Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2014 February 26

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< February 25 February 27 >

February 26[edit]


Template:Infobox Neo Nazism in Ukraine[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Delete; deleted as G2 by RHaworth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 19:14, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Neo Nazism in Ukraine (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Nothing here for a controversial invented topic by vandalizing user Львівське (говорити) 16:41, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Infobox monarch sainthood[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete and replace with {{Infobox saint}} (clear fork). Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 15:07, 6 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox monarch sainthood (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only four transclusions. Delete, merge into {{Infobox monarch}}, or make it a module for use in that template. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:15, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete and replace with Infobox royalty (monarch was deprecated) without merging anything. There are not enough articles that would benefit from the change.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 06:50, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jax 0677 (talk) 05:06, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Upcoming sport[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Delete; deleted as G4 by RHaworth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 20:19, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Upcoming sport (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

I do not see how this is an improvement over Template:Future sport and the other "future" templates that we deprecated, then eventually deleted, back in 2009. See Wikipedia:Centralized discussion/Deprecating "Future" templates. The reason back then, as it is now: "There is no reason to tell our readers something that is (a) more than obvious, and (b) already covered by our general disclaimer." The other issue is this new template displays a variation of the phrase used on Template:current sport: "Information may change rapidly before the event" (emphasis added). Such rapid editing on these articles usually do not happen on a constant ongoing 24-hour cycle unless new verifiable content about the future event occurs. And then that rapid editing only lasts until the news spike on that future topic settles down again. Thus, this tag has the potential to sit on an article like 2020 Summer Olympics for several months without little or no updates -- another concern that was discussed on the aforementioned 2009 WP:DFUTURE discussion -- despite what the new tag says. Zzyzx11 (talk) 04:26, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. I don't want this deleted. It's very fine. WikiPolice66 (talk) 11:02, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Consensus is plainly not to have this particular type of disclaimer banner. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 13:19, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete duplication of deleted {tl|future sport}}. The only template needed is {{current sport}} as that indicates to editors they could enter in an edit conflict and cleanup message {{out of date}}. Many things are projected, they don't need a template to indicate such WP:NODISCLAIMERS; speedy delete as a db-repost -- 70.50.151.11 (talk) 06:39, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2014_February_26&oldid=1078564269"