Wikipedia:Templates for discussion
V | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Total |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
CfD | 0 | 0 | 19 | 0 | 19 |
TfD | 0 | 0 | 6 | 2 | 8 |
MfD | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
FfD | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
RfD | 0 | 0 | 10 | 2 | 12 |
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]
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]
- 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[edit]
To list a template for deletion or merging, follow this three-step process. The use of Twinkle (explained below) is strongly recommended, as it automates and simplifies these steps. Note that the "Template:" prefix should not be included anywhere when carrying out these steps (unless otherwise specified).
Step | Instructions |
---|---|
I: Tag the template. | Add one of the following codes to the top of the template page:
Note:
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 TemplateStyles pages: The above templates will not work on TemplateStyles pages. Instead, add a CSS comment to the top of the page:
|
II: List the template at TfD. | Follow this link to edit today's TfD log.
Add this text to the top of the list:
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: {{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 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 Related categories: If this is a deletion proposal involving a template and a category populated solely by templates, add this code in the {{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. 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]
July 9[edit]
July 8[edit]
Template:Timeline House of Alpin[edit]
Single use template. Text can be included in House of Alpin, the only articles where it is used. The Banner talk 21:27, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Subst and delete per nom. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:39, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Subst per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:52, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:Fourteenth Doctor stories[edit]
- Template:Fourteenth Doctor stories (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Tenth Doctor stories (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Propose merging Template:Fourteenth Doctor stories with Template:Tenth Doctor stories.
The template is unnecessary given that the three episodes plus specials page all link to each other through inline links and with {{Doctor Who episodes|N13b}}. Though with the inclusion of The Power of the Doctor a merger was proposed with Template:Tenth Doctor stories. As the two incarantions are pretty linked and both played by David Tennant. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 21:14, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:Dick Schoof sidebar[edit]
- Template:Dick Schoof (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Propose merging Template:Dick Schoof sidebar with Template:Dick Schoof.
A navigation bar and a sidebar is duplication, in particular because there is not much to link yet Dajasj (talk) 19:56, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Merge per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:50, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Module:Citation[edit]
- Module:Citation (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
The 2018 TfD says that "a soft redirect in a module is not possible". That's not true anymore. require('Module:Module wikitext')._addText('{{soft redirect|Module:Citation/CS1}}')
would do exactly that. I'm not saying the closer made a mistake; Module:Module wikitext was created two years after the TfD, but that doesn't mean we can't reevaluate the close since things have changed now. Nickps (talk) 15:31, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Pinging @Trappist the monk since their comment on RfD brought the module to my attention. Nickps (talk) 15:34, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Umm, that
require()
doesn't work. I don't know why and I'm not going to take the time to figure it out. Currently, if Module:Citation is invoked you get:{{#invoke:Citation|citation}}
- Lua error in Module:Citation at line 1: This module is retained for historical and structural reasons; consider using Module:Citation/CS1..
- I think that error message appropriate. Readers should never see it but editors will if they are doing something that they ought not do (and are paying attention ...).
- If we want to 'soft redirect' Module:Citation can't we just add
{{soft redirect|Module:Citation/CS1}}
to someplace in Module:Citation/doc and be done? - —Trappist the monk (talk) 19:26, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- That require doesn't work because it just redirects the page. If you add a second line that says
return require [[Module:Citation/CS1]]
under it, then the module will be functional too. Nickps (talk) 19:58, 8 July 2024 (UTC)- I've edited Module:Sandbox/Nickps to demonstrate. {{#invoke:Sandbox/Nickps|citation}} gives Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1 at line 4150: attempt to concatenate a nil value. which doesn't look too promising at first but it's the same error as {{#invoke:Citation/CS1|citation}}: Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1 at line 4150: attempt to concatenate a nil value. which means the redirect is working. Nickps (talk) 20:02, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Actually, I just pushed the change to Module:Citation directly as a proof of concept. It can always be reverted later. Nickps (talk) 20:06, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- What is it that I am not understanding? You get the Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1 at line 4150 error message because of line 2 at Module:Citation (permalink). It is not obvious that line 1 (permalink) is doing anything that we want. If, as WP:SOFTREDIR says,
Soft redirects differ in that they leave the reader on the redirect page
that isn't happening because line 2 is pretty much the equivalent of a hard redirect. So tell me, what it is that you are attempting to accomplish with your edit? That edit puts the soft redirect outside of the module documentation. Wouldn't it be better to add{{soft redirect}}
to the ~/doc page? - Part of my misunderstanding was that I expected an invoke of Module:Citation to do nothing but put up a soft redirect annotation and halt as WP:SOFTREDIR sort of suggests that it should. The soft redirect annotation is for direct wikilinks (
[[Module:Citation]]
→ Module:Citation). That being the case, I see no benefit to be gained by using the module to create the soft redirect annotation when the same can be accomplished by including{{soft redirect}}
in the ~/doc page. - Just what am I missing?
- —Trappist the monk (talk) 21:51, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Now I'm confused. If you open Module:Citation you're left at the redirect page. So by the definition you provide, that's a soft redirect. I don't see how a redirect being soft or hard has anything to do with what it does when transcluded. Now, we could move the soft redirect template to the documentation page, although that would require changing the second line (then only line) to
return require('Module:Citation/CS1')
to avoid creating a hard redirect. Or, we could avoid this entire conversation and go with Pppery's suggestion of making a hard redirect. Nickps (talk) 22:17, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Now I'm confused. If you open Module:Citation you're left at the redirect page. So by the definition you provide, that's a soft redirect. I don't see how a redirect being soft or hard has anything to do with what it does when transcluded. Now, we could move the soft redirect template to the documentation page, although that would require changing the second line (then only line) to
- What is it that I am not understanding? You get the Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1 at line 4150 error message because of line 2 at Module:Citation (permalink). It is not obvious that line 1 (permalink) is doing anything that we want. If, as WP:SOFTREDIR says,
- Actually, I just pushed the change to Module:Citation directly as a proof of concept. It can always be reverted later. Nickps (talk) 20:06, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- I've edited Module:Sandbox/Nickps to demonstrate. {{#invoke:Sandbox/Nickps|citation}} gives Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1 at line 4150: attempt to concatenate a nil value. which doesn't look too promising at first but it's the same error as {{#invoke:Citation/CS1|citation}}: Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1 at line 4150: attempt to concatenate a nil value. which means the redirect is working. Nickps (talk) 20:02, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- That require doesn't work because it just redirects the page. If you add a second line that says
- Umm, that
- Here's a link to the previous TfD. Nickps (talk) 17:19, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep it's marked historical, that's sufficient. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 17:29, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Ideally we would move Module:Citation/CS1 to this title - there's no reason things are the way they are other then history. Otherwise just hard redirect now that hard redirects are possible - there's no reason for a soft redirect which would deliberately get in all possible users' way. * Pppery * it has begun... 20:51, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:Holly Trolley (VTA)[edit]
Unused route template. Gonnym (talk) 08:05, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: This is an infrequent tourist service that gets three sentences in one article. It doesn't need an RDT. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:00, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:19, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: Can I place this somewhere in VTA light rail? If so, I can do that. If not, you can delete that.
- - SleepTrain456 (talk) 18:53, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- @SleepTrain456: Even there, it's still going to be just a few sentences. We don't need a dedicated RDT for an infrequent seasonal service that operates entirely over trackage shown in other RDTs. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:55, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- P.S., I've since added the template to VTA light rail, and failing that, to California Trolley and Railroad Corporation. If they belong to one of these, that's fine by me. If they belong to neither article, you're welcome to delete it.
- - SleepTrain456 (talk) 23:00, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: CT&RC seems to be the correct place with this diagram, as it wouldn't be appropriate nor necessary to have the entire VTA light rail network there. Useddenim (talk) 19:54, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:26, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:They aren't[edit]
- Template:They aren't (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Too specific, plus it can be done by just {{they are|Example}}n't
. Currently not used. Nardog (talk) 13:06, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:They use[edit]
- Template:They use (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Subst and delete. Too specific. {{gender:Example|he uses|she uses|they use}}
isn't too long and we can't create these for every verb ad infinitum. Nardog (talk) 13:04, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- go ahead, and tbf I kinda made template:they verb shortly afterwards to solve the issue of creating these for every verb ad infinitum by having one that would very obviously solve it for every possible verb 🔥HOTm̵̟͆e̷̜̓s̵̼̊s̸̜̃🔥 (talk・edits) 16:55, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom - Template:They verb is useful, the rest are unnecessary special cases. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:39, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:IPAc-is[edit]
- Template:IPAc-is (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
No transclusions. Created in 2019. – Jonesey95 (talk) 12:46, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:39, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
User:UBX/Juve Merda[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 Procedurally closed.. Wrong venue. User boxes are discussed at WP:MFD. Whpq (talk) 17:57, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
Offensive against Juventus Football Club, "merda" in Italian is a vulgar word equivalent to "shit"Qwerty 9706 (talk) 11:35, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: I think userboxes are supposed to go to MFD, not TFD. – Jonesey95 (talk) 12:59, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- 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:Australia squad 2019 World Women's Handball Championship[edit]
- Template:Australia squad 2019 World Women's Handball Championship (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Most of the entries have been deleted as non notable. A navbox for 3 players (including 1 under AfD) is not useful. Also unusual to create a team template for a team that came last in a competition. LibStar (talk) 00:30, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:39, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:50, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
July 7[edit]
Template:Verifiedbadge[edit]
- Template:Verifiedbadge (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Created by a user blocked for spamming, to use in his autobiographical article (since deleted). Clearly this is of no use to Wikipedia, but I wasn't able to find a suitable criterion for speedy deletion. Un assiolo (talk) 19:33, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - no transclusions or incoming links. Suntooooth, it/he (talk/contribs) 00:28, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:49, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:Seconda Categoria[edit]
The template was only transcluded in Seconda Categoria; it was likely originally meant to link pages of all the regional tournaments in this league (which do not have Wikipedia pages), but it only links to the names of the regions. Not useful. Broc (talk) 13:31, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions. GiantSnowman 18:50, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - not needed. GiantSnowman 18:51, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:49, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:BC Körmend by season[edit]
Navbox with all red links in the body. DB1729talk 10:30, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:40, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:48, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:User WP:AGS[edit]
- Template:User WP:AGS (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Ancient Germanic studies was redirected and is no longer a project or task force. Gonnym (talk) 10:02, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep for the same reasons as Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Colonial Empires/Userbox/CEBASICBOX, Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2024_July_7#Template:User_WikiProject_Dacia, Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_July_7#Category:WikiProject_Dacia_participants and Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 7#Category:WikiProject Colonialism participants. Although the WikiProjects are gone, these templates and their accompanying categories have historical interest. It would have been helpful to bundle these related nominations together or at least link them. And polite to notify the successor wikiproject at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject History. – Joe (talk) 09:02, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep but change "is a participant" to "was a participant". There's no reason that past relationship can't be expressed through a userbox. Also this is the wrong venue (should be at MfD). * Pppery * it has begun... 00:40, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:User WikiProject Dacia[edit]
Wikipedia:WikiProject Dacia was redirected and is no longer a project or task force. Gonnym (talk) 09:51, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep for the same reasons as Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Colonial Empires/Userbox/CEBASICBOX, Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2024_July_7#Template:User_WP:AGS, Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_July_7#Category:WikiProject_Dacia_participants and Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 7#Category:WikiProject Colonialism participants. Although the WikiProjects are gone, these templates and their accompanying categories have historical interest. It would have been helpful to bundle these related nominations together or at least link them. And polite to notify the successor wikiproject at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject History. – Joe (talk) 09:03, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep but change "is a participant" to "was a participant". There's no reason that past relationship can't be expressed through a userbox. Also this is the wrong venue (should be at MfD). * Pppery * it has begun... 00:40, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:WikiProject Dacia Invitation[edit]
Wikipedia:WikiProject Dacia was redirected and is no longer a project or task force. Gonnym (talk) 09:51, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:40, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:48, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:Fake pp-semi[edit]
- Template:Fake pp-semi (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
There is no real place this would be used, even as an example. Gonnym (talk) 09:42, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:40, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:48, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:User18[edit]
- Template:User18 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
No transclusions or incoming links. Created in 2021. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:37, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep No user template has similar or more expansive contents than this one. In particular, it is the only one that links to Special:AbuseLog and Special:Log/block. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:42, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- I just fixed the broken unnamed parameter. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:48, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Also, because it's one of the only ones able to easily cross-link a user from a Wikimedia sister project (the other is {{Userxx}}). It was created to support linking users involved in cross-wiki issues, which admittedly don't come up that often, but it a big time-saver when it does. It looks like I must have forgotten about it when the time came to use it, so ironically, this Tfd has reminded me. There are not a ton of users who are interested in or know how to deal with cross-wiki issues, so it would be helpful to keep this around for that purpose. Maybe it needs a rename, to highlight the cross-wiki nature of it, and if someone could suggest a good name for it, I'd support that. (as creator) Mathglot (talk) 02:37, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Evidently nobody cares about whatever virtues are being extolled here because this has remained unused for years. * Pppery * it has begun... 03:41, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:49, 29 June 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 02:53, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: This template now has transclusions, apparently because of this edit. It does not appear to be used anywhere except for in this list of many similar templates. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:03, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:Usbk/light[edit]
- Template:Usbk/light (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
No transclusions or incoming links from discussions. Created in 2016. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:38, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:52, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep I'll try to dig a bit more. I believe this template was created to allow pages to contain very large numbers of userboxes without falling over. It may on the other hand have been to deal with slightly tendentious categories. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 16:40, 26 June 2024 (UTC).
- Confirmed someone who didn't get it had removed the uses of the template. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 22:26, 26 June 2024 (UTC).
- Confirmed someone who didn't get it had removed the uses of the template. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 22:26, 26 June 2024 (UTC).
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:49, 29 June 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 02:53, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:Cat[edit]
- Template:Cat (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Category link (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Propose merging Template:Cat with Template:Category link.
{{Cat}} has the option for a "category:" prefix (i.e. {{cat|stubs}}
and {{cat|Category:stubs}}
have the same output: ‹The template Cat is being considered for merging.› Category:Stubs), but otherwise this template just has fewer features than {{Category link}}. {{Category link}} does not accept the category prefix ({{Category link|Category:Stubs}}
becomes ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Category:Stubs), but does allow for various options. They should be combined. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 00:11, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Merge Template:Category link to Template:Cat as an inferior duplicate. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 02:01, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- I suppose I could've made it more clear in my nomination, but {{Category link}} has numerous options which {{Cat}} lacks, such as
|count=
,|count_type=
, and the ability to "pipe" links ({{category link|X1|X2}}
becomes ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› X2) (you can read more on at Template:Category link/doc). HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:56, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- I suppose I could've made it more clear in my nomination, but {{Category link}} has numerous options which {{Cat}} lacks, such as
- Merge as both do the same thing. Gonnym (talk) 09:28, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Merge or reverse merge as both do the same thing. Unless someone has other criteria it seems reasonable to keep the one with the most features, as HouseBlaster says. I am not sure how the merge will technically impact the current usage of the template, hopefully there are solutions for that. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:16, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: As HouseBlaster mentioned in an above comment, {{Category link}} has the ability to pipe links, which is incredibly useful (I've personally used it extensively on my saved links page). If the templates are merged, this functionality should stay. Suntooooth, it/he (talk/contribs) 17:09, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Update: because the ability to optionally include a category prefix at {{Category link}} would be a good idea regardless of the outcome of this discussion, I have gone ahead and added that functionality to the sandbox. The sandbox version calls a new subtemplate, {{Category link/core}}, which has the added benefit of eliminating multiple calls to the WP:EXPENSIVE PAGESINCAT magic word. If this merge goes ahead, we just need to sync the main template with the sandbox and redirect {{cat}} to {{category link}}. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 22:32, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
July 6[edit]
Template:Newspaper of record[edit]
Unused wikidata related template. Gonnym (talk) 06:31, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep, albeit a little weakly. The nominator seems to be under the misimpression that a template being unused is by itself sufficient grounds for deletion. It is not. This template was developed for potential use in a Module:Find sources template, and while it wasn't initially adopted, it might be in the future, and given that its development stage is appropriately tagged and that retaining it is cheap, that provides grounds for keeping. It is also relevant for editors looking at the history of the creation of the find sources module, and could have other uses for editors seeking for other reasons to associate a country with its newspaper(s) of record. Sdkb talk 06:42, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- The commentor above is under the misimpression that the nominator does not know how TfD works and that hundred of templates get deleted on a weekly bases for being unused. 3 years being unused is a clear indication that either the template creator has abandoned a template or that the community does not want it. Both are valid grounds for deletion. Gonnym (talk) 08:06, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
and has no likelihood of being used
isn't exactly ambiguous, and is bolded for good reason. To the extent it's not being followed, it ought to be — even when there's only a small chance they'll be used in the future, the maintenance cost of retaining templates is minimal (particularly when their documentation is clear, as here). Deletion for the sake of deletion does not benefit the encyclopedia. Sdkb talk 14:23, 20 June 2024 (UTC)- I'm yet to be convinced of the value of deleting templates, merely because they are unused. Or indeed for any reason, except when they are using a valuable piece of namespace that could be better used. Even then moving is an option. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 18:36, 22 June 2024 (UTC).
- The commentor above is under the misimpression that the nominator does not know how TfD works and that hundred of templates get deleted on a weekly bases for being unused. 3 years being unused is a clear indication that either the template creator has abandoned a template or that the community does not want it. Both are valid grounds for deletion. Gonnym (talk) 08:06, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 02:29, 28 June 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:45, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
[edit]
Navbox only contains three blue links (not including the header, which links to the general Wesleyan Cardinals football page), not enough to warrant the existence of this template for navigation purposes. There is also not an article for List of Wesleyan Cardinals starting quarterbacks. Eagles 24/7 (C) 20:07, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Weak oppose: (I think this is how opposing and supporting works) Has four now, so I could see the rationale for both keeping or deleting it. Thetreesarespeakingtome (talk) 03:01, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:16, 29 June 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:45, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Despite four links, it does provide navigation. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:45, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:Eastern Football League seasons[edit]
Navbox with all red links. DB1729talk 14:15, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:45, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:Riddell District Football League seasons[edit]
- Template:Riddell District Football League seasons (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Navbox with all red links. DB1729talk 14:14, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:45, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:Western Region Football League seasons[edit]
Navbox with all redlinks. DB1729talk 14:13, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:45, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:Wales Conservative Party MPs[edit]
As a result of the recent election, the template is currently blank. 2601:249:9301:D570:B519:DC52:8298:C7B (talk) 05:55, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:45, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
July 5[edit]
Template:Them/doc[edit]
- Template:Them/doc (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Their/doc (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Theirs/doc (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Themself/doc (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:They are/doc (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:They aren't/doc (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:They're/doc (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:They were/doc (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:They have/doc (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:They do/doc (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:They use/doc (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:He or she/doc (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Him or her/doc (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:His or her/doc (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:His or hers/doc (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:He/she/doc (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Him/her/doc (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:His/her/doc (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
These doc pages are part of the {{they}}-series of templates (full list here) that specify the proper pronoun for a given user based on their WP:Preferences; example: {{they|Bishonen}}
→ she. Each of these individual template /doc pages are almost identical, except for the usage line showing the template name, and a line of explanation of the results of the template, which looks like this (examples from {{Them/doc}}, and {{They are/doc}} ):
{{them}}
: This template will expand to one of "him", "her" or "them" depending on what the specified user has set in their preferences.{{they are}}
: This template will expand to one of "he is", "she is" or "they are" depending on what the specified user has set in their preferences.
All the others have similar lines. Documentation for all of these templates is now handled by a single, template doc-generating template, namely, {{They/doc}}. The individual doc pages are no longer needed, and should be removed.
Note: there are one or two in the full list, such as {{they verb}}, that have special needs and therefore are not included here for deletion.
The template doc Talk pages are all redirects, and probably they should be retargeted to Template talk:They. Mathglot (talk) 23:23, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Notifying doc page creators: @Jonesey95, Locke Cole, GKFX, Crazytales, Nardog, CX Zoom, HOTmess, Od Mishehu, Jc86035, and NE Ent:. Mathglot (talk) 23:53, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete all /doc pages as not in use and not needed. They don't offer any value. Gonnym (talk) 12:08, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete all per nom. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:48, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:Blink[edit]
- Template:Blink (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
This template has been deleted multiple times. The creator removed a speedy deletion tag, so rather than get in a dispute, here's a TFD. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:10, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- The previous, unrelated version of this template was deleted because it didn't work (it used the actual blink tag, which has been deprecated for around twenty years). There was not a consensus to forbid any template from ever existing on the English Wikipedia with the pagename
blink
, although if it would make you happy, I could rename this to {{blink2}} so that it isn't a "recreation". jp×g🗯️ 18:13, 5 July 2024 (UTC)- JPxG, what do you want this gross thing for? Folly Mox (talk) 23:57, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- There's an article about the blink element, whose primary illustration is rendered with this template, which makes text blink. There is also a section about the deprecated blink and marquee tags at HTML element. It's obvious that the template is not appropriate to randomly be used for emphasis in article text, which is why there's a bold exclamation-pointed sentence on the /doc page telling you not to use it this way. Indeed, we have lots of content that would be inappropriate to put in random articles, like File:Communist Hammer and Sickle Star Flag.svg or File:Flag of the Ku Klux Klan.svg (which are illegal to display in some countries). The <blink> tag was quite bad, but hopefully we can agree it was less bad than the Khmer Rouge, whose insigna we display in their article; I think we can similarly depict a <blink> tag in the articles about <blink> tags, or deprecated HTML tags more broadly.
- It's true that it would be in theory possible to delete the template, and replace its invocations entirely with inline formatting on the two articles where it's in use -- but that inline formatting would still require TemplateStyles, so it would still require a stylesheet to be located somewhere. The idea of attaching a
/styles.css
subpage to a mainspace article, and then invoking that stylesheet from a different mainspace article (or having two identical .css pages on two different mainspace pages) seems quite obtuse and unorthodox to me, especially if a template for doing this already exists and works fine. - In general, my understanding of the purpose of Wikipedia templates is that they're supposed to allow code to be used on multiple pages, rather than forcing people to manually copypasta large complicated blocks of 100% identical code (in this case,
<templatestyles src="Blink/styles.css" /><span class="blink-css">{{{1}}}</span>
andblink, .blink-css { animation: blink 1s step-end infinite; } *::@keyframes blink { *:: 67% { opacity: 0 } *::}
, and additionally a content-model change to enable the second to be loaded from a separate page because it can't be styled inline with MediaWiki). jp×g🗯️ 00:39, 6 July 2024 (UTC)- Just like with Template:Marquee, you build it and people use it and we end up with horrible (User:Alpine0x37 User:One cookie) GeoCities like pages. Gonnym (talk) 12:14, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think it is reasonable for us to try to completely prevent people from making silly userpages, that doing so should be an objective of our template system, or that it should take a higher priority than using said system to write articles. jp×g🗯️ 06:02, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Just like with Template:Marquee, you build it and people use it and we end up with horrible (User:Alpine0x37 User:One cookie) GeoCities like pages. Gonnym (talk) 12:14, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- There's an article about the blink element, whose primary illustration is rendered with this template, which makes text blink. There is also a section about the deprecated blink and marquee tags at HTML element. It's obvious that the template is not appropriate to randomly be used for emphasis in article text, which is why there's a bold exclamation-pointed sentence on the /doc page telling you not to use it this way. Indeed, we have lots of content that would be inappropriate to put in random articles, like File:Communist Hammer and Sickle Star Flag.svg or File:Flag of the Ku Klux Klan.svg (which are illegal to display in some countries). The <blink> tag was quite bad, but hopefully we can agree it was less bad than the Khmer Rouge, whose insigna we display in their article; I think we can similarly depict a <blink> tag in the articles about <blink> tags, or deprecated HTML tags more broadly.
- JPxG, what do you want this gross thing for? Folly Mox (talk) 23:57, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- I find neither argument convincing here. Deleting {{blink}} won't stop people from building GeoCities-style pages if they want to, and I'm not even convinced we should care if they do. But I also don't see the value in a fake (because it doesn't actually use the blink HTML tag) self-demonstrating example in pages like blink element - it seems to me that people can understand what an element blinking means without it being shown to them. And I agree G4 doesn't apply. Since the burden is normally on the nominator in deletion discussions 'weak keep I guess. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:48, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:Chicu cabinet table[edit]
Single-use table of article content with no template parameters, documentation, or categories. Copy into article and delete. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:56, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:48, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Subst per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:38, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:Bedroom Community[edit]
This navbox lists four of the many recording artists whose work was released by the music label linked from the navbox header. These artists are not connected in the way that is intended for use in navboxes. A category will cover this need, if it exists. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:00, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:39, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:Article card[edit]
- Template:Article card (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Proposed and discussed in 2018 but never adopted. Subst and delete. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:56, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom (nit: it's not actually technically possible to substitute a template using CSS). * Pppery * it has begun... 00:48, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:Cabinet of Bola Tinubu[edit]
- Template:Cabinet of Bola Tinubu (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:First Cabinet of Muhammadu Buhari (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Second Cabinet of Muhammadu Buhari (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
All three were single-use templates. I have substituted them on their respective cabinet articles. These should not have been created as separate templates as it would create a duplicate notes and references section and there didn't appear to be any article size issues for them needed to be transcluded through a separate space. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 12:31, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Not sure about their current use but (if I recall correctly) the reason these templates were created were to use them for the page of their specific cabinet and the Cabinet of Nigeria page. Watercheetah99 (talk) 16:31, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- To link to the main cabinet article could just be a link to the article about the cabinet itself rather than doing section transclusion or with a template. These templates have been removed on the Cabinet of Nigeria article for a while. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:40, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:Static column row[edit]
No transclusions. Created in 2009. The documentation says that it is used by a template that does not exist. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:54, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:48, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:41, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:SpokenWikipediaReminder[edit]
No transclusions or incoming links from discussions. Appears to have been used just once on an editor's talk page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:51, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: per nom; I also have no idea what it means for a spoken article to be "incactive" [sic] or "expired". Queen of Hearts talk 06:58, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:40, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:Ddag[edit]
- Template:Ddag (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Double-dagger (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Propose merging Template:Ddag with Template:Double-dagger.
add a "sup" param to {{double-dagger}} and redirect; see also Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2024 June 6#Template:Dag Queen of Hearts talk 01:40, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
July 4[edit]
Template:Starmer Shadow Cabinet[edit]
- Template:Starmer Shadow Cabinet (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Starmer Cabinet (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Propose merging Template:Starmer Shadow Cabinet with Template:Starmer Cabinet.
With the election being in Labour's favor by a comfortable margin, these two should be merged as the "Shadow Cabinet" one will be redundant within a day's time. Omnis Scientia (talk) 22:35, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Fully agree this would be the best thing to do. --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 06:29, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Merge per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:38, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:Grand Rapids and Indiana Railroad[edit]
Navbox with two blue links. DB1729talk 23:46, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep, it has three (including the parent), and the other redlinks are valid future articles. Mackensen (talk) 01:45, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep
per Mackensen. It contains information relevant to the subject displayed in a standardized format at an expected location. (It would be much less visible if buried as text in the article.)12:23, 24 June 2024 (UTC) Useddenim (talk) 01:49, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- It has two links in the body. That does not justify a navigation box. --DB1729talk 11:55, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- That's really an editorial question. WP:NENAN is an essay, and the examples therein don't apply to this navbox and the related articles. Mackensen (talk) 10:07, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- It has two links in the body. That does not justify a navigation box. --DB1729talk 11:55, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 02:17, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Not much to navigate with. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 00:15, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Not enough content to warrant a navbox. We keep templates based on the present, not future speculation that has had over a decade to come true but hasn't. * Pppery * it has begun... 03:49, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Pppery The template's been stable for sixteen years, which is longer than WP:NENAN's been an essay. TfD shouldn't be making these kinds of editorial decisions and NENAN isn't even a guideline. Are there other policies in play here? Is it a good outcome to delete a navbox when it is the sole navbox on two articles and one of two on the other? Mackensen (talk) 17:52, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 17:01, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Comment. Added
anothertwo more blue links. Mackensen (talk) 00:34, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:Animals of Texas/doc[edit]
- Template:Animals of Texas/doc (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Evolution/doc (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Unused as parent uses {{Navbox documentation}}. Gonnym (talk) 09:40, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:37, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:Niki and Gabi[edit]
- Template:Niki and Gabi (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Navbox with just two links in the body. Not useful for navigation. – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:33, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:37, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:Martial arts medalists for Iran[edit]
Unnecessary, this is just a list of Iranian athletes in different sports, completely unrelated list of people with different level of achievements, they have nothing in common except the nationality. Sports2021 (talk) 00:45, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:37, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:DartsDatabase[edit]
- Template:DartsDatabase (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Seems to be doing the same thing as Template:Dartsdatabase. DB1729talk 00:34, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect to the older and established {{Dartsdatabase}}, although neither template appears to work. I get 404 errors from every link. – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:34, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Good catch, they'd changed their domain and URL but thankfully kept the ID number the same. I have updated the template code, doc and the URL match and formatter in the property and have written to them suggesting adding a redirect in case of any hardcoded URLs. nice work @Jonesey95 Back ache (talk) 11:11, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:AtWt2021[edit]
- Template:AtWt2021 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Unused recently created citation template. These should be used practically immediately after being created and not left unused. Gonnym (talk) 12:56, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 00:59, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Now in use. Thoughts?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:18, 4 July 2024 (UTC)- While it is in use, it is used on a single article. If a citation template can only be used on one article, it shouldn't be in a template. So subst and delete if no actual usages are found. Gonnym (talk) 08:16, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- I get 174 results when searching for the DOI provided by this template, so clearly it
can be used
in multiple articles. Also registering my pushback against the idea that every newly created template has to be used in several articles immediately or face deletion within a month or so. Imagine if we applied that standard to our orphaned articles, or any other type of page on the website. Even unedited drafts get a six month grace period. Why do templates need to be deleted or used right right away?But, this template: doesn't wrap a citation template, it just outputs one; it sets|display-authors=1
, which is pretty idiosyncratic and probably not desirable to many editors or possibly readers; uses the CS2 template {{Citation}}, which has an identical caveat; uses both|date=
and|year=
, which adds pages transcluding it to Category:CS1 maint: date and year; has no configurability, just outputting the same code without accepting any parameters in the template call.So, I feel this template is probably not fit to purpose. It should either be improved to a proper wrapper – without mandating a|display-authors=
parameter – as well as ditching one of either|date=
or|year=
; or it should be userfied pending improvement or deleted outright, the probable outcome. Folly Mox (talk) 13:56, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:2018 United States state legislative elections (upper house) imagemap[edit]
- Template:2018 United States state legislative elections (upper house) imagemap (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Unused election map. Gonnym (talk) 12:50, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 00:59, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Now in use. Thoughts?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:17, 4 July 2024 (UTC)- Fine with me to be kept as it is now in use. Gonnym (talk) 08:15, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:2018 United States state legislative elections (lower house) imagemap[edit]
- Template:2018 United States state legislative elections (lower house) imagemap (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Unused election map. Gonnym (talk) 12:50, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 00:59, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Now in use. Thoughts?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:17, 4 July 2024 (UTC)- Fine with me to be kept as it is now in use. Gonnym (talk) 08:15, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
July 3[edit]
Template:Lyane Leigh[edit]
- Template:Lyane Leigh (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Singer navbox with two blue links to associated acts. The singer herself, has no WP article. Lyane Leigh redirects to E-Rotic. DB1729talk 23:43, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:36, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:Patrick Rondat[edit]
- Template:Patrick Rondat (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Navbox with just two blue links in the body. Not useful for navigation. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:49, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:36, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:Filipinki[edit]
- Template:Filipinki (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Navbox with no links to relevant articles. All links appear to be to record labels, except for one, which links to the author of a book about the musical group. Not useful for navigation. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:47, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:36, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:Feed Me[edit]
- Template:Feed Me (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Navbox for a musical group with just one album and one single. Not useful for navigation. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:45, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:36, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:Cite LSA[edit]
- Template:Cite LSA (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Module:Cite LSA (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
This citation template has never served its intended purpose (not a single page using it is about linguistics) and it's not CS1 compatible so it's nearly impossible to maintain. ~ฅ(ↀωↀ=)neko-channyan 20:44, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support deletion. It's a pain in the ass to interact with, and I've only encountered in on geology articles, which should not use LSA style. It's used under 1000 times, so can easily be converted with AWB and similar. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 22:18, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete and replace with appropriate CS1 templates in articles. This may have to be done by hand to match the WP:CITEVAR style in each article, like this. The original purpose of this template is long gone, per this discussion and much previous discussion on the template's talk page, including this rabbit hole that led to undoing a misguided template move or merge many years ago. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:26, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: I think this TFD would also apply to Module:Cite LSA. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:36, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete and replace per above. I've also added the module to the nomination. Gonnym (talk) 08:21, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I tagged Module:Cite LSA with {{subst:tfd}}. Nickps (talk) 20:16, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:Arbitrator note[edit]
- Template:Arbitrator note (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Undocumented template proposed four years ago but apparently not needed. Subst and delete. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:28, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Subst per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:36, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:Australia squad 2013 World Women's Handball Championship[edit]
- Template:Australia squad 2013 World Women's Handball Championship (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Most of the entries are deleted, so not much use for navigating between players. Also unusual to create a template for a team that came last in the tournament. LibStar (talk) 00:36, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. Taylor 49 (talk) 15:30, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:36, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:EIDR[edit]
- Template:EIDR (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
No transclusions or incoming links. Created in January 2024. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:14, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- There are 222980 records in wikidata with the property that template presents, the thing itself is an ID for identify media that is not tied into a particular vendor or platform, if effort is needed, it is it promoting EIDR not in dismantling the infrastructure around it Back ache (talk) 21:25, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete template is of little use. It would be used to add an external link to articles, however the link in reality really adds little value to the articles. The basic information is already in the articles, and providing IDs solely for other databases and streaming platforms isn't of any use to the vast majority of article readers. Anyway the link itself per WP:EL needs to be immediately useful and they aren't. Additionally it seems to provide nothing that isn't already what Wikidata's point is which renders it a pointless duplicate link. Canterbury Tail talk 00:08, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- ouch :-( Back ache (talk) 08:01, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Doesn't seem to be useful for the reader? The creator is now mass adding them to film articles, with no explanation. Mike Allen 00:51, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- I was trying to show by example some of the articles it covers, it also has the potential to me more than just a link template because as an industry wide ID there maybe microdata that could be added Back ache (talk) 07:41, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- Probably should be rewritten as a catalog id template for citations, rather than for use in external links (which no one uses templates for anyway). See my comment below. SamuelRiv (talk) 09:26, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- In regard to external link templates, there are some very popular ones for example youtube, twitter, linkedin etc the advantage with using them is as a platform evolves (as is currently happening rapidly with twitters transformation into "X") if the surrounding URL's change, just a change to the template is needed. Your point about transforming it into a citation template makes sense Back ache (talk) 11:49, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- Could this work better as an authority file entry for {{authority control}}? That seems a better place to consolidate structured metadata than in subheading External links, or inside a citation (although I could see citations to this database supplanting user generated sources like imdb for things like runtime). Folly Mox (talk) 12:10, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:06, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:PD-music-ineligible[edit]
It's unused. There are no transclusions, no instructions to subst it, no advice about other non-transclusion use, and only one relevant link that can be replaced by "PD-ineligible". Taylor 49 (talk) 15:27, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:36, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
July 2[edit]
Template:Continental Asia in 200 CE[edit]
No transclusions or incoming links. Created in early 2023. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:24, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Please keep , it's part of a series, and it will be used at some point. पाटलिपुत्र (Pataliputra) (talk) 20:04, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. This template is part of a series of over thirty template maps of Continental Asia across different time periods. I know I've seen this one transcluded in an infobox before, early in article development prior to replacement by a newly created more specific map template.Our encyclopaedic coverage of circa 200 CE Asia history topics is not yet particularly thorough, and it would be a shame to discard this work just because it's currently unused.In general and as a set, I think all templates in this series should be kept whether or not they have any transclusions at the moment. I think my memories of how this template was previously used could be extrapolated to future use cases: templates from this series are transcluded until a more specific map is located or created, if ever. Just because the usage is temporary doesn't mean that it's not useful. Folly Mox (talk) 11:33, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 00:52, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:46, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:Mountains of Argentina[edit]
No transclusions or incoming links. This could be converted to a list article if such a list is desired. Created in January 2024. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:13, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Noting that the template's creator Joelkaula has transcluded this navbox into all seventeen applicable bluelinked articles since the nomination. Leaning keep. Folly Mox (talk) 12:16, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:43, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Now used since nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:34, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:Minebea Mitsumi FC[edit]
Not a useful navbox. One link to a category page; the other two just point back to the main article. DB1729talk 23:33, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions. GiantSnowman 20:11, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. GiantSnowman 20:12, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:34, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:WikiProject Chechnya[edit]
- Template:WikiProject Chechnya (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:WikiProject Russia (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Propose merging Template:WikiProject Chechnya with Template:WikiProject Russia.
It's a task force. It's been one for many years. Task forces are not supposed to have their own WikiProject Banner. 48JCL 19:59, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Merge. This looks relatively easy, at least for a first pass. There are about 300 affected pages, so someone handy with AWB should be able to edit the pages. Ideally, someone should move/rename the relevant categories that are assigned to Chechnya-related articles, but that can happen after the merge. [Update: I have fixed the categories.] – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:31, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Merge. Per NOM.Mistico Dois (talk) 23:11, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- Merge per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:34, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:Triángulo de Amor Bizarro[edit]
Just two links in the body of this navbox. Not useful for navigation. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:35, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete unless someone creates articles for the band's other albums. I warned the template creator on their talk page four years ago that this template was in danger of deletion as it stands. However, they stopped editing on Wikipedia shortly afterwards, so clearly they have no interest in improving the template. The band do have two other charting albums so there may well be sources out there to create more than two links, but I don't have access to Spanish music publications, so unless someone with access to sources is prepared to take it on, this template should be deleted and recreated without prejudice if further articles are created. Richard3120 (talk) 21:38, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:34, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:User Riana Welcome[edit]
No transclusions, and no apparent use for probably ten years or more, if it was ever used. Redundant to other welcome messages. The most recent 13 edits have either been maintenance edits or reverts. Note: this is not a userbox. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:51, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:34, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:1966 Central Conference football standings[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 Withdrawn. Eagles 24/7 (C) 14:43, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Template:1966 Central Conference football standings (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:1966 Pacific Southwest Conference football standings (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:1965 Pacific Southwest Conference football standings (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
No transclusions, documentation, template parameters, or incoming links. The editor who created this template has created dozens of unused templates of this type, including some in the last 24 hours, despite being asked to stop doing so multiple times. These are the oldest ones, created in April 2024. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:24, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. All three of these template are now transcluded on two articles. Jonesey95, can you withdraw this nomination? Also, for future reference, can you clarify what sort of documentation or template parameters you would have liked to have seen? Jweiss11 (talk) 18:52, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Withdrawn. In the future, to avoid these nominations, it would be helpful for you to follow the process steps that I recently suggested on your talk page. As for template parameters, they are an indication that the Template-space page is being used as an actual template rather than as regular wikitext article content repeated on one or more pages. Per guidelines, documentation should be provided for all templates. The documentation explains why the page exists in Template space and where and how it should be used. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:21, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Jonesey95, thanks for withdrawing. Can you explain what you mean about parameters and by "actual template "? Navbox templates and standings templates like the ones nominated here are static. They don't accept variables to render content conditionally like infobox templates, external link templates, and all the more complicated templates like Template:CFB standings start that lay below these templates. These standings templates are in template form precisely so that they can be repeated on multiple articles. Is this a problem? Jweiss11 (talk) 01:30, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Navbox templates typically take at least one parameter,
|state=
. Template-space pages that take no parameters are sometimes viewed by editors as "article content" unsuitable for template space. I am not making that argument here. I'll be happy to continue this conversation on your talk page or mine. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:37, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Navbox templates typically take at least one parameter,
- 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:1949 Ivy Group football standings[edit]
- Template:1949 Ivy Group football standings (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:1950 Ivy Group football standings (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:1951 Ivy Group football standings (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:1952 Ivy Group football standings (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:1953 Ivy Group football standings (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Unused templates with no documentation or sourcing, no template parameters, and no incoming links. Created in 2023. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:21, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - Unused and no sourcing. Nosferattus (talk) 16:47, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: Cbl62, you may want to take a look at these as you created the analogous Template:1941 Ivy League football standings and Template:1954 Ivy League football standings. Perhaps these can be sourced and used? Not sure "Ivy Group" is a meaningful term. Jweiss11 (talk) 18:55, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- I've never heard of an "Ivy Group". The sources I've seen from this era refer to the "Ivy League". Cbl62 (talk) 19:00, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:34, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:Southern Football League (Victoria) seasons[edit]
- Template:Southern Football League (Victoria) seasons (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
All red links. DB1729talk 11:38, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:34, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:North West 200 Circuit[edit]
No useful links. The two blue links point to unrelated subjects. DB1729talk 10:19, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - useless navbox. Nosferattus (talk) 16:42, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:34, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:Glass Beach[edit]
- Template:Glass Beach (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
For just three links which are already made in multiple places in their respective articles, I don't see much use in this template. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 05:52, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete no need for a navbox for only 2 albums. Nosferattus (talk) 16:41, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:34, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:Australia squad 2011 World Women's Handball Championship[edit]
- Template:Australia squad 2011 World Women's Handball Championship (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Almost all the entries in this template have been deleted, so as a template it is not useful for linking related articles. LibStar (talk) 04:36, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete as not enough links but also, a navbox for a team that placed 24th seems strange. Gonnym (talk) 09:14, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. Taylor 49 (talk) 15:36, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:34, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:Deomyinae[edit]
- Template:Deomyinae (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
This template is unnecessary as we can always navigate the taxonomy via the taxonomic infoboxes. And now we have to maintain the taxonomy in 3 different places: the infoboxes, the genus articles (which list the species), and navigation templates like this. Why do we need such redundant systems that just create more work? Nosferattus (talk) 04:07, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. This is a standard navbox that is used in many articles. Clearly useful. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:44, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete is my preference, as I share concerns about keeping redundant information up-to-date across multiple pages. However, I don't understand why this template was singled out over everything else in Category:Mammal species templates and it's subcategories. Many (but not all) mammal species have navboxes. Very few other organisms have navboxes like mammals do. If I was going to single out one mammal species navbox for deletion it would be {{Murinae (Others)}}. The subfamily Murinae is split across 10 navboxes, why not just make one (massive) navbox for the subfamily? And putting two genera in the "Others" navbox is completely unintuitive for readers when the other navboxes are arranged by parts of the alphabet. Plantdrew (talk) 20:46, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Old discussions[edit]
July 1
Template:Romania film list
- Template:Romania film list (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Romanian film list (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Propose merging Template:Romania film list with Template:Romanian film list.
Two sidebar templates with the same scope. DB1729talk 03:41, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Use Template:Romania film list that has all the valid blue links. No need to make this side bar that large for no actual benefit. Gonnym (talk) 07:07, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
Template:Bus companies in West Midlands
- Template:Bus companies in West Midlands (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Bus companies in the West Midlands (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Propose merging Template:Bus companies in West Midlands with Template:Bus companies in the West Midlands.
One navbox transcluded to another with slightly adjusted title. DB1729talk 00:28, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Template:Bus companies in the West Midlands there is nothing to merge there. That was an improper template creation. Gonnym (talk) 07:09, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- I think the improper creation was an attempt to fix the name and add the definite article "the". I don't know but "...in the West Midlands" sounds more correct to me. Taking a look through Category:West Midlands (region) and Category:West Midlands (county) it looks like it's done both ways, but including "the" is more common. (and fwiw we have Template:Bus companies in the East Midlands) -- DB1729talk 14:41, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- It should have been created as a redirect instead of a transclusion. I would support a redirect of the new one to the old one, or move the older one to the page with "the" in its title for grammatical correctness. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:01, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- I think the improper creation was an attempt to fix the name and add the definite article "the". I don't know but "...in the West Midlands" sounds more correct to me. Taking a look through Category:West Midlands (region) and Category:West Midlands (county) it looks like it's done both ways, but including "the" is more common. (and fwiw we have Template:Bus companies in the East Midlands) -- DB1729talk 14:41, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
June 30
Template:CFLStartingQuarterbacks
Similar to this discussion about Template:NFL starting quarterbacks navbox, this navbox changes weekly during the CFL season and has to be transcluded and untranscluded on individual pages each week. It is not particularly useful from the end of the season to the beginning of a new one, when players may not even be on their listed teams anymore. Eagles 24/7 (C) 14:54, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- Repurpose Remove the current starters but keep the links for the team lists. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 18:32, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- Repurpose Agree with WikiOriginal-9; keep links for team starting quarterback history. Cmm3 (talk) 18:45, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
June 29
Template:Infobox climber
- Template:Infobox climber (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Infobox mountaineer (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Propose merging Template:Infobox climber with Template:Infobox mountaineer.
I think that Template:Infobox mountaineer could be handled by Template:Infobox climber. A lot of mountaineers do climbing and visa-versa. Infobox climber is the most important infobox (and the most detailed) and has the richest level of detail on their climbing/mountaineering career (I think infobox climber captures all of mountaineer career data. The mountaineer infobox items of "famous partnerships", "final ascent" and "retirement age" are subjective items). The main differences are around the non-climbing items that cand be just merged? Aszx5000 (talk) 16:34, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
- Noting also that we have been recently merging several mountaineering categories and climbing categories together such as Category:Works about climbing and mountaineering at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 26#Category:Works about mountaineering, amongst others. Aszx5000 (talk) 09:24, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:45, 8 June 2024 (UTC)- Pinging User:Cullen328 who I have seen participate at climbing AfDs - @Cullen328, what do you think of my proposal? I have put a notice of this on at WikiProject page but no one has answered so far - are there any others who should be pinged? thanks. Aszx5000 (talk) 10:03, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
- Could you list the parameters that would need to be added or have different names? That would make it easier to see if these indeed have the same scope. Gonnym (talk) 11:23, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
- Aszx5000, I am not familiar with the details of the respective infobox parameters, but I agree that mountaineering and climbing are basically the same sport with many variations ranging from bouldering to high elevation expedition mountaineering. I think that it is counterproductive to try to separate it into two separate sports, so I am generally supportive of what you hope to accomplish. I am 72 years old and have not been an active mountaineer for about 15 years, so I am not current on recent developments in the sport. Cullen328 (talk) 15:06, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
- Gonnym, The disjoint of the parameter sets for these two templates appears to consist of the following:
|main_discipline=
,|other_discipline=
,|start_discipline,=
|height=
,|weight =
,|start_age =
,|partnerships=
,|website =
,|typeofclimber =
,|namedroutes =
,|highestredpoint=
,|highestonsight=
,|highestboulder=
,|apeindex=
,|knownfor=
,|worlds =
,|final_ascent=
,|medaltemplates=
,|updated =
,|partner=
,|children =
,|parents=
,|relatives=
,|firstascents=
. Further, the following parameters would have to be aliased to one another:|retirement=
and|retirement_age=
;|notable_ascents=
and|majorascents=
.That said, {{Infobox climber}} wraps {{Infobox sportsperson}}, whereas {{Infobox mountaineer}} does not appear to, so many of the mountaineer parameters not present in the climber template may actually be inherited (the family stuff for sure).Why not just wrap {{Infobox sportsperson}} with {{Infobox mountaineer}} instead of trying to realign everything here? How many articles have a problem where it's unclear which template is more appropriate for the subject? Both genuine questions for Aszx5000. Folly Mox (talk) 19:45, 8 June 2024 (UTC)- I agree that the way {{Infobox climber}} does so is the better way. I'm leaning support this merge unless someone has any valid objections. One thing though, when the merge happens, please make sure you use the correct naming conventions for parameters (snake case) and climber uses a mix of 4 different styles. Gonnym (talk) 21:34, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
- Would definitely keep {{Infobox climber}} as it has lots of good objective facts when used properly (e.g. Alexander Huber, Chris Sharma, Catherine Destivelle). The issue is that {{Infobox mountaineer}} has essentially the same 'biographical' facts (i.e. personal and family info) as {{Infobox climber}}, but outside of 'notable ascents' (which is the 'major ascents' on {{Infobox climber}}), the rest of the 'career' section are either not objective facts or not really notable things in mountaineering, and should be discarded. I would be happy to help guide any merge process (I am very active in WProj Climbing). Once done, there are a few more upgrades we want to make to {{Infobox climber}} to improve its usefulness. thanks to all above. Aszx5000 (talk) 11:23, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
- Could you list the parameters that would need to be added or have different names? That would make it easier to see if these indeed have the same scope. Gonnym (talk) 11:23, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 19:51, 17 June 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:49, 29 June 2024 (UTC)- Are we agreed to merge the two boxes per the discussion? Pinging @Folly Mox, @Gonnym (I am assuming @Cullen328 is out?). It would be great to have a single "climber" infobox. thanks. Aszx5000 (talk) 13:06, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- If you're planning on doing the work yourself, sure, support merge to avoid another relist. Folly Mox (talk) 14:10, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Sure, good luck with the merge. I'd recommend that while you are doing the merge that you chose one style of parameter names. Currently you have
|main_discipline=
,|namedroutes=
, and|show-medals=
which isn't user-friendly. Gonnym (talk) 18:11, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Are we agreed to merge the two boxes per the discussion? Pinging @Folly Mox, @Gonnym (I am assuming @Cullen328 is out?). It would be great to have a single "climber" infobox. thanks. Aszx5000 (talk) 13:06, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- I don't have a strong opinion on the merge, but as long as the infobox is undergoing renovation: For speed climbing competitors, should there be a space for speed records? For instance this is not currently in the infoboxes for Sam Watson (climber) and Aleksandra Mirosław (current world record holders) nor national record holders such as Shauna Coxsey although it is in the text of the articles. —David Eppstein (talk) 04:04, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
June 27
Template:Diplomatic missions of Bosnia and Herzegovina
- Template:Diplomatic missions of Bosnia and Herzegovina (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Navbox with no transclusions or incoming links. No blue links to full articles in the body of the navbox. Created in 2021. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:54, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Third reason in WP:TFD#REASONS says to delete when a template has no likelihood of being used. Three years is not a long time; similar templates have been populated over time. Many of the structured templates I created in Category:Diplomatic missions by receiving country started off as bare-bone/transclusionless and now have increased usage. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 07:55, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 19:49, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep There are three blue links now. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 11:17, 18 June 2024 (UTC).
- I do not see any blue links to full articles about the navbox's subject in the body of this navbox. The navbox has not been edited for content since 2022. It may be useful someday, but it is not useful for navigation yet, so it should not exist. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:15, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- This is becasue people have deleted articles without doing proper WP:Before, I think. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 21:33, 5 July 2024 (UTC).
- This is becasue people have deleted articles without doing proper WP:Before, I think. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 21:33, 5 July 2024 (UTC).
- I do not see any blue links to full articles about the navbox's subject in the body of this navbox. The navbox has not been edited for content since 2022. It may be useful someday, but it is not useful for navigation yet, so it should not exist. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:15, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Unused template. No links to relevant full articles. The Banner talk 22:04, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 00:59, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. We don't keep templates because of speculation about what might happen in the future. * Pppery * it has begun... 03:45, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
June 26
Taiwan political party templates
- Template:Congress Party Alliance (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:DPP/short (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Green Party Taiwan (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Hakka Party (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Independent (Taiwan) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Kuomintang Party (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:New Party Taiwan (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:New Power Party (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Non-Partisan Solidarity Union (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:People First Party (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Taiwan Constitution Association (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Taiwan Farmers Party (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Taiwan Home Party (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Taiwan Independence Party (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Taiwan People's Party (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Taiwan Solidarity Union (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Third Society Party (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Young China Party (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
This family of templates contains just wikilinks, maybe with an icon (mostly used for decoration in violation of MOS:ICON). Over the last few years we've been moving away from the "one template for every version of X" system (be it for political parties, national sports, etc) in order to allow for easier updating and centralised coding. This is also a good example of "text stored in a template". Primefac (talk) 23:29, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- I looked at most of these templates and several transclusion cases. I'm not seeing a violation of MOS:ICON, but I agree that this is a lot of templates for what could be easily accomplished with a single template taking a single parameter (and maybe an optional boolean controlling icon display). I'm thinking combine and replace, although I'm not presently volunteering to do the work, since I've been pretty busy and will almost certainly forget. Folly Mox (talk) 14:13, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- Support. I agree that simple links should not be hosted in a template. There is just no reason for that. If such a thing is actually valid, then there probably should be a template for every single concept. In reality, writing New Power Party or {{New Power Party}} is no different and if {{NPP}} is valid as a redirect, then it would have been valid as redirect, which NPP is not. This just seems to bypass the basic system of how links work here. Other than that, we already have a module that acts as database for political party names and colors. So that should already take care of this. Regarding the icons, I also agree, but for some reason during the merge a few years back, we left the group of templates with icons out of it. So if this passes, we should take care of the other templates in Category:Political party name templates (which also includes US templates like Template:GOP, which is exactly the same). Gonnym (talk) 14:58, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
June 24
Template:Detailed Middle East topic
Unsuccessful copy of Template:Middle East topic The Banner talk 09:12, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- @The Banner, what do you mean by "unsuccessful copy"? MWQs (talk) 10:31, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- First, you make clear that it is a copy/fork from "Template:Middle East topic". Second, the template starts with "prefix= join= the Greater Middle East". The Banner talk 16:56, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- Re: Second, the "the template starts with "prefix= join= the Greater Middle East". The template displays instructions if people leave the variables blank. If the variables are properly filled in e.g. {{d Middle East topic| prefix = religion | join = in }} then it displays the topic pages for the regions. If that's not intuitive, I'm happy to change it? (compare first and last below) MWQs (talk) 13:11, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Is that new error meagre more helpful? Or should it just say "The Greater Middle East"? I want it to give an error message because it takes the variables differently to the others templates that look similar. MWQs (talk) 14:02, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Re: Second, the "the template starts with "prefix= join= the Greater Middle East". The template displays instructions if people leave the variables blank. If the variables are properly filled in e.g. {{d Middle East topic| prefix = religion | join = in }} then it displays the topic pages for the regions. If that's not intuitive, I'm happy to change it? (compare first and last below) MWQs (talk) 13:11, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Re: First, you make clear that it is a copy/fork from "Template:Middle East topic". I used the {{Middle East topic}} template as a starting point, but I changed almost everything. @Mikeblas said I need to mention in the edit summary every time I copy something, even if it's only little bits or I intend to change it later. There is pretty much none of {{Middle East topic}} left. There's the names of some of the places (about 20% to 50% - red links don't show) - compare 1 and 2 below - but that's only as much overlap as {{Middle East topic}} and {{Asia topic}} - compare 3 and 2 below. MWQs (talk) 13:48, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- It's not what I said; it's a policy of Wikipedia. Please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. -- Mikeblas (talk) 14:12, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry I misinterpreted. The relevant bit of that link seems to be "content forking" but I'm a bit unsure on what I was supposed to do differently? How should I describe it if I start with a copy of something but plan to turn it into something non-redundant? I just described what I stated with in the first edit. But then I changed pretty much everything. It's part of a set that all overlap at least one other, the places in {{Middle East topic}} are Egypt plus a subset of {{Asia topic}} and that's a subset of {{World topic}}, but they all have different levels of detail etc. Then there's at least 3 sub regions of {{Americas topic}}. MWQs (talk) 04:59, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- It's not what I said; it's a policy of Wikipedia. Please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. -- Mikeblas (talk) 14:12, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Re: First, you make clear that it is a copy/fork from "Template:Middle East topic". I used the {{Middle East topic}} template as a starting point, but I changed almost everything. @Mikeblas said I need to mention in the edit summary every time I copy something, even if it's only little bits or I intend to change it later. There is pretty much none of {{Middle East topic}} left. There's the names of some of the places (about 20% to 50% - red links don't show) - compare 1 and 2 below - but that's only as much overlap as {{Middle East topic}} and {{Asia topic}} - compare 3 and 2 below. MWQs (talk) 13:48, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. As I've stated before in MWQs related templates. If you feel something is missing in the template, propose that it is added to the actual template instead of creating a fork. I personally don't find your additions helpful here as they usually end up with either irrelevant locations to the topic (Europe, EU in a navbox about the middle east) or full of redirect links which navbox should not include. Also, why create a wall of nested sections and transclusions? Does this look like a documentation page? Gonnym (talk) 08:12, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
Asia and the Middle East
|
---|
Americas
|
---|
Blank (all regions shown)
|
---|
1. {{d Middle East topic}} The Template:d Middle East topic includes a lot of historical regions (e.g. Ottoman Empire), and broad regions (e.g. Arab world) and it more broadly covers the Greater Middle East, including North Africa, and Central Asia, etc. It also covers a lot of disputed territories that aren't on the {{Middle East topic}} version (Western Sahara, Northern Cyprus, etc.) 2. {{Middle East topic}} The Template:Middle East topic only has current countries in West Asia and Egypt. 3. {{Asia topic}} TheTemplate:Asia topic includes current countries in all of Asia. |
with variables added
|
---|
4. {{d Middle East topic| prefix = religion | join = in }} |
- Delete per Gonnym. * Pppery * it has begun... 23:24, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
June 22
Template:Edit semi-protected
- Template:Edit semi-protected (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Edit extended-protected (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Edit template-protected (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Edit fully-protected (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Edit interface-protected (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Request edit (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Propose merging Template:Edit semi-protected with Template:Request edit.
As I have (surprisingly) recently discovered, this entire family of templates auto-detects the protection level of the template for which the edit request is being made. This means that an {{FPER}} placed on a template-protected template will result in exactly the same thing as a {{TPER}}. Because of this, it seems to me that there is little reason to keep these all as separate templates, instead using the more obvious and reasonably-named {{request edit}} as the base template for this family (instead of the latter template being used as a dab for all five). Primefac (talk) 15:53, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
I have struck {{request edit}} since most of the participants feel it's not well-suited for the final target. Primefac (talk) 13:00, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
Merge the first five togetherbut keep {{request edit}} as is since COI edit requests are, and need to be, a separate process (a page someone has a COI with can also be protected). * Pppery * it has begun... 16:02, 22 May 2024 (UTC)- Perhaps a parameter such as
COI=yes
ortype=COI
could be used to flag the type of edit request that is being made, which would allow all six templates to be merged into Template:Request edit. That would still keep them a separate process. Adam Black t • c 16:50, 22 May 2024 (UTC)- Is there any reason to do that, though? It seems to just make things more complicated for everyone. * Pppery * it has begun... 18:30, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
- I don't see how it complicates things, it streamlines the process of requesting an edit. Btw, {{request edit}} has been deprecated, so you're already meant to use a different template - {{edit COI}}. Adam Black t • c 22:27, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
- Is there any reason to do that, though? It seems to just make things more complicated for everyone. * Pppery * it has begun... 18:30, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
- Striking my merge !vote per below discussion. * Pppery * it has begun... 01:38, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- Perhaps a parameter such as
- (edit conflict)Request edit used to be for COI, and it's a generic name that could refer to it or edit partially-blocked as well. Snowmanonahoe (talk · contribs · typos) 16:03, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
- Support Merge (Non-Admin vote) Babysharkboss2 was here!! Dr. Wu is NOT a Doctor! 16:44, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
- Being an admin doesn't mean very much here--there's no need to point out you aren't one. Snowmanonahoe (talk · contribs · typos) 17:00, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
- Merge the first five and keep {{Request edit}} as a disambiguation per Pppery. I was also rather surprised and amused to find out that the edit request templates automatically emulate each other based on the page's protection level. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 18:37, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
- As no one has suggested a title for the proposed merged template, perhaps {{Edit protected}}? —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 18:48, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
- Should probably have "request" in its name. Gonnym (talk) 19:29, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
- Then maybe {{Protected edit request}} to match the Module it invokes, though I should note that the possibly enticing shortcut {{PER}} is already a template for the Peruvian flag. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 20:10, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
- {{PTER}} and/or {{ProtER}}? Mathglot (talk) 18:13, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Or even {{TPER}}, based on extension of, and analogy with WP:TPE? Mathglot (talk) 01:23, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- {{PTER}} and/or {{ProtER}}? Mathglot (talk) 18:13, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Then maybe {{Protected edit request}} to match the Module it invokes, though I should note that the possibly enticing shortcut {{PER}} is already a template for the Peruvian flag. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 20:10, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
- Should probably have "request" in its name. Gonnym (talk) 19:29, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
- As no one has suggested a title for the proposed merged template, perhaps {{Edit protected}}? —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 18:48, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
- Merge first five unless there is some yet-to-be-discovered reason to have them separate. Gonnym (talk) 19:30, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
- {{request edit}} needs a new name, since that's not what it does. Other than that, I see no issue with merging the others. Izno (talk) 21:31, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
- Ok, I see an issue (based on the VPT chatter), and the underlying module already deals with these reasonably. Oppose. Izno (talk) 06:13, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
Comment[Edit: Oppose]: These do not behave identically when the edit request is to an unprotected page. For example, you could use {{Edit extended-protected}} for an article that is within an WP:ARBECR topic area but which has not presently been protected. (If the page is protected, you have to use|force=
to forcea different protection levelthe default protection level specified by the wrapper.) SilverLocust 💬 23:38, 22 May 2024 (UTC)- Need to make sure the force stuff isn't broken, it is needed sometimes. — xaosflux Talk 15:51, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
- Because I don't think it's possible to merge these without breaking current functionality (as I explain below), I am changing my comment to an "oppose". (I don't oppose creating a sixth template with no default level that instead would say when the protection level could not be detected, but I oppose redirecting or deleting the five templates proposed for merging.) SilverLocust 💬 20:56, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
- Need to make sure the force stuff isn't broken, it is needed sometimes. — xaosflux Talk 15:51, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
- Comment this template set is missing a template for requesting edits that are editfiltered, so autodetection doesn't help, when you need extra rights due to an edit filter instead of page protection. If these are merged, will a switch be available to select a rights level for that situation? -- 65.92.244.237 (talk) 02:33, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Except the last, they're all wrappers for Module:Protected edit request with slightly different arguments, so in that sense they're already merged. But we should probably keep the slightly different behavior in that {{Edit fully-protected}} should default to fully-protected if the auto-detection fails, {{Edit semi-protected}} to semi-protected, and so on rather than turning them all into redirects to a single wrapper. {{Request edit}} should probably have no default, if that's reasonable. Anomie⚔ 12:01, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
- Weak merge, now that the last has been struck, keep different behavior defaults if feasible per Anomie. I also agree that with everything already under one-module it really doesn't make that much of a difference. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:4CF1:7456:BBC:F8B5 (talk) 20:30, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
- Support merge - I do like Anomie's point about the default action Happy Editing--IAmChaos 01:39, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
- Conditional oppose merge per Anomie. These separate 'templates' are just wrappers for that edit request module really, so not any duplicated template code to worry about. Let's not possibly cause unintended behaviour for a template that's used at least hundreds of times everyday, especially with the auto-detect failover. There are other potential complications like what 65.92.244.237 has written above. Though, consider this vote invalidated if it's possible to merge all of these templates together without changing the behaviour and functionality of these templates. — AP 499D25 (talk) 05:56, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
- Conditional support creating a template with auto-detection, as long as the existing templates are kept per SilverLocust and Anomie. Rusty4321 talk contribs 14:21, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
- Support, but the target should maybe be {{Protected edit request}}. {{Request edit}} may be the destination or redirect to a different merge target, since hatnotes can direct users to more appropriate templates. SWinxy (talk) 23:30, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
- Support the currently-proposed merge of the first five. Agree the final template name should be something like {{Protected edit request}}. Elli (talk | contribs) 13:18, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose. WP:ECR doesn't always get applied using WP:ECP. Therefore, using {{Edit extended-protected}} on a page that is not extended confirmed protected makes sense. The autodetection will not be able to handle that case. Add that to the other edge cases described above by other editors and it's clear that this merge will create more problems than in will solve. Nickps (talk) 16:08, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
- Obviously I don't oppose a merge if the current default behavior is retained. Nickps (talk) 16:11, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
- Unless I am mistaken {{EPER}} doesn't currently recognize non-ECP pages that also happen to be under ARBECR. If I am mistaken, then yes, the post-merge template will be able to handle it because no functionality is being lost (just renamed). Primefac (talk) 16:17, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
- Well, I'm going by what Anomie said. If the auto-detection fails, {{EPER}} defaults to ECP. So, while it doesn't recognise that the page is under ARBECR, it still handles the situation correctly. I also just noticed that SilverLocust has already raised this issue. Nickps (talk) 16:28, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
- There would be a loss in current functionality, Primefac. For example,
{{Edit extended-protected|force=yes}}
would no longer work. - Each of the five wrapper templates proposed for merging has a default level. E.g., {{Edit extended-protected}} is
{{#invoke:protected edit request|extended}}
(where the default there isextended
). If the page to be edited is unprotected or if|force=yes
is used, then that default level is used. If these were all redirected to one template, then there would be a loss of functionality unless someone knows how to tell a module not merely which wrapper is invoking a module (since there would only be one merged wrapper), but rather which redirect is being used to transclude the wrapper that invokes the module (and I don't think that is possible). If no default is provided when invoking the module, then it presently breaks with the error message Lua error in Module:Protected_edit_request/active at line 299: attempt to concatenate local 'boxProtectionLevel' (a nil value). when the page is unprotected or|force=yes
is used. SilverLocust 💬 20:21, 1 June 2024 (UTC)- @SilverLocust The module could use
getContent()
to get the text of the current page and then search it for one of the redirect templates. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 02:30, 3 June 2024 (UTC)- That would potentially break when viewing old revisions/permalinks, and probably need to take into account possibilities like multiple requests on a page (compare Module:Is infobox in lead's difficulty of handling multiple infoboxes). I prefer not to have templates behave differently when viewing permalinks/old revisions of a page. (Ahecht also replied at Village pump (technical), where Nickps asked whether this is possible. PrimeHunter replied expressing opposition to the suggestion.) SilverLocust 💬 04:41, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
- The simple solution for new uses is to transition from
|force=yes
to specifying the level to force, eg.|force=extended
. I agree there's no straightforward solution for existing uses, so we should just leave the existing templates as is, but stop advertising them in preloads and documentation pages. – SD0001 (talk) 06:58, 6 June 2024 (UTC)- Why exactly would something like
{{Request edit|force=semiprotected}}
be better than{{Edit semi-protected|force=yes}}
? Other than to satisfy a misguided desire for {{Edit semi-protected}} to be a redirect rather than the wrapper it is now? Anomie⚔ 11:53, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- Why exactly would something like
- @SilverLocust The module could use
- There would be a loss in current functionality, Primefac. For example,
- Well, I'm going by what Anomie said. If the auto-detection fails, {{EPER}} defaults to ECP. So, while it doesn't recognise that the page is under ARBECR, it still handles the situation correctly. I also just noticed that SilverLocust has already raised this issue. Nickps (talk) 16:28, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
- Unless I am mistaken {{EPER}} doesn't currently recognize non-ECP pages that also happen to be under ARBECR. If I am mistaken, then yes, the post-merge template will be able to handle it because no functionality is being lost (just renamed). Primefac (talk) 16:17, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
- Obviously I don't oppose a merge if the current default behavior is retained. Nickps (talk) 16:11, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
- Support per reduced clutter of templates to ensu8re a smoother and more effective way of getting editor's attentions regarding articles and editing. The move would be very helpful in sorting edits an allowing -people to use those templates better as it would be easier and more effective as opposed to having them separate. 97.77.64.90 (talk) 19:09, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Support, just makes sense and simplifies things on the technical side DimensionalFusion (talk) 20:42, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Support, The auto-detection feature makes the distinction between semi-protected and fully-protected templates unnecessary for users requesting edits. This would streamline the editing process and improve clarity. 2603:8080:B8F0:5360:70CF:3BF2:4A5C:A546 (talk) 16:46, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ToadetteEdit! 18:42, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Good luck finding "more thorough discussion and clearer consensus". The nomination is flawed in that it overlooks that the different templates have different behavior if the autodetection fails (and also if
|force=
is used?). Opinions seem largely split between those who seem unaware of that and so support merging, and those who are aware of it and want to keep that behavior. Anomie⚔ 20:31, 22 June 2024 (UTC)- Yes, @ToadetteEdit, a relist was not appropriate in this situation. What should have happened is a request probably WT:TFD to close the discussion, since several of the regular closers have participated already. Izno (talk) 20:58, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- Comment In my opinion, none of the editors who support the merge have adequately addressed the problems identified by myself, Anomie and SilverLocust. Moreover, the simplification in the process that they wish to achieve could also be done by following SilverLocust's idea of
creating a sixth template with no default level that instead would say when the protection level could not be detected
. By making that sixth template and updating the procedures at WP:MAKINGEREQ to use it we would get the best of both worlds. The editors wouldn't need to use a different template depending on the protection level, but at the same time they would be able to use the old templates with|force=yes
to force another level when appropriate. Nickps (talk) 14:04, 23 June 2024 (UTC) - I suppose this is somewhat directed at Anomie, Nickps, and SilverLocust, and maybe pppery, but if this discussion is closed with no major changes taking place, and this RFD indicated that the generic-name redirects should be kept as-is, is everyone really saying that we should have inappropriately-named redirects pointing to templates that can detect the protection of a page, but because we don't want to change those wrappers we're just going to keep everything completely as-is? Primefac (talk) 15:34, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not following your logic there. I'm not seeing anything inappropriate about redirecting {{edit protected}} -> {{edit fully-protected}} given that the target works for both kinds of protection. And, looking back at the May discussion I could be convinced to retarget any redirects that don't specifically talk about protection to the disambiguation page {{request edit}}. * Pppery * it has begun... 15:42, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) My initial concern was that we have a bunch of generically-named redirects (e.g. template:edit protected) that are pointing at {{Edit fully-protected}}. Those in favour of keeping the redirects as-is said that since FPER auto-detected the protection level anyway, it made no sense to retarget. However, when I came here to suggest getting rid of the distinction since the templates can all auto-detect anyway (i.e. just have one "edit request" template), those same people say that the auto-detection is insufficient and thus we have to keep all of the SPER/TPER/FPER/etc separate. I honestly haven't evaluated the whole discussion here to actually see what way the wind is blowing, but I just wanted to check with those opposed that I am reading their concerns properly. Primefac (talk) 15:58, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) IMO the main problem with your RFD was that you're trying to turn functional (if imperfect) redirects into redirects to a disambiguation page that doesn't function properly as a template. Turn {{Request edit}} into a template that actually requests an edit and I don't think anyone would object to changing the redirects.
Nor do I see anyone here objecting to that idea of making {{Request edit}} function to request an edit; the objections are all about breaking the fallback behavior if the auto-detection fails (and the|force=
parameter) for all the other templates. Anomie⚔ 15:48, 27 June 2024 (UTC)- That's fair, and also the reason why I withdrew in favour of coming here. I suppose the main reason I never thought about using {{request edit}} in that way is because it used to be used for COI or pblocked requests (which are not covered under the SPER/FPER/etc scheme) and needed that disambiguation, but if folks think that having {{request edit|protection type}} is a useful way to take care of these redirects, I'm all for it. Primefac (talk) 15:58, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not following your logic there. I'm not seeing anything inappropriate about redirecting {{edit protected}} -> {{edit fully-protected}} given that the target works for both kinds of protection. And, looking back at the May discussion I could be convinced to retarget any redirects that don't specifically talk about protection to the disambiguation page {{request edit}}. * Pppery * it has begun... 15:42, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
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.