Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2016 October 19

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< October 18 October 20 >

October 19[edit]

Template:A.D. Isidro Metapán – managers[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. WP:FOOTY is responsible for keeping track of their own content via article alerts if they care to. ~ Rob13Talk 21:38, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused template GXXF T • C 21:41, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Template:A.D. Isidro Metapán managers. As no one notice this TfD because no tag in WP:Footy. Matthew_hk tc 13:22, 27 October 2016 (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:FTSE China A50 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 no consensus. This is a messy situation, but no-one is arguing that the repurposed template should be deleted as far as I can see. Beware of bludgeoning the discussion. ~ Rob13Talk 21:47, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

navigation template for an stockmarket index without an own article The Banner talk 11:34, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I am going to create one....Offtopic but as Chinese companies were spread between Shanghai, Shenzhen and Hong Kong Stock Exchange, as well as different criteria, there is lots of related templates, for example Template:Hang Seng China 50 Index for A/H/Red Chip (updated recently by me), Template:Hang Seng China-Affiliated Corporations Index (for Red Chip), Template:Hang Seng China Enterprises Index (for H shares, NOT TO BE CONFUSED WITH Hang Seng Index) and Template:FTSE China A50 Index was for A shares only. All of the stock market index templates were not updated for a while, including Template:SZSECI (top 500 in SZSE? how to maintain) and Template:SSE 50 companies (should be notable, top 50 A shares in SSE) Matthew_hk tc 11:43, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
and it should speedy closed as i created the main article FTSE China A50 Index, unless someone want to discuss the templates i added in the comment above.Matthew_hk tc 12:22, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The template originally pointed to Xinhua A50 China Tracker and for some unexplained reason you replaced that by another index. In my humble opinion you gave the template a completely new content, not related to the original content. The Banner talk 12:27, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The original ETF article should be deleted as non-notable. How come a ETF article survived without the main subject FTSE China A50 Index was not created? Moreover, the original template was unused. Matthew_hk tc 12:30, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Before you moved and redirected "Xinhua A50 China Tracker" it was a normal article with a proper link to its parent as shown here. The Banner talk 17:26, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It just effectively split the article. "Xinhua A50 China Tracker" is a generic term for ANY ETF tracker fund of the index, which WAS published by "FTSE/Xinhua" joint venture. But in the former "Xinhua A50 China Tracker" article , it just mentioned iShares as the only provider of such fund, which in fact not. In theory, tracker fund should have 100% the same components with the index components, which again iShares A50 ETF isn't. Thus, updating Template for components of "Xinhua A50 China Tracker" with all the components of the index, it totally logical, just iShares A50 ETF isn't a good tracker ETF. Matthew_hk tc 10:02, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
changed the vote. Just totally the nominator was unfamiliar the main topic. Matthew_hk tc 11:24, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You mean: you did not create a new template as was the best option but choose to hijack overwrite another template. Effectively, you are now misrepresenting the history of the original template. The Banner talk 12:49, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
did you check the dictionary of index tracker fund means? Just iShare hijacked the article Xinhua A50 China Tracker. Matthew_hk tc 13:08, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It is non-notable for "iShare FTSE/Xinhua A50 China Index Tracker Fund" to have a template (It is not a company but a tiny ETF fund and their portfolio). But "FTSE/Xinhua A50 China Index Tracker Fund" (generic term; at least 3 provider of such fund) and its mother article "FTSE/Xinhua A50 China Index" may notable to have a template. It is not a hijack to update the template with right information, just the original "FTSE/Xinhua A50 China Index Tracker Fund" failed to map to parent topic thus from article to template need update. Matthew_hk tc 13:13, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
why "Xinhua A50 China Tracker" in google was point to iShare was just because the effect of wikipedia, the article was hijacked by iShare since 2007, 9 years ago. Matthew_hk tc 14:48, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Evidence? The Banner talk 15:27, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Did you know Xinhua actually refer to Xinhua Holdings? You don't know the parent topic is and iShare got a very eye catching topic title for their personal Ad. Matthew_hk tc 15:46, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The iShare tracker fund of FTSE China A50 Index, despite the can't buy the shares they targeted directly (not a domestic financial company in China), but their top 10 holding was equal to the top 10 companies of the index itself (with different in weighting), since the main topic (the index) was clarified and created right parent article for the template and the topic, it well established that:
FTSE China A50 Index is the major notable topic which Xinhua A50 China Tracker depends on it, while iShares FTSE A50 China Index ETF depends on "Xinhua A50 China Tracker" and i map the template dependency from "Xinhua A50 China Tracker" to "FTSE China A50 Index" (which i created after you nominated the TfD) isn't moving the template without a dependent article, but increasing its notability. Creating a template for iShares FTSE A50 China Index ETF just like creating a template for my investment (or a small equity investment of a small company), it is non-notable. Now it should have another legit reason to relist it. Matthew_hk tc 17:02, 27 October 2016 (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:User ITunes[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 procedural keep. Relisting at this MFD. (non-admin closure) Primefac (talk) 01:41, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused nonsensical template. Cabayi (talk) 08:55, 19 October 2016 (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:User Internet Download Manager[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 procedural keep. Being relisted at this MFD. (non-admin closure) Primefac (talk) 01:38, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused template. Cabayi (talk) 08:54, 19 October 2016 (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:Garv Television Awards[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 ~ Rob13Talk 21:39, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template for awards for which only the single parent article( Garv Television Awards ) exists. All other entries are unlinked or red-linked. List of winning actors is hard coded. Several (many? most ?) listed articles make no mention of the award. Template is redundant as it provides no relevant navigation to articles  Velella  Velella Talk   08:40, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete, winners should be in a list article, and no other working links. Frietjes (talk) 13:05, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • To give it a chance, I changed the template from its previous grotesque to normal dimensions. Still, at present reference quality and quantity, we should delete it. If referencing improves sufficiently, I would change this opinion. gidonb (talk) 08:14, 21 October 2016 (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:A Short History Of Persian literature[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 soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13Talk 21:41, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

unused and no clear inclusion criteria. Frietjes (talk) 20:42, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 04:28, 19 October 2016 (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:List of Delhaize America Companies[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 ~ Rob13Talk 21:43, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The template "List of Delhaize America Companies" is the navigation template for what once were the American subsidiaries of Delhaize, a defunct Belgian supermarket chain. The template has been substituted with the "Navigation Ahold" template and, for the American subsidiaries, the combined Ahold Delhaize group has its own line in the "Supermarkets of the United States" template. Navigation Ahold also has a North America (US) category. In other words, the template that I propose we'd delete, is obsolete and rehashes the same information at least one time too many. gidonb (talk) 04:02, 19 October 2016 (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).

Monash student election templates[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 (non-admin closure) Primefac (talk) 01:33, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

These templates were created for use in the since-deleted Results of the Monash Student Association elections, 2016 and are not in use in any other article. There was a consensus that the results of student government elections are not notable, and thus it seems unlikely that these templates will ever be used in the future, either. Some participants in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Results of the Monash Student Association elections, 2016 sought to have the templates deleted in that AfD as well, but the closing admin wrote, "The templates are not properly under consideration here at AFD and so should be listed at TFD." So I am recommending deletion of these templates here. Metropolitan90 (talk) 02:27, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete, could probably be speedy deleted as dependent on a non-existing page. Frietjes (talk) 13:07, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Should have been deleted at the time of the AfD rather than wasting everyone's time with this. Number 57 19:32, 19 October 2016 (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:Wettest tropical cyclones in California[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 soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13Talk 21:42, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

unused and duplicates the list in the article. Frietjes (talk) 13:32, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 00:03, 19 October 2016 (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/2016_October_19&oldid=1136066682"