Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2015 July 10

< July 9	July 11 >

July 10[edit]

Template:Welcome with spinning icon[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. Opabinia regalis (talk) 05:37, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Welcome with spinning icon (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

We have absolutely no need for welcome template with a perpetually-moving animated GIF. (See also MOS:Animation and WCAG accessibility guidelines.) Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:04, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"We" have no need for any welcome template -- for years I used to just cut and past a standard greeting -- so that is no use is not justification for deletion. The MOS guideline does not apply as this is for use on user talk pages not in article space. -- PBS (talk) 19:04, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- The MoS Page I - parenthetically - referred to explains why this image breaches accessibility guidelines. HTH. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:10, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  - In what way does it prevent access to a talk page? -- PBS (talk) 09:10, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment shouldn't the GIF be an ANG or MNG file? -- 67.70.32.20 (talk) 09:52, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
delete Good lord, please do not allow spinning gifs in welcome templates, it's a terrible idea for accessibility reasons as Andy Mabbett observed above. Unrelatedly, it's ugly as sin. Ogress _smash! 00:55, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- If you think it is ugly then you don't have to use it, but that is no reason to delete something. -- PBS (talk) 09:10, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  - She said "unrelatedly". Alakzi (talk) 10:27, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    - I have clarified that as the issue is accessibility. Ogress _smash! 01:27, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
delete, we don't need it, and is problematic for accessibility. Frietjes (talk) 21:10, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- None of the the welcome templates are needed. How does the template output prevent someone from accessing their talk page. -- PBS (talk) 18:09, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  - accessibility = WCAG accessibility guidelines Frietjes (talk) 13:44, 16 July 2015 (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 entertainer[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 redirect. Opabinia regalis (talk) 05:39, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox entertainer (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Used in one article, Jackie Chan, where it is redundant to {{Infobox Chinese-language singer and actor}}. Alakzi (talk) 13:20, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as redundant; then redirect to, say, {{Infobox person}}. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:04, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and redirect to {{infobox person}}. It's basically redundant. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:35, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and merge {{Infobox actor}} and {{Infobox Chinese-language singer and actor}} into here. It lists works of an entertainer, and awards specific to the entertainment industry, such as the Academy Awards and the Grammy Awards. See zh:Template:藝人. --Dabao qian (talk) 02:42, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Infobox actor redirects to infobox person. --Izno (talk) 15:44, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I viewed the history version of {{Infobox actor}}.I think this template is more suitable than {{Infobox person}} for {{Infobox actor}}.--Dabao qian (talk) 03:33, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
delete/redirect as redundant. Frietjes (talk) 13:46, 16 July 2015 (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:Space-based solar power[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. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:58, 20 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Space-based solar power (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

None of the topics are directly related to each other. Only transcluded on to one page, thus is of no navigational value, and it would be inappropriate to transclude on to more. Also - inclusion of picture makes the navbox intrusive. Rob Sinden (talk) 11:25, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Agree. Navbox navigates technology involved; it doesn't navigate between related topics.96.52.0.249 (talk) 03:05, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Agree. While their have been a number of conceptual proposals of this sort of thing over the years, and lots of SciFi writing, it seems to not have near enough to justify a nav template. N2e (talk) 17:58, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
delete, the relationship between the articles is too weak. Frietjes (talk) 13:46, 16 July 2015 (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.