs etc., but those two have since ballooned into a massive article and a massive template. Only the 35 songs that were performed at every show are included, compared to the numerous in "Taylor Swift songs".
Also, it may not be helpful for a fan who is already well-versed in the topic, but rather it’s oriented for a reader who only has surface-level knowledge. This template is important because it condenses all the topics and articles related to the tour into one smaller template, instead of having to hunt for them in various other articles and templates. “Eras Tour” itself has already become a notable topic of its own, so it necessitates having its own template. TenthAvenueFreezeOut (talk) 06:54, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds like recentism to me... Ippantekina (talk) 07:49, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If this is a recreation by the same editor for the same template then delete per WP:G4. Gonnym (talk) 10:10, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Infobox Indian kingdom

[edit]

Unused. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 02:06, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:GL

[edit]

Unnecessary list which associates "GL" with unrelated templates. Think of how many templates start with the letter GL or can be abbrievated as such. No need for this. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 02:01, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Three Sovereigns and Five Emperors

[edit]

If for navigating purposes, only two links then it's not enough. But in terms of names, only the end of both templates are different. Footer and genealogical tree can't be hard to see as different and it would show up in the search bar using "Template:Three Sovereigns and Five Emperors" as the first words. This can't be too confusing enough to disambiguate. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:56, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:COVID-19 pandemic data/United States

[edit]

Unnecessary and better to navigate for the time with Template:U.S. COVID-19 case charts for the time being. The California and Massachusetts are not linking to different templates other than the subpage or a subtemplate. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:51, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:MAL

[edit]

No links in this template disambiguation has any links related to the name of the template "MAL". Instead, its for countries that have the same three letters at the start of their name. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:47, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep as useful and helpful. This is what disambiguation pages are for. Someone logically types "MAL" as a country abbreviation for one of these countries, and they are directed to this disambiguation page, which helps them find the right template. Without it, they have to hunt around. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:14, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Cabinet

[edit]

If anyone wants to find a template that is about a government cabinet, the search bar in the top right can be a better way than this template. Search "Cabinet of [name of country]" or "[name of politician]". Politician could be a prime minister or president of a nation or some leader of a province/state.

Listing all the cabinets would be overkill and Category:Cabinet navigational boxes and the subcat of Category:Cabinet navigational boxes by country and its subcats is a better way to navigate for them. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:41, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:AMD Epyc 9005 Turin

[edit]

Unused and a chart containing the same info is on Template:AMD Epyc 9005 series. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:28, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as unused duplicate. Gonnym (talk) 10:14, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Indices of Deprivation

[edit]

Unused and all articles in the body of the navbox is redirects to the main article. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:23, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as all pages have been redirected, so nothing to navigate to and from. Gonnym (talk) 10:15, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Riovic

[edit]

Unused and only one link which is subject of an Afd and no main article. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:21, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Serves no purpose with only one link. Also template was made by a COI user.
Imcdc Contact 01:36, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Timeline Classical Composers 20th Century

[edit]

Unused timeline. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:18, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Meh. Looks like I created it myself, almost 20 years ago. Templates like this seemed like a good idea at the time. Now, not so much. Deciding which composers to include is a maddening exercise in original research and opinion. I'll probably never edit one again, for that reason alone. Are these templates useful at all? Maybe, but it's certainly not obvious to me. If consensus is to delete that's fine with me. Antandrus (talk) 05:21, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This template was in use until an edtitor deleted/redirected List of classical music composers by era without discussion. — Gor1995 𝄞 10:08, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Given that the page was being actively discussed, I don't think Walsh90210's unrationalized-redirect was justified at all. That being said, I do generally agree in the page not being particularly encyclopedic, so see no reason to restore it myself. Aza24 (talk) 15:50, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


December 9

[edit]

December 8

[edit]

Template:WPBASEBALL assessment level category

[edit]

Propose merging all of the above into one template.
There should be one consistent banner to throw up on these categories so fixing stuff doesn't require looking for all these different templates. Gonnym (talk) 19:05, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


December 7

[edit]

Figure skating Challenger Series templates

[edit]

From this discussion: The number of competition templates at the bottom of many of our articles has become ridiculously crowded. I believe the competition boxes should be limited to: Olympics, international championship events, Grand Prix events, and national championships... In particular, I believe the Challenger Series event boxes should be eliminated, as not all Challenger Series events are represented, and to be blunt, they are not as prestigious as the other events listed. As an example: Meryl Davis and Charlie White. Ten championship event templates at the bottom: Olympics, Worlds, Grand Prix Finals, U.S. Nationals... and the Nebelhorn Trophy. That last one does not enhance the navigability of this article in any way. We really need to be more judicious in terms of which templates are truly the most beneficial. Bgsu98 (Talk) 22:05, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:The Trump Economic Miracle

[edit]

If there are only two pages this template would need to be included on, then why would one need a template if the information could just be included directly at those two pages? This template (previously transcluded at Arthur Laffer at Stephen Moore (writer)) has been replaced with a substituted version at both articles. GTrang (talk) 20:50, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Two articles fails to justify transclusion; okay, I get it. Next time I do this, I'll do it for a book with a lot more coauthors. --Uncle Ed (talk) 17:21, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:BS templates navigation

[edit]

Navbox with no links in the body. All of these BS* templates have been deleted as part of an upgrade of rail line articles to Module:Adjacent stations. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:20, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: long overdue. Useddenim (talk) 13:27, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


December 6

[edit]

Template:SEPTA services

[edit]

No longer used on any pages WMSR (talk) 16:20, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:STN

[edit]

Propose merging Template:STN with Template:Station.
Not a huge fan of having two templates that do basically the same thing, but with wildly different names (especially with names that are non-obvious). These days I suspect that most stations have a redirect from the alternate capitalisations regardless. Primefac (talk) 16:08, 6 December 2024 (UTC) Hyperbole struck. Primefac (talk) 16:56, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support making {{stn}} a redirect to {{station}}. The merged template should detect lowercase "station" first, before falling back to initial-capitalised "Station". --Minoa (talk) 17:44, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Jeez, didn't even think about that. Will do so regardless of the outcome of the TFD for {{station}}. Primefac (talk) 18:35, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'd be concerned about the number of expensive parser functions that would require. Some pages have well over 100 uses of these templates, so they could easily hit the expensive calls limit depending on what else is on the page unless you use something like {{PROTECTIONEXPIRY}} to do the detection. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 19:53, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's fair. Primefac (talk) 20:45, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Primefac Any objection to putting the merge notice inside <noinclude>...</noinclude>? It breaks the Tokyo Station and Shinjuku Station articles. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 19:07, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose not. I'll just wait for the slew of people bitching about not being notified because of all the people bitching about being notified. Primefac (talk) 20:45, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:58, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. I would also support making {{STN}} a redirect to {{station}} per Minoa above. XtraJovial (talk • contribs) 00:33, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, I don't see much benefit (if any) of getting rid of STN. I get that consolodation reduces the maintenance burden but STN hasn't been edited since 2017 because of how simple it is. BLAIXX 03:26, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: with wildly different names: {{STN}} follows logically from the {{stn}} alias. Useddenim (talk) 15:48, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. (Also, I don't think these are "wildly" different; {{station}}'s alias {{stn}} and {{STN}} use the same exact letters, just different capitalization.) – Epicgenius (talk) 01:11, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Having two templates with the same exact letters, just with a different capitalization is a horrible system. Most systems can also be switched from "STN" to their Adjacent Stations module and use the relevant templates. Gonnym (talk) 09:50, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom -MJ (talk) 18:14, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support since the two separate templates are the same text and have the same commands. HarukaAmaranth 07:31, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Cricket Result

[edit]

Propose merging Template:Cricket Result with Template:Cricket result.
Duplicate; convert uses of the less common {{Cricket Result}} to use {{Cricket result}}. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 15:42, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Replace and delete per nom. Gonnym (talk) 12:54, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Federal Bureau of Investigation

[edit]

Infobox template which takes a single parameter – |subname= – which affects a single display field in the infobox. It is only used once in mainspace page (National Incident-Based Reporting System), and I highly doubt there are additional articles which would benefit from an all but identical infobox. Indeed, I am struggling to think of a time where an infobox (not a sidebar) can be almost entirely duplicated but not constitute a WP:REDUNDANTFORK.

I think it is more sustainable to avoid hiding the wikitext, in the spirit of WP:TMP: Templates should not normally be used to store article text, as this makes it more difficult to edit the content. Therefore, subst and delete the template. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 15:35, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete without subst. The infobox should only appear on Federal Bureau of Investigation and not on other pages. Gonnym (talk) 15:42, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also alright with that :) HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 16:42, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:NHS

[edit]

Only two uses after nearly 20 years, probably just easier to directly use an elink. Primefac (talk) 15:32, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete due to insufficient use: the remaining two uses can be accomplished with a regular external link. --Minoa (talk) 18:31, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:KWh

[edit]

Not heavily used, and while I understand the convenience element I feel like using {{val}} works just as well (plus it has more options). Primefac (talk) 15:27, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:USAF DOR O-6

[edit]

No transclusions or incoming links to explain why it was created. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:09, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Major Clubs T20 Tournament

[edit]

No transclusions. All articles linked from this navbox were were deleted at AFD. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:06, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:EIN

[edit]

This template does not seem to give any useful information; the /doc itself says that the search only works in certain circumstances, and I checked about half o the extant uses and none of them give a result. Unless it can be fixed I figure this template should probably be deleted. Primefac (talk) 15:00, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2025 Pakistan Super League Points table

[edit]

Unused as 2025 Pakistan Super League#Points table uses a different table. Gonnym (talk) 13:47, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:World premiere

[edit]

Unused and recently created but fails MOS:ICON. This glob of the world is meaningless. Gonnym (talk) 09:40, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Wikt-lang/language

[edit]

Unused as the module has been using the Lua for years. Gonnym (talk) 09:38, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Alki Oroklini squad

[edit]

Unused after the data was blanked. Gonnym (talk) 09:31, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


December 5

[edit]

Template:CPL original clubs

[edit]

WP:TCREEP - this template is not needed. Template:Canadian Premier League already links to every CPL club and there is nothing special about the "original" clubs. BLAIXX 23:38, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The make-up of leagues, especially in North America, has a tendency to change over time. This can be seen from the current clubs in Major League Soccer as opposed to its first season back in 1996. We have already seen changes in the Canadian Premier League as well since it started. Many other nations' leagues have similar templates, so why should Canada's not have one? Or is it simply "oh, it only started in 2019" that is the issue? Hammersfan (talk) 11:12, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The issue is not that 2019 is too recent, it's that it's an arbitrary grouping. There are infinitely many ways to group articles but we want to stick to notable groupings. Yes, the membership of many sports leagues change every year but that doesn't explain why the inaugural season is so special that it needs an extra navbox? BLAIXX 22:37, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Forgive me, but how can the original members be an arbitrary grouping? Does that make templates that show the original members of other national leagues arbitrary groupings? Presumably that means the templates showing the original members of The Football League should also be deleted? Or the members of Serie A that took part in the first season? The first season is the historic one, that shows everyone the founding members, something that may well end up changing over time Hammersfan (talk) 15:29, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I agree, those other templates should be deleted too. This content is simply not suitable for a navbox. If you want a place that lists the teams from the first season of the Football League, the article 1888–89 Football League does just that. Putting a navbox on the article of each club that was part of the inaugural season just feels gratuitous. BLAIXX 15:54, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This template's content is made somewhat redundant by Template:2019 in Canadian soccer and Template:2019 Canadian Premier League season by team. I am wordsmyth (talk) 12:30, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
None of the links in this template are included in the 2019 in Canadian soccer template Hammersfan (talk) 17:51, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Belarusian mobile phone companies

[edit]

Insufficient number of links for navigation. Izno (talk) 20:53, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Shirley Manson

[edit]

Seems unnecessary when each of the bands she was in has a dedicated navbox. --woodensuperman 13:55, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Butch Vig

[edit]

All albums are by Garbage and included at {{Garbage (band)}} so Vig does not need a navbox to himself. --woodensuperman 13:40, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:B5 (band)

[edit]

Just two notable albums. WP:NENAN --woodensuperman 13:33, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WikiProject Medicine/proposed doc

[edit]

Any changes made to the doc have been made 10+ years ago. Gonnym (talk) 10:24, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Biota infobox/Wikidata

[edit]

Unused infobox other than in one old discussion. Gonnym (talk) 10:21, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose This template is useful for comparing the output of the taxobox using the automated taxonomy system with what would produced if using Wikidata. Why we don't use wikidata is a topic that is often raised and the examples in the template documentation and testcases provide a quick reference for illustration of the problems with the current wikidata taxonomy model. This might change so it's useful to make the comparison on occasion.  —  Jts1882 | talk  10:35, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox journal/wikidata

[edit]

Unused infobox template other than in one old discussion. Gonnym (talk) 10:20, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Old discussions

[edit]

December 4

Template:Rlw

[edit]

Template designed to give a {{No redirect}}-style link to a redirect along with either a Special:WhatLinksHere or edit link. While I can kind of see its use, they have only been used in one set of database reports since their creation (of which they are also historic and no longer updated). Primefac (talk) 15:43, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It sure would be nicer if the database reports got fixed instead, but I'm doubtful that's gonna happen, ah well. --MZMcBride (talk) 20:01, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Plural form

[edit]

Propose merging Template:Plural form with Template:Plural abbr.
Templates both do the same thing and achieve the exact same output text. waddie96 ★ (talk) 13:24, 4 December 2024 (UTC) Edited at 15:27, 4 December 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Did you mean to link the same template twice? It looks like you intended to propose merging it with Template:Plural abbr. Gary600 (talk) 15:09, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yes, sorry I mean merging with Template:Plural abbr. I corrected it Gary600. waddie96 ★ (talk) 15:30, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think template:plural form is clearer and would prefer merging the other way (depending on usage). Caleb Stanford (talk) 18:31, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please can someone revert this it's ruining the appearance of intro sentences across articles. Atrapalhado (talk) 22:54, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Atrapalhado: I've added <noinclude> tags to stop it from being substituted. waddie96 ★ (talk) 22:53, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Brad Pitt

[edit]

Only three articles. WP:NENAN --woodensuperman 13:08, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Heavy Moss

[edit]

Only one album and two notable singles to their name. WP:NENAN --woodensuperman 10:01, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose still serves as a hub for all links for the band. Scuba 14:03, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article Heavy Moss does that job quite well already! And the articles are well linked, you can link to the band, the album and each of the singles from each and every article. This simply isn't needed. --woodensuperman 14:59, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Module:User:Anomie/deepToString

[edit]

Unused sandbox or test module. If the user still wants it move to the user's sandbox per Module:Sandbox to Module:Sandbox/Anomie/module name, else delete. Gonnym (talk) 09:01, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep Why randomly change the conventions for naming user module sandboxes? And if there is an actual consensus for that somewhere, you should be proposing a rename rather than a deletion. Anomie⚔ 12:07, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not proposing a rename, I'm proposing deleting an unused module. If the user, in this case, you, still want this, then it should be moved to pseudo userspace in the Module namespace, which I've indicated above. Gonnym (talk) 12:17, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It is in a pseudo-userspace in the Module namespace. Just not the particular pseudo-namespace you prefer. And this one isn't even a sandbox, it's a module intended for use in the Lua debug console. Anomie⚔ 13:12, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep No reason given to delete other than a personal preference for Module:Sandbox. However, Module:User is appropriate because the code is finished and not a sandbox. Johnuniq (talk) 01:01, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Our only existing information page on the point describes Special:Prefixindex/Module:Sandbox/ as the place for sandboxes, for which there is a clear and obvious preference compared to Special:Prefixindex/Module:User:. It does not appear to be solely personal preference. Izno (talk) 02:22, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The main "clear preference" is because people like you and Gonnym have gone through and moved or deleted existing pages out of Module:User:. Looking at the place you link, I note all it says is (emphasis added) Module:Sandbox provides a pseudo-namespace for experimenting with Lua modules. At least until one of you changes it to further your crusade. Anomie⚔ 12:37, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Anomie Erm, please find me moving literally anyone's module sandbox or retract your unsubstantiated WP:ASPERSION. Heck, you're welcome to find me advocating for moving sandboxes of modules literally anywhere besides this page. I won't hold my breath, but maybe I've said something or done something of the sort to be held up as a "crusader". Remind yourself what WP:AGF looks like, please.
    Since you think it is WP:FAIT by Gonnym also, you are also welcome to show evidence of that being the case, otherwise that too should be treated as an WP:ASPERSION. Do you really want to be at ANI for this topic?
    Regarding does not support your claim that your preferred space is the only one, you may wish to review what I actually said: "the only page we have that says anything says it goes here".
    You're somewhere between WP:BLUDGEON (on the soft end) and WP:BATTLEGROUND (on the hard end). Either move on or significantly reduce the temperature you are displaying response to everyone else here. It is not the end of the world if your modules are moved, merged, or whatever other option TFD decides, and you know it. Izno (talk) 23:36, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Here's one, and here are seven more.
    WP:FAIT: where actions are justified by virtue of being already carried out, such as moving things away from Module:User: then pointing to "clear and obvious preference".
    You may want to re-read what you said: (emphasis added) describes Special:Prefixindex/Module:Sandbox/ as the place for sandboxes, versus "a place" as I quoted.
    You seem to be the one coming in hot for no reason to me. Anomie⚔ 01:20, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Either this is a sandbox, in which case move it to proper sandbox space per nom, or it is not a sandbox, in which case it should be deleted as unused: we are not a web host. I don't have a preference between the two. You can probably get me, at best, to merge to Module:Dump or similar given the apparent purpose of this module, at best. Izno (talk) 02:22, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Who made you the arbiter of what is the "proper sandbox space"? As for "unused", it's a module intended to be used in the console without being traditionally transcluded. You're also misquoting WP:WEBHOST, nothing in that applies here. As I mentioned below, WP:MFD's discussion of user pages is more relevant. Anomie⚔ 12:37, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      WP:MFD's discussion of user pages is more relevant We routinely move pages that are in template or module space per TFD to user's clear namespace when they are found not to be helping the greater wiki at large (as would be evidenced by an untranscluded module and where that user requests such a move), or simply deleted when such users don't pop up to request their template's salvation. It's not enough for a module Just To Exist, we are interested in people being able to find the technology they need, which is inhibited when modules aren't named how they should be named. Right now this module displays a stunning WP:OWNing name, whether you think it is for yourself or for others. I was willing to entertain it was valuable, so...:
      it's a module intended to be used in the console without being traditionally transcluded Yes, which is why I left an opening here for another end to this module, vice the below sandbox module with the word sandbox in it. Speaking of:
      Who made you the arbiter of what is the "proper sandbox space"? It is clear what the global preference is. Do you want to respect that silent consensus? Do you respect it? Do we actually need to put something in WP:Lua that more strongly says what the delineation should be for sandboxes? I fine to do that. I suspect the replies to an RFC on the point will be the same, but hey, I'm suggesting there is opportunity there to decide further how module sandboxes should be named. Izno (talk) 23:41, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Re your first paragraph, since you ignored what I said in favor of irrelevancies, I'll ignore what you said since it's irrelevant.
      Re your second, a non-sandbox under a "sandbox" prefix isn't a very convincing suggestion.
      Re your third, I could just as easily update WP:Lua and other pages to reflect what I see is the actual situation, that both conventions have been in use since 2013. Module:Sandbox has had the advantage of being on WP:Lua for all that time, and yet Module:User: still has had a fair bit of usage until people started trying to eliminate it. How about neither of us do unilateral edits? Anomie⚔ 01:20, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Module:User:Anomie/Sandbox

[edit]

Unused sandbox or test module. If the user still wants it move to the user's sandbox per Module:Sandbox to Module:Sandbox/Anomie/module name, else delete. Gonnym (talk) 09:01, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Module:User:Mr. Stradivarius/sandbox2

[edit]

Unused sandbox or test module. If the user still wants it move to the user's sandbox per Module:Sandbox to Module:Sandbox/Mr. Stradivarius/module name, else delete. Gonnym (talk) 09:00, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep Why randomly change the conventions for naming user module sandboxes? And if there is an actual consensus for that somewhere, you should be proposing a rename rather than a deletion. Anomie⚔ 12:11, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Not randomly at all. This module is an unused module in the module space and is subject to all other guidelines and procedures, meaning it can be sent to TfD and deleted. Iff the user still wants the module (and so far, they have not stated that), the module should be moved to the pseudo userspace in the Module namespace, which I've indicated above. Gonnym (talk) 12:16, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    You want guidelines and procedures? If Modules could be in the User namespace, this would be handled at WP:MFD which generally doesn't delete established users' subpages just because some busybody thinks they're "unused". But since modules need to be in the Module namespace, we need a convention for "userspace" for people to have their own modules, and pages in that pseudo-userspace should probably be judged under the same criteria as other userspace pages. I also note that the "Module:User:<name>" convention has existed for as long as the "Module:Sandbox/<name>" convention, and has the advantage of covering more than just sandboxes. Anomie⚔ 13:12, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    As I noted above, the other convention is clearly not the preferred one if we treat these as sandboxes, nor is your apparently preferred convention for sandbox modules even mentioned in the relevant page on the point. At best you have to argue this is their own personal collection of scripts that in fact see real use (despite the name in this specific case being otherwise), in which case that's not what template space is for and we'd be deleting them the same for that reason (or alternatively, if they are transcluded they should have a name that doesn't presume ownership over their contents). Izno (talk) 02:28, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    As I replied above, the "not the preferred one" is largely due to people like you and Gonnym trying for a Wikipedia:Fait accompli and Wikipedia:Lua does not support your claim that your preferred space is the only one. Anomie⚔ 12:37, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move to actual sandbox space per nom. Izno (talk) 02:19, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

December 3

Film writer templates

[edit]

This writer-specific navbox violates WP:FILMNAV, which says, "Filmographies (and similar) of individuals should also not be included in navboxes, unless the individual concerned could be considered a primary creator of the material in question. This avoids over-proliferation of individuals' navboxes on each production's article, and avoids putting undue weight on the contributions of certain individuals over others." This navbox is causing exactly the problem that WP:FILMNAV warns about. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 22:06, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak oppose. I think that in the majority of these cases the writers concerned could be considered primary creators of the material in question. I don't think bundling these nominations together is helpful, as they should each be looked at on their own merit. I'd be more concerned with the producer navboxes, espectially these days when films seem to have about a dozen producers. I'm sure I've advocated for limiting this to director roles only in the dark and murky past, but I seem to recall that "primary creator" was the compromise. What is auteur theory anyway? ;) --woodensuperman 11:31, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I looked at all the examples, and there were none where they were always the primary creator. Are you suggesting limiting it to works where they are only the primary creator? I feel like if we don't pay attention, editors will mindlessly fill out (or restore) all credits, like the now-blocked MolAnneFinnBall567 did. It seems to be better to be all or nothing. It's not like there is zero access to writing credits; their names are always in the infobox and ideally the article body too. It's about whether or not we need yet another navbox at the very end of the article, and writers and producers are rarely the exclusive sole drivers of creativity across all their works. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 12:42, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I think these have been concerns for nearly a decade! See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers/Archive 11#RFC: Filmography navboxes. --woodensuperman 13:07, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I think categories serve best than the navboxes. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:14, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep the Fusco navbox at the least, don't mind deleting the others. I've been following this discussion for a while, and considering the script is the second-most essential to a film (even more so than producers and actors), I feel a case can be made for keeping those who in almost all cases act solo, unlike guys like McKenna and Sommers (who would often be part of a team of six, thus cheapening their creative role too much to be primary). In Fusco's case, almost every work (save The Shack (2017 film), with two other writers) had him work solo - and there are 15 - so there is far less of an issue keeping him than the others. ミラP@Miraclepine 19:44, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:PIE

[edit]

Replace usages with {{lang|ine-x-proto}} and delete.

Proto-Indo-European language has been supported for a while now by {{lang}}, which additionally provides various checks, validations and categories, that this template does not.

The main difference between the two templates is that PIE does not italic the text or adds an asterisk (*), while Lang does. That means that when replacing, if a PIE usage

  • has an asterisk, it should be removed
  • wraps the template in italics, they should be removed

See this edit as an example.

Also somewhat related, "pie" is incorrect to use here as that is the language code for the Piro Pueblo language. Gonnym (talk) 13:40, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:42, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:27, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support nomination, per nom. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 05:39, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Testcase

[edit]

Propose merging Template:Testcase with Template:Test case.
{{Testcase}} is referred to as the legacy version of the spaced {{Test case}}. They should be merged. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 21:48, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I do think that the amount of coding that would be required to create a wrapper for the old template so that all the params can translate into the new one would be overly burdensome, and I don't think that the time spent reprogramming old test cases to follow the format of the new template would be worth it. As such, I don't think that template merging here would improve the encyclopedia on a net basis, so I think they should be kept. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 05:44, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Replace all usages (122) and delete template. Don't merge anything that the new template can already do, and only merge specific features if actually needed. Gonnym (talk) 12:09, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Happy with that outcome, too. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 21:46, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:47, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:27, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:How-to

[edit]

Propose merging Template:How-to with Template:Manual.
These seem to say the same thing, in different words ("contains instructions, advice, or how-to content"/ "written like a manual or guide").

Reducing the number of available duplicative templates makes it easier for editors to find the template suited to an issue which they wish to flag. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:48, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Merge which way?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:18, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:IranNCSGN

[edit]

No point in external link template for a dead link. * Pppery * it has begun... 17:06, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:17, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: If kept per Frietjes, then convert to a full citation template and not leave it in this mixed-state. Gonnym (talk) 12:19, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Completed discussions

[edit]

A list of completed discussions that still require action taken on the template(s) — for example, a merge between two infoboxes — can be found at the "Holding Cell".

For an index of all old and archived discussions, see Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/Archives.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion&oldid=1262236290"