Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2015 November 13

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< November 12 November 14 >

November 13[edit]

Template:Porchlight Music Theatre's Joseph Jefferson Nominations[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).

The result of the discussion was delete after adding the information into the article itself. (non-admin closure) Primefac (talk) 08:22, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Useless navbox. The only use is on the theatre's own page, where it could be a list if the content were to be retained. But the concept that a local theatre's production of some play was nominated for some local award is not appropriate (undue and not-defining) on the play's own pages, which is where else this navbox could conceivably be used. DMacks (talk) 21:25, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Not enough links to provide useful navigation. See also Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2015 November 16#Template:Ensemble Members of Porchlight Theatre Ensemble (Porchlight Music Theatre). --Rob Sinden (talk) 16:55, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Pls. do see also that other TFD. The other template is a reasonable navigation template, as each of its items is the name of person who may be notable and deserve an article. This one, created by the same new editor Danceandsingandact, doesn't work to navigate between intended articles, as far as I can tell. It seems to be a list of the awards received by the organization, and it looks like it should be directly included as a list within the organization's article. If that editing were done, and the new editor was advised, then I would agree this template can go. However I oppose simply deleting a new editor's contributed template without providing some education and effecting some learning. This with intent to avoid discouraging them and driving them away from Wikipedia, which happens too often.
Like I said at the other TFD: Also, I don't mean to be sarcastic or rude, honestly, but don't people have better things to do than to go around hurting new editors? I find myself asking this question and making essentially this comment, repeatedly. There is no policy violation in nominating these templates for deletion, but it is "morally" wrong in my view, and I hope other editors concerned about editor retention will agree. You can choose not to take actions that are likely to turn off new editors, I suggest.
sincerely, --doncram 21:48, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Turn into list Both the theater and the award meet WP:N, so the information is worth to be kept, although not as an orphan template. PanchoS (talk)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Convert/text2[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).

The result of the discussion was relist to Nov 23. Primefac (talk) 08:45, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

unused subtemplate of convert. (note, there is already a userspace version at User:Wikid77/Template:Convert/text2) Frietjes (talk) 20:17, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep by author. The Template:Convert/text2 is in use, but has been removed from many pages without consensus; {Convert/text2} was created over 2 years ago (October 2013), to solve the strong user complaint of too many conversions intermingled within article text, so it combines the 2 conversions at the end of the text to reduce the disruption within the free-form text. {Convert/text2} functions as a wp:wrapper template for {convert} and allows quick insertion of free-form text as multiple phrases, beyond the limits of {convert} as designed for ranges of numbers but not free-form text between numbers as in {convert/text2}. Over the past 2 years, the original doc-page was deleted/renamed without consensus, and so it was recreated to begin rewriting the help-text about the various parameters. Removal, hacking and deletion of long-term templates and their documentation, over years, is a massive disruption causing many years of endless suffering, to thwart long-term progress by experienced template editors. -Wikid77 (talk) 19:09, 17 November 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).

Template:Db-gfdl[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).

The result of the discussion was relist to Nov 23. Primefac (talk) 08:45, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This seems like an exceedingly unusual and highly specific reason to need to delete a page. The same logic could apply to CC-BY-NC type licenses as well; no need for a GFDL-specific speedy deletion template nowadays. — This, that and the other (talk) 13:29, 13 November 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).

Template:Die Another Day[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).

The result of the discussion was relist to Nov 23. Primefac (talk) 08:45, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not enough links to provide useful navigation Rob Sinden (talk) 13:29, 13 November 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).

Template:Skyfall[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).

The result of the discussion was relist to Nov 23. Primefac (talk) 08:45, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not enough links to provide useful navigation Rob Sinden (talk) 13:29, 13 November 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).

Template:Substandard[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).

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 03:51, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unused article maintenance tag. I can't tell what it is supposed to be for. More established tags like {{copy edit}} and {{tone}} are in wide use. — This, that and the other (talk) 09:37, 13 November 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).

Template:Uw-error4im[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).

The result of the discussion was Redirect to Template:uw-vandalism4im. — This, that and the other (talk) 03:19, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure we need to proliferate the "4im" series this far. The {{vandalism4im}} warning should suffice in extreme cases of inserting deliberate misinformation (such as changing Barack Obama's gender in many articles, or something of that type). — This, that and the other (talk) 09:25, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Can I just replace it with a redirect to {{vandalism4im}}? ElectricBurst(Electron firings)(Zaps) 18:06, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That's not a bad idea. — This, that and the other (talk) 03:19, 16 November 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).

Template:Edinburgh Crossrail[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).

The result of the discussion was no consensus. Withdrawn by nom but multiple delete votes still exist. (non-admin closure) Primefac (talk) 06:08, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as seeing as the article was just merged with Borders Railway, it is no longer needed. Simply south ...... time, deparment skies for just 9 years 22:04, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. It actually belongs in the (sub)section Borders Railway#Edinburgh Crossrail, as it is relevant to the article, and the Edinburgh Crossrail serviceUseddenim (talk) 18:11, 29 October 2015 (UTC) is not shown on the main diagram. Useddenim (talk) 00:22, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. No longer needed. The previous service to Newcraighall has been incorporated into the Borders Railway. --Stewart (talk | edits) 09:48, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 07:02, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. While now being historic, Edinburgh Crossrail has been a significant precursor to the Borders Railway. The template (or a similar figure) is required to properly illustrate it. -- KlausFoehl (talk) 13:04, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete – As the service has been incorporated into the Borders Railway, and as the Crossrail article has been merged into that article, this is plain redundant. There is no need for this template, which merely shows things that are already shown in the Borders Railway template. It is just clutter. RGloucester — ☎ 14:20, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as used to explain "Edinburgh Crossrail" and allows separation of large article into sub-articles, as WP seems to be wp:data hoarding related topics into megapages of excessive size, no longer encyclopedia articles but instead rambling pages which should be split apart. -Wikid77 (talk) 20:28, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I withdraw. Simply south ...... time, deparment skies for just 9 years 21:04, 18 November 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).

Template:Trailer sailers and Trailer yachts worldwide[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).

The result of the discussion was no consensus. (non-admin closure) Primefac (talk) 06:04, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Broad and unclear scope. See also Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2015 January 20#Template:Keelboats worldwide. Smartskaft (talk) 09:25, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep There is clear use of the template. It has value and can co-exist peacefully with any list or category fulfilling a similar function. Fiddle Faddle 09:56, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 20:42, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 07:02, 13 November 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).

Template:Helper[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).

The result of the discussion was relist at Nov 23. Primefac (talk) 08:48, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions, and apparently, not intended to be substituted. Confusing use, and unlikely to be used, and redundant to the functionality of several templates in Category:Wikipedia help templates. Steel1943 (talk) 14:15, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep: These templates are used on thousands of templates. Yours aye,  Buaidh  04:00, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    @Buaidh: I stand corrected, to an extent: Template:Helper has 27 transclusions (not counting itself and its doc file), and Template:Helper userbox has over 4000 transclusions. For this reason, I am withdrawing Template:Helper userbox from this nomination for now solely due to its high amount of transclusions, but change my vote for Template:Helper to "substitute and delete" due to lack of usefulness since it returns nothing but a string of text and links (sort of like a canned response hatnote). However, the rest, not counting themselves and their doc pages, have 0 transclusions total, so my "delete" stance still applies to those. Steel1943 (talk) 04:27, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all less Template:Helper and the withdrawn Template:Helper userbox, substituted as appropriate. These templates don't appear to be particularly valuable--people who need help with anything can always use another of our various help templates or even something such as edit protected to get help.

    Template:Helper should redirect to Template:Help me IMO. No prejudice against deletion prior to redirection. --Izno (talk) 13:30, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    These Helper templates send questions about templates directly to WikiProject Templates with preformatted inquires. This procedure is far more likely to produce specific answers to difficult template questions than a generic inquiry via Template:Help me. Please click on the link on the last line of documentation of Template:Epi for an example. Yours aye,  Buaidh  04:45, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    "These Helper templates send questions directly to WikiProject Templates [...]" is a fact. "This procedure is far more likely [...]" is not, and I find it just as likely that someone using the {{help me}} scheme, which is more generic and thus more likely to get an answer quicker (another not-fact, though we can suppose it), would be able to move forward with the change they are seeking. --Izno (talk) 11:37, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    At the least, Template:Helper is too generic a name where specifically it is about templates and should regardless of any of the others be re-developed or more likely redirected, preferentially to my already-suggested target. --Izno (talk) 11:39, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 07:02, 13 November 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).

Template:Glossary of baseball index[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).

The result of the discussion was delete, redundant to other navigation. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 03:52, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The template links to just one article, though many different sections of it. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 01:47, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Strong keep it links to many different pages. Your "one article" is actually a transclusion-set of several different articles. (like several other lists on Wikipedia, that transclude their sublists) -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 07:21, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete, redundant to Template:A-Z multipage list. Frietjes (talk) 19:42, 13 November 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).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2015_November_13&oldid=1142562527"