Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2023 February 11

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< February 10 February 12 >

February 11

[edit]

Template:TWN-1945

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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) 15:19, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unued flag icon template. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:48, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Links to History of Taiwan (1945–present) (which does not mention a "Formosa Mandate", nor does any other article), and is probably ahistorical. Only edit by the creator was to create this template. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 08:39, 12 February 2023 (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:Peruvian national election, 2006 candidates

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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) 15:19, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Formerly single-use. Substituted on 2006 Peruvian general election. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:47, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Gonnym (talk) 08:45, 18 February 2023 (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:Kit shorts

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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) 15:18, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Both unused charts of shorts and socks. Just transcluding image files. No use here. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:38, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Unused, nonstandard galleries (galleries in articles normally use the <gallery> tag) with no context and labels (such as _blanksides2 for File:Kit shorts blanksides2.png) that read like computer code. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 15:12, 12 February 2023 (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:Kibaki – Odinga Cabinet 2008

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the template's undeletion. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 16:13, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:38, 11 February 2023 (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:Karzai second cabinet nominees

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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) 15:18, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:37, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Second Karzai cabinet#Accepted candidates uses a different table. Gonnym (talk) 08:47, 18 February 2023 (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:Karel Doorman frigate sensors

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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) 15:17, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. Might have been substituted on a relevant space, but this is article material on template space. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:37, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Informational note. for the record, here is the entry for this frigate as a topic.
Sm8900 (talk) 00:26, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Since it was only used on one article and has since been subst and no indication that it can be used elsewhere, there is no reason to keep this around. Gonnym (talk) 08:48, 18 February 2023 (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:Kolkata Derby East Bengal first squad

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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) 15:17, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Both unused. No links to any players on the team. More of a chart template than a typical squad template which is usually a navbox. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:36, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete not a valid squad template, seems to be a team sheet for one specific match that doesn't have its own article (and even if it did, the image could be used without a template for it). Joseph2302 (talk) 15:57, 17 February 2023 (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:Leatherhead F.C. squad

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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) 16:08, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unused with only two links. Outdated but on the mainspace, there are only two links to players only. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:33, 11 February 2023 (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:Koneswaram temple

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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) 16:08, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. No need for a timeline like this. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:29, 11 February 2023 (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:Handball Championship winners regional

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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) 16:07, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:26, 11 February 2023 (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:Ethnic Milwaukee sidebar

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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) 16:07, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and two links. No mainspace exists for the template subejct. Not a sidebar, but a navbox. Only one article exists for ethnic groups and that is about Germans in the city. And certainly, not enough exists unlike those in Category:United States ethnic group sidebar templates. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:25, 11 February 2023 (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:Egypt squad 2017 Arab Nations Basketball Championship

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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 keep. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 15:16, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure how important this is for templates, but this is the only template in both Category:Arab Nations Basketball Championship squad navigational boxes or Category:Egypt national basketball team templates so although it is trancluded on to a couple of players pages, it is not part of an organized series of templates for past or present Arab Nations Basketball Championships national squads. Liz Read! Talk! 20:54, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep It helps to avoid unnecessary content inflation. The alternative is that the participation at the event is noted on every player's individual page as it will state "he played alongside X,Y,...". That would lead to a lot of unnecessary extra words/content that just wouldn't fit there. It just makes logical sense to keep it. This shouldn't even be out for discussion.BiggySmoov (talk) 05:29, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Of course it should be noted on every player's individual page. That is what an article is for. You need to provide sources that actually say they were part of that team. Sources don't belong on navboxes. Also, mobile readers do not see navboxes. What a strange argument. Gonnym (talk) 13:47, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Navbox that has merit since it's a championship winning team. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:54, 13 February 2023 (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:Copyright notes Iraq

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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 relisted on 2023 February 18. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 16:06, 18 February 2023 (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:S-line/RB-BY left/15

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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) 16:06, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unused s-line templates. Gonnym (talk) 13:42, 11 February 2023 (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:2016 Men's Pan-American Volleyball Cup squads

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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) 16:05, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Single use template of tables. Subst to article and delete. Gonnym (talk) 10:25, 11 February 2023 (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:Quadratic equations

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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) 16:05, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Non sensical to have an navbox for a narrow topic of mathematics, that includes all mathematics D.Lazard (talk) 09:36, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Used only on Quadratic residue and Proofs of quadratic reciprocity, neither of which appear in the bundled navboxes. Nor are any other articles specifically about quadratic equations linked, except for Quadratic function. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 08:35, 12 February 2023 (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:Stoicism sidebar

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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) 15:59, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate with Template:Stoicism, less complete version, and worse as it is a sidebar that takes up what is now valuable article real estate. Most of the other philosophical school templates are navboxes. This sidebar is only used on a few pages, while the other one is used on almost all of them. - car chasm (talk) 08:42, 11 February 2023 (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:Leadcite comment

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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 to delete. Please feel free to start another discussion elsewhere concerning rewording the template. If the consensus there is to delete the template, then feel free to bring that back to TfD. However, with very limited discussion here, it appears as though this is not the best venue for a rewording discussion. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 16:56, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This either needs to be significantly re-written, or it needs to be deleted. I think re-writing will make it pointless, so I suggest deletion instead.

The problem is that the template claims "No citations are required in the article lead per MOS:LEADCITE, as long as the content is cited in the article body", but the named guideline says the opposite. Specifically, LEADCITE says that contentious facts about BLPs must be cited in the lead even if it's additionally cited in the body of the article (look for the bold, italicized word every in the guideline). LEADCITE also explicitly says there is no special exemption for any content in the lead. (The FAC rules, WP:When to cite, say that once per page is enough, but LEADCITE doesn't say that.)

Finally, there's the problem that it says all information in the lead should be repeated in the body. There is quite a lot of basic contextualization information that isn't. Cutthroat trout, which is a Featured Article, begins with the claim that "The cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarkii) is a fish species of the family Salmonidae", and this fact is not – and shouldn't be – repeated in the body of the article. If you want to cite that, it's going to have to be cited in the lead.

What might be possible for a boilerplate comment is to say something like "You can find the citation for this claim in the ==Named section== below. We talked about this at <link to archived discussion> and decided that providing the citation in the body of the article was sufficient." WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:51, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@WhatamIdoing: This template isn't meant to be used on all or even most articles. I created it because there were some articles that were getting a significant number of {{cn}} tags added to the lead because people were unaware of the LEADCITE guideline. It intentionally isn't worded to apply to every possible situation. I've explained this at the template's talkpage as well. Elli (talk | contribs) 20:17, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
When editors, especially newer ones, read a message in a template, they assume that it is completely correct. This template appears to have been subst:d into 48 articles, most of which are biographies and/or contentious subjects like Nazi concentration camps, Nannygate, and Doctors' plot. These are exactly the kinds of articles that MOS:LEADCITE doesn't support omitting requested citations. WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:45, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nannygate is a good article and still doesn't have any citations in the lead, so clearly this does not appear to be a problem. The templates in the other two were added by Buidhe and Peaceray respectively, both of whom are long-time editors who almost certainly understand what they are doing. This template was created in response to a specific problem, and it seems to do a decent job addressing that problem. Elli (talk | contribs) 00:17, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This appears to have been used just about 50 times. Izno (talk) 21:58, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or reword. The template should properly reflect Wikipedia guidance or else should be deleted. In its talk page, I started a couple of discussions to attempt to have it reworded, to no avail. Cheers! Thinker78 (talk) 22:26, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I think that rewording is in order. I think that the objective of the template is not to discourage citations in the lead; rather I think that the purpose is to avoid {{cn}} templates being added willy-nilly when the lead is summarizing well-cited material in the body.
We should also think about whether an editnotice might be more effective. I sometimes use these when shortened footnotes has become the preferred form of citation. Another example is for certain conditions. For instance, List of companies based in Seattle has Template:Editnotices/Page/List of companies based in Seattle, which uses {{Editnotice for lists of companies and organizations}}. I mention this because I perceive that {{use British English}} seems ineffective in preventing changes between national forms of English.
@Thinker78: Was part of the reason you attempted an RFC due to the need for a template editor or an admin to do the edit? I have the template editor privilege if we can consent to a wording change. Peaceray (talk) 01:15, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There's no need for the template editor perm to update the template. It's not protected at all. Elli (talk | contribs) 07:40, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know how to edit templates and I couldn't reach consensus to reword it. Thinker78 (talk) 04:21, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 02:10, 11 February 2023 (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/2023_February_11&oldid=1140336398"