Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2007 August 2

< August 1	August 3 >

August 2 edit

Template:Work in Progress 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 page.

The result of the debate was keep and rename. This delete nomination was a misunderstanding, but nobody seems to object to a rename to something like "WQA in progress", which is a lot clearer. Mel sa ran (formerly Salaskаn) 01:15, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Work in Progress (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) (and {{Work in progress}} redir)

~~Delete~~ Rename and document per discussion below. Unused, and nonsensical anyway - all talk page topics that are not {{Resolved}} (or {{Stale}}, etc.) would qualify for this template. If it were actually deployed, it would be the most-used template on all of Wikipedia. Thankfully, everyone seems to understand that it is pointless. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 19:32, 2 August 2007 (UTC) Superseded by discussion below; simply needs to be renamed Template:WQA in progress. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 00:39, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep This template is not intended for regular talk pages. It was developed for and is used specifically on Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts.The purpose of the template is to indicate for volunteer editors who are scanning the topics needing attention, that a given report is already getting attention from another volunteer. That way, they can skip reading those and look for ones that are not already marked as in active discussion. WP:WQA has been significantly upgraded as a dispute resolution page over the past few months and it has helped a lot of users resolve problems that otherwise would have gone to WP:AN or other forums. This template helps us do that work.

If your concern is that it might be over-used, we could modify the documentation on the template to indicate that it is not for regular talk pages and only for dispute resolution project pages. --Parsifal _Hello 20:47, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Works for me; I'd say move it to Template:WQA in progress, and definitely update the docs. Because it is specific to WQA's issues with fights on talk pages, I wouldn't document it as being for "dispute resolution project pages" but WP:WQA specifically — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 23:46, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, sounds good. I'll make those changes shortly. --Parsifal _Hello 02:54, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I started to work on moving the template. But I found that it apparently has been used on 15 or 20 talk pages, so I did not proceed with the renaming because I didn't want to mess up those pages with a template that changes to something they are not expecting.

Maybe it would be better to leave the template as it is, but modify the documentation to make it clear that it is not for regular talk pages but only for collaborative project pages, such as WQA, where editors need a status flag to avoid duplication of effort... something that would limit general use. It could turn out to be useful on other projects where they work on stuff together and need to co-ordinate their efforts, for example Wikiprojects talk pages or to-do lists.

I don't mind making the changes you suggested, but when I saw that some people were already using it, I thought it would be good to bring this up first and request additional input. --Parsifal _Hello 04:51, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In reviewing the "what links here" examples further, I found that some editors are using the whole template series in an organized way, for example here: Talk:Calculus and Talk:General relativity. They seem to be finding it useful for organizing their work, so I suggest we let it be. If you don't agree about that, I'm open for further suggestions, but it seems unnecessary to delete or change a template that is being used productively.

I'm not trying to keep it for any personal reason, I was willing to change it to a WQA template, but when I discovered this usage I thought we should re-consider. What do you think? --Parsifal _Hello 05:03, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The usage at Talk:Calculus, etc. is precisely the issue. Every topic that is not resolved is "in progress", and this template has no legitimate function outside of the narrow circumstance it was intended for. No harm will come of moving it; the original name will work as a redirect, until handful of pages misusing it are cleaned up, then the redir can be RfDd. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 20:47, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have fixed the misuses of the template (other than on individual's user pages; I don't like editing those even for template fixes), including use on generic talk pages, and mistaken use as a substitute for {{Inuse}} on actual articles. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 21:58, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also fixed the documentation, and fixed name to {{Work in progress}} per naming conventions (redir already existed, I simply swapped them, and made conforming move with the /doc file). I note that Template:WQA in Progress already existed, so I made the naming-conventions-recommended Template:WQA in progress as well; the subject of this TfD at this point is simply "move Template:Work in progress to Template:WQA in progress. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 00:25, 4 August 2007 (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:Myspace2 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 page.

The result of the debate was speedy delete per G1. What a surprise that this wonderful template should come from an indefinitely blocked user [1]. IronGargoyle 21:50, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rather nonsensical. Wikipedia isn't Myspace. ><RichardΩ6 12 18:10, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete not sure what the point of this template is exactly but the wording suggests no good can come of it. --W.marsh 18:42, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete Cites nonsensical and fake rules, is bad written and it certainly seems like there's no argument that can save it. Paolobueno 20:09, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete per G1, "irredeemable" "patent nonsense". — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 20:15, 2 August 2007 (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:25 kV 60 Hz 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 page.

The result of the debate was no consensus. IronGargoyle 02:22, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, and do we really need a template for these? [thanks Alton for drawing my attention to the last two] ><Richard0612 17:49, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No. Shalom ^Hello 04:32, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I thought it might be a shortcut for commonly used voltages, but the name is just as long as what it subst's. I suggest you add the others ({{25 kV 50 Hz}}, {{15 kV AC}}) as well. I'd also contact the creator to ask for his rationale. ALTON .ıl 23:37, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - This template is used on multiple articles for three different power standards for electrical railways. The template replaces (in the third template) 15 [[Volt|kV]] 16⅔ [[Hertz|Hz]] [[Alternating current|AC]], inculding the nonstandard ⅔ and & nbsp ; sign. This is quite a long block of code, and is excessivly difficult for multiple editors to both get correct and not at least write consequently. The 16kV template is transcluded in more than fourty articles, and is by far the least used of the three electrical standards on railways. Arsenikk 14:12, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep all - per Arsenikk. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett

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.

Korean subway infoboxes 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 page.

The result of the debate was delete all now that templates have been replaced. IronGargoyle 02:13, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The first of these templates is being used in just ten articles, and is completely redundant to {{Koreanname}}. The rest of them all have extra fields for "next" and "preceeding" stations, but surely that depends entirely on which way you'd be travelling, and in any case there are various nav templates for these subway lines which already have that covered. Most of them aren't being used at all, and none of them in more than eight articles; these can all be replaced with {{Koreanname}} as well. PC78 17:23, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect {{Korean subway}} to {{Koreanname}} (or manually replace {{Korean subway}} with {{Koreanname}})
Delete the rest per nom. eDenE 18:38, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't think a redirect would be possible, as the parameters are not quite the same. No big deal to update ten articles, though. PC78 19:08, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment As creator, I can't deny they are underused. They were designed to supersede the other templates but never really caught on. However, the stations are numbered sequentially so there is a clear order to preceding and following, and the colours and links are useful for navigation, hence I would contend they are not redundant to Koreanname. Deiz talk 10:16, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Fair enough about the station numbers then, but I think my point about the nav templates having it covered still stands. At the very least, it should be possible to streamline the above into a single all-purpose infobox.
  - I would certainly agree that Korean subway (which is nothing to do with me) is entirely redundant to Koreanname. I would suggest asking the editors at Wikiproject Korea which template they prefer for individual stations, I'd be comfortable with any outcome if there was some kind of unified plan among interested parties for using one style from here on in. Deiz talk 14:31, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- OK then, Deiz seemed happy with my suggestion of using {{S-line}} in place of these infoboxes (see Jongno 3-ga Station for an example of how this looks), so I've gone ahead and updated these articles. I've also replaced {{Korean subway}} with {{Koreanname}}; none of the above templates are now being used. PC78 16:41, 4 August 2007 (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:Starfleet officer rank insignia Nav 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 page.

The result of the debate was delete. IronGargoyle 02:29, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Navigation box used solely on recently-deleted individual Starfleet rank pages. Only one such article remains, and the relevant link to the more general rank page is provided in the infobox at the top. This navigation template no longer serves a purpose. --EEMeltonIV 16:37, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Per nom. ><RichardΩ6 12 18:05, 2 August 2007 (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 Bassist 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 page.

The result of the debate was delete. Sr13 is almost Singu larity 20:03, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Unused and redundant with {{Infobox musical artist}}. --PEJL 16:05, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. There is nothing in this template that {{Infobox musical artist}} doesn't cover. Mel sa ran (formerly Salaskаn) 16:11, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as above, redundant. ><RichardΩ6 12 18:05, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 10:01, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - The differences that aren't there aren't significant enough to warrant a separate template. Perhaps bassists don't consider themselves musicians... ALTON .ıl 23:40, 3 August 2007 (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:Weasel-inline 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 page.

The result of the debate was Procedural keep, no harm in waiting for the discussion to end. Circeus 00:50, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect them all to {{weasel word}}; redundant.. Mel sa ran (formerly Salaskаn) 15:52, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Procedural strong keep; deletion nomination is premature. Merge of all of these templates is being actively discussed at WT:ILT and at Template talk:Who. The most likely outcome is that only {{weasel-inline}} and {{who}} will survive, possibly only the former. Nominator has hit on the same idea as everyone involved at WP:ILT, but is not part of the discussion, and thus unware that resolution is already in progress (and is certainly not going toward merge into {{weasel word}}, which is really {{Views needing attribution}}; rather, that one is on the merge-from slate.) Actually make that a speedy keep if possible; of the four deletion criteria that apply here only #2 "The template is redundant to another better-designed template" is even relevant, and there are already consensus discussions taking place as noted above, to determine what template that is. Also, this nomination is incomplete; most of the nominated templates are not TfD tagged. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 20:11, 2 August 2007 (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:Brave New World 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 page.

The result of the debate was delete. Sr13 is almost Singu larity 20:04, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - with the exception of The World State and Brave New World (film) every link to an item of fiction from the template redirects to Brave New World. These items and the historical people listed are all interlinked through text links. The template is not needed for navigation. — Otto4711 15:35, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. A navigation template that doesn't navigate? Pointless like a blunt pencil! ><RichardΩ6 12 18:06, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, can be recreated once these articles exist. Mel sa ran (formerly Salaskаn) 19:31, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, per User:Melsaran Unschool 22:15, 3 August 2007 (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:Kml 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 page.

The result of the debate was Keep. Mike Peel 07:06, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Google's services shouldn't be favoured over all the others on Template:GeoTemplate. This service can and will be added to that list once the {{coord}} template's editprotected request is fulfilled. —Para 15:18, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep (nominated for deletion within minutes of creation, while only used once!). Template:GeoTemplate, which is for single waypoints, is irrelevant to the use of this template, which is for collections of waypoints, as I have already explained to the nom. more than once today. The hypothetically solution suggested is not yet available, and may never be, given the other flaws it includes, and may not be relevant for the aforesaid reasons of plurality. Google's service is not "favoured" - it's the only one available (the nom failed to meet my challenge to name others), which is not different to using, say, {{imdb title}}. When other such services are avallable, this template can link to a page listing them. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 15:34, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All the services on Template:GeoTemplate have some unique features, and none of them are important enough to deserve a template of their own. The script this template links to just downloads a Wikipedia page and converts the coordinates to KML for Google Maps and Google Earth (among others, such as NASA World Wind), and this feature doesn't make it special enough to have it placed in all articles that have more than one instance of coordinates. Creating templates when a better solution is an admin's edit away is pointless and creates unnecessary work for people to clean up after you. --Para 15:58, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"this feature doesn't make it special enough to have it placed in all articles that have more than one instance of coordinates" - Who said it was to be used like that? More FUD. There is no better solution "an admin's edit away". Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 16:02, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you give Wikipedians the tools, there is always someone daft enough to take example and use the template in other articles than where you personally have chosen. This template would apply for all articles that have multiple coordinates, and even if you had any ownership for the template, its uses or the articles, you would not be able to control where it's placed. As {{coord}} is implemented through so many templates, I won't place a full working copy of it in a sandbox, but you can see from the proposed change mentioned in the editprotected request that coord is requested to be modified to give the pagename to GeoHack, which already supports the &title parameter. Since there's currently nothing in Wikipedia to pass a title, it's not used in any of the Template:GeoTemplate services, but there's a sandboxed template with no change to the title part, where the title parameter can be seen for example here. Again, all that needs to be done is to fulfill the editprotected request and add this service of yours to Template:GeoTemplate. --Para 16:56, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see how Template:GeoTemplate can be updated for articles (or lists) like Netherton Tunnel Branch Canal and List of volcanoes in the United States of America. eDenE 19:07, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's easy. All the service needs is an article name, and that's exactly what the modification to coord would make available to GeoHack. GeoHack would then only need to put together the url and the article name, which can be done in GeoTemplate with a link like "http://serviceurl/kml.php?url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/{title}". The contents of the article make no difference, that's for the kml service to figure out. --Para 19:19, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How about other links that can points to only 1 location? Will it output thousands of external links? I'm very confused :S eDenE 20:08, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Eh? The only external link used with coordinates is the one that leads to GeoHack, which generates a list of links based on Template:GeoTemplate, where people can choose to use this KML conversion service or any other service listed. If a page contains only one set of coordinates, the script that downloads the Wikipedia page and converts it to KML returns only one placemark. If the page contains thousands of them, the KML will contain thousands as well. In any case, there will be only one click from the article to GeoHack, another to choose the KML "export" service, and a single resulting http request from the tool to Wikipedia. Does that help you understand? --Para 20:25, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"If the page contains thousands of them, the KML will contain thousands as well" - Which will be of no use because there is presently no mechanism for GeoTemplate to make use of it. Your proposal to pass the page name is flawed and may not pass. If it does pass; we don't know how long it will take to implement. {{kml}} is available for use now. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 22:33, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It can't in any meaningful way. Template:GeoTemplate is for single points; this is for series or collections of points. It would be semantically confusing, if not meaningless - a square peg in a round hole. And even that is not available yet. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 21:11, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GeoTemplate exists to help people "find maps and data about the location", which covers locations defined as both single or multiple points. It makes no difference for the user, the KML service, or GeoHack whether the article has one or more points. You can start thinking of a good description to put in GeoTemplate for your service to make that clear to readers. The functionality is currently not available only because you and you alone keep opposing it over your own templates. --Para 22:19, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"there is always someone daft enough to take example and use the template in other articles than where you personally have chosen" - I wasn't aware that we nominated templates for deletion on the grounds that somebody might, one day, misuse them. When did that policy change? Shall I nominate {{cleanup}}, say, for deletion, in case somebody uses it on a GA? It would be inappropriate to add this service to Template:GeoTemplate for presentation series of waypoints, since that template is for single waypoints (I make that about five times I've told you that, in the last few hours). Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 21:43, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't nominated for deletion for that, please reread the nomination. The point in this discussion was that it makes no difference where you intend the template to be used, as it can be used on any page with multiple coordinates, or actually on any page with coordinates, without it being vandalism as you suggest. All use of this template is misuse, as geographical information services on Wikipedia are centralised to GeoTemplate. --Para 22:58, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I made no mention of vandalism. Your initial assertion "This service can and will be added [...] once the [...] editprotected request is fulfilled" is conditional; and there is no guarantee that that condition will be met. As such, the deletion proposal should be dismissed, and made again if and when that condition is met, and if still appropriate then. geographical information services for single waypoints are centralised to GeoTemplate; it is not appropriate to do so for series or collections of waypoints (an issue you keep ignoring). Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 23:15, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have explained this so many times on so many pages already, but for some reason you keep ignoring it. GeoTemplate exists to help people "find maps and data about the location", which covers locations defined as both single or multiple points. It makes no difference for the user, the KML service, or GeoHack whether the article has one or more points, they will all be converted. The implementation is only an admin's edit away, which you and you alone oppose. --Para 23:25, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have explained this so many times on so many pages already, but for some reason you keep ignoring it. GeoTemplate exists to help people "find maps and data about the location", which covers only a single point. {{kml}} deals with series of collections of points. GeoTemplate begins by specifying a single set of coordinates. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 23:47, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the listed services use the given coordinates, but this service link would use the given page name, which in turn is used to get the multiple points. The means of transfer is irrelevant. --Para 23:56, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's certainly irrelevant to the point of my previous post, which you again ignore. GeoTemplate begins by specifying a single set of coordinates.. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 00:16, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So? Most of the services use the given single set of coordinates, so of course the display is designed for the majority. That doesn't stop it from working with a page name to allow conversion of multiple coordinates. GeoHack won't pass the coordinates to the KML converter, but the page name where it can find the coordinates. Users on Wikipedia click on coordinates to find information about the location and its surroundings, and that's what they will get when clicking on a map service or a KML conversion tool. --Para 00:26, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Users on Wikipedia click on coordinates to find information about the location and its surroundings" - a list of junctions on a motorway running teh length of Great Britain is not the "surroundings" of one of those junction's coordinates; a list of impact craters around the planet is not the "surroundings" of one of those crater's coordinates. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 07:13, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom; this stuff needs to be centralized and organized (cf. merge discussions at other coordinates-related templates involving Andy Mabbett and Para; too much lone-wolfism going on here, with corresponding strife, instead of adding new functionality to existing templates.) — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 19:50, 2 August 2007 (UTC) ~~Actually Userspace; there is no reason to lilterally delete this, as it may be needed for Template:GeoTemplate integration.~~ — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 20:37, 2 August 2007 (UTC) It's been pointed out that there is no code needing to be merged, and that merge will be complete anyway with fulfillment of latest editprotected at Template:GeoTemplate. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 00:37, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Which existing templates do you feel that this functionality could have been added to? Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 21:11, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- The template contains only links and no code. Andy has been spamming the same links all over Wikipedia [2], so there's no fear of them all disappearing. --Para 23:56, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - There is no spamming; your accusation is unfounded, unjustified and unacceptable, Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 00:14, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per SMcCandlish; perfectly summed up. This kml stuff is a good idea, but no need to rush it out without due circumspection. (It is not as yet user-friendly.) -- roundhouse0 20:07, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- There was "due circumspection". In what way is it "not as yet user-friendly", and why do you not instead propose improvements? Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 21:11, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep (merge if possible). I would suggest that Para and Pigsonthewing work together to try merge the functionality of the two of these templates into one. As far as favoring Google over NASA, Google is the 800# Gorilla, just as MS Windows dominates the OS market, we shouldn't stifle developer progress because something they developed runs only on the most popular software. —MJCdetroit 12:52, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's not stifling developer progress, but centralising their work to the single place where it belongs and stopping it from straggling everywhere. No geographical service on its own is important enough to be placed in articles. I have prepared all the modifications for a merge to my sandbox, but Pigsonthewing alone keeps opposing them because they would make his own templates redundant. --Para 13:38, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Now you're resorting to dishonesty. I do not "keep opposing them because they would make [my] own templates redundant", but because your proposal is badly flawed. I'd be quite happy for the templates I created (they're not "mine") to be merged and/ or made redundant, if the result is an improved service to our users. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 14:42, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The proposed modification offers improved service to our users. Your most recent attempt to stall the change is to claim that it doesn't "degrade gracefully", but you refuse to explain your reasoning despite numerous requests by a number of people. Can you please explain the flaws, and why they would be serious enough to warrant placing a template on all pages with coordinates, instead of just a single link on GeoTemplate? --Para 14:50, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"...and why they would be serious enough to warrant..." Straw man. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 15:38, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So, no explanation then, you are obviously opposing just for opposition's sake to keep using your "own" templates. --Para 16:57, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kindly desist from telling such lies, here and in your edit summary. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 17:04, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Kml subsection 1 edit

Reply comment: It would indeed be great if these editors collaborated, but its been my experience that this won't happen. I attempted dispute resolution with them before, at Template talk:Hcard-bday#Merge dispute resolution, and, well, mediation doesn't work if one party will not cooperate, nor if both parties are at each other's virtual throats all the time. <sigh> This TfD isn't about that, however; it about template redundancy (WP:TFD deletion rationale #2). As Para points out, the merge is one editprotected away from being complete anyway. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 00:37, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep until Template:GeoTemplate gets updated. I still don't understand how {{GeoTemplate}}, which seems to be designed to link a single set of coordinates. {{Kml}}, which is meant to be placed until External links section, gives readers a great overview of multiple (even hundreds) sets of coordinates at once. Unfortunately, only Google services and NASA World Wind supports KML at the moment. eDenE 14:32, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - This template will be quite useful for things with collections of geo points of interest - e.g. hiking trails, railways, rivers, mountain ranges. I agree that it probably shouldn't be hooked straight to Google in the long run, but Google seems to be the only map service which supports such groups of points --Ozhiker 15:35, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - It is useful in its present form. If a similar yet different service needs support, then this can be generalized. This is useful and changes can be made when they need to be made, rather than deletion as a form of generalization. (SEWilco 19:57, 3 August 2007 (UTC))[reply]
Comment - This template both links to the multiple location display tool and provides a notice to the reader that the article has multiple locations which can be displayed. Each individual location is already linked to GeoTemplate, for display of individual points. GeoTemplate could be modified to provide this ability, although somehow it would have to know whether to manipulate a coordinate or an article name. Maybe KML's name should be changed, but it seems a label is needed to tell the reader that multiple location display is available. (SEWilco 21:03, 3 August 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Wikipedia is filled with articles that in addition to the main topic of the article handle subtopics that are either a part of the topic or related to it. There has never been any need to give self-referential hints to readers that the article provides more complete information than its name might imply; the readers can see that themselves after having looked at the article for a moment. GeoTemplate already lists services that span over a larger area than a single set of coordinates with their implied precision could be expected to have, such as information on roads, villages, communities, images or information from the general area, and so on. Currently they are all mixed together with the traditional map services, and a KML generator link would fit right in. GeoTemplate won't need any logic for coordinate or article name manipulation, as the link to be inserted in it after coord's proposed modification will only use the article name and ignore the rest. --Para 22:35, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your first two sentences appear to have no relevance; your point about Geo Template is a red herring; it may cover single coordinates of low granularity, but it dos not cater for sets of different coordinates (please feel free to cite an example if you can; comparable with, say, List of impact craters on Earth, which has sites in South Africa, Australia and Mexico). Your last sentence is also a red herring; nobody is disputing that the mechanics of using links from Geo Template would work (they're only web links, after all, and would work just as well from the main page); just the appropriateness and usability. And the whole issue is still redundant, because what you're arguing for is not yet possible and may yet not come to pass. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 22:51, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - the template is, at least, of some use and doesn't pass any of the criteria for template deletion - and the nomination seems to be based on a personal vendetta against Potw rather than the template, which is fine. Will ^(talk) 23:53, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

- I wish you more interaction with Potw, maybe you'll overthink your comment then. --Dschwen 15:14, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DELETE - This template is redundant, confuses users and deteriorates the article text! Adding the {{coord}} template is enough to fulfill the requirement. Don't creat lists inside Wikipedia where the information wanted can be spidered. There are already services like Stefan Kühn's, geonames.org's and Google Earth's which parse coord template out of the article text from the offline backup. Any realtime attempt only works for few items and else would put more unwanted burden on the productive servers. -- Geonick 00:24, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain to what you believe this to be redundant, and how you think it confuses users. GeoNames and Google are irrelevant to this templates; they deal with single coordinates with a 1:1 relationship with articles; not sets of coordinates within one article. {{kml}} puts no burden on the servers; it simply passes the page's URL to external sites. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 10:24, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, slightly beyond the scope of an encyclopedia. Usefull for only a small user set. I'd prefer an opt-in solution which could easily be created with a small bit of Javascript. --Dschwen 14:49, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Most of Wikipeida - and certainly most of the advanced features - is only useful for a small user set. As I've already pointed out to you elsewhere, a Javascript-based alternative would by inaccessible to some people, and thereby a breach of [{WCAG]]. Apparently, you failed to understand the accessibility issues, as you voted immediately after making this ill-informed comment. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 15:03, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For users interested in constructive discussion: I'm working on preliminary JS solution here. --Dschwen 15:14, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm very interested in constructive discussion: please constructively explain how you plan to make your solution accessible to people with no use of Javascript. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett

I don't and I stated before that I do not deem it necessary at all. You to are pushing a link in your template which requires functioning Javascript, the GoogleMaps link. How do you expalain this inconsistency?! --Dschwen 16:07, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your ignorance of, or wilful intent to ignore, accessibility issues doesn't make an inaccessible solution acceptable. I don't own any templates. The use of {{kml}} does not require Javascript, nor does the "download KML" link. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 19:34, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just don't consider one less gimmick an accessibility issue. And I'd appreciate if you'd stop your bad faith assumptions. We are all just trying to improve WP here. --Dschwen 18:02, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We're not discussing "gimmicks - so much for "stopping bad faith assumptions". Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 18:20, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Dschwen and others. Really we should be driving for more native, open source, and site-integrated mapping tech, not increasing the amount of external linking and dependence on outside mapping resources. We certainly shouldn't be increasing the total number of geocoding related templates in use, there are already far too many. --Gmaxwell 04:26, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In the long term, of course, you're right. But in the short term, that option is not available to us (unless you can show otherwise?), and {{kml}} is. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 10:01, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Kml subsection 2 edit

Right now, I say ~~Move~~, but I don't 100% grasp the issues people have raised here. I see point that we don't have any tools that collect coordinates that are used in articles and export them in some kml format. I personally have no desire for such format, but the ability to make maps with the coor templates is certainly useful (for building articles as well). But why isn't this on the tools.wikipedia space, shouldn't it go there? Please enlighten me on this. I also find it strange how it's limited to being used in one article. Any use of the coor templates I've worked with involves just tagging a single article with a physical position. It seems it would be useful to have it crawl a category or something, but I digress. -Theanphibian ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:42, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It should definitely go to the toolserver, but it's not there yet because the creator of this template (alone) opposes adding the functionality to make it possible. When the template was nominated for deletion, it was used only once, but the creator of the template has since gone on a transclusion spree and added it to other articles despite the controversy here. There are about 110,000 articles in Wikipedia with coordinates [3], and a method to export KML from any of them would no doubt be useful. Pasting a template to each and every one would obviously be the wrong way to make it possible though, and any of the other options MediaWiki extension, link in the centralised toolserver service list or Dschwen's Javascript would be better. --Para 09:25, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"the creator of this template (alone) opposes adding the functionality to make it possible" - once again, Para, you're lying about me. Please desist. And note that nobody is advocating the application of this or any similar template, to every article with coordinates: more FUD on your part. Javascript is not, as pointed out above, accessible to everyone. Please let us know when a MediaWiki extension with this functionality is available. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 13:43, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You do not control the use of any template, and where anyone envisages or advocates this template to be used in is irrelevant. A link to a KML exporter can be seen useful with any article that has coordinates, and it is thus applicable to them all. But as I and many others have already said, this is not the correct way to link to the service. WP:EL doesn't support having such a general link and there is no criteria for transclusion other than articles with coordinates. As Dschwen already pointed out, the KML service itself requires Javascript support already, or a KML compliant client application, so the accessibility argument is moot. I wouldn't expect an extension for a proprietary format to be enabled on Wikipedia anytime soon, so the only remaining options are following the standard coordinates link to a list of services or opt-in Javascript. --Para 14:33, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your continued use of dishonest ad hominem edit summaries is unacceptable. So far as WP:EL is concerned, {{kml}} is no different to many other templates, such as {{imdb name}} and {{IMDB title}} (as I've already pointed out). The KML download service does not require Javascript; and it requires a KML compliant tool in the same way that PDF links require a PDF compliant tool and web links require an HTML compliant tool. You seem to be clutching at straws. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 14:48, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What is unacceptable is your continued use of arguments that have already been shown moot. {{kml}} is not at the same level with IMDB links at all, as IMDB is the #1 movie database and Wikipedia offers no list of other similar services, while KML and the offered service is just a single way to use geographical information among all the others listed in Template:GeoTemplate. KML compliant applications are also far fewer than Javascript supporting browsers. You seem to be ignoring your previous point of needing someone to advocate the use of this template, but that's probably a result of the contempt you have for the Wikipedia way of doing things. You have proved no accessibility issues whatsoever. --Para 15:27, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your ad hominem attacks, including your latest edit summary continue to be unacceptable. Please point out which of the services listed in Template:GeoTemplate can display a set of multiple coordinates from one Wikipedia page, overlaid on a map, or in a portable XML format (hint: none of them can). This isn't a dick-waving war; the raw number of Javascript browsers has nothing to do with the inaccessibility of Javsascript; which is already well documented. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 15:52, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I feel like Para hasn't clicked links generated by {{Kml}}. Google Maps is currently the ONLY web service that is capable of showing MULTIPLE coordinate at the same time with Kml. eDenE 16:03, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is no need to separate the services on the number of coordinates they show at the same time, they're all geographical information services. Google Maps uses the "infamous" Javascript to show the placemarks, and any map service could display placemarks with Javascript in a similar way. You can try the links generated by the template with Javascript disabled to see how good a service it is for the accessibility camp. The KML client applications haven't been designed with accessibility in mind at all, since they are after all for displaying large images. --Para 16:18, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You were keep saying KML requires JavaScript. Google has loved JavaScript and Google Maps highly relies on JavaScript, too. But all major browsers support JavaScript and not many people (in fact very very small) disable JavaScript. Okay, so you are saying JavaScript is not a standard and WikiPedia should remove all external links that requires JavaScript? eDenE 16:29, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, this part of the thread was about Andy insisting that Dschwen's opt-in Javascript generated links were somehow more inaccessible than the Javascript driven map sites. Again he is alone with his opinion. --Para 16:36, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, you're once again disseminating false information about me and the points I've made. The discussion it was about the Javascript generating no links at all for some people. And the W3C-WCAG agree with me. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 18:46, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The whole point of this template is that it deals with sets, of, not individual, coordinates pairs (incidentally, it works, fully, for me, with Javascript disabled for all of Wikipedia). You have failed to provide any evidence of a single alternative which does that. Accessibility != "no images"; though the KML export tool does not generate images at all. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 18:46, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just to bring the services closer to Wikipedians, I quickly implemented a tool of my own to export KML from Wikipedia articles. [4] When the editprotected request is done, it'll fit in GeoTemplate perfectly alongside all the other services, despite the number of coordinates in the requested article. How's that for an alternative? --Para 23:27, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Does it parse hCards, like the current service? Is it dependent on your proposal, which will break {{coord}}? GeoTemplate is an inappropriate home for it, because, as pointed out to you repeatedly, GeoTemplate is for single coordinates pairs, not multiple sets of coordinates. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 09:35, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It parses everything and currently doesn't depend on wikitext formatting, though it probably should, and I may later improve it to that direction as it would be easier for editors to understand, more efficient and resource friendly. Nothing on GeoTemplate says that it's for single coordinates pairs only, that's just your personal spin. GeoTemplate works just as well for multiple sets as it does for single coordinates. --Para 09:45, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Nothing on GeoTemplate says that it's for single coordinates pairs only, that's just your personal spin" - it says You may be able to find maps and data about the location (or waypoint)..., which is singular. It then proceeds to cite, in bold and large type, a single pair of coordinates; so that's another lie from you. And every link to it is from a single pair of coordinates. "It parses everything" - please be specific - what does it parse? What do you mean by "depend on wikitext formatting"? My name is... Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 10:11, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Location can be defined as many points. There is still nothing on GeoTemplate to say that it's for single coordinates pairs only, no matter how many times you refer to what the majority of the services does or how it's supported by displaying additional information, or how many waypoint singulars you keep adding. This is so off topic... But just to answer your questions, coordinates should be given with one of the community approved coordinate templates, and semantic annotation for them should be given either by linking the information together with an identifier such as a name, or adding it to the existing approved templates. coord|name= does both. My tool parses coordinates, try it to see. HTH, HAND. --Para 10:33, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please try to be realistic: a list of impact craters on several continents is not a location. Many points would be locations. HTH, HAND, indeed. Your reference to the broken proposal to amend coord does not answer my questions. Nor are such issues "off topic". Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 10:55, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I note that my question remains unanswered; see also Template talk:Kml#New link target for a bug report for the new service. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 11:19, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Kml subsection 3 edit

Theanphibian, a template such as this is only needed on articles which have several coordinates. Clicking on a coord link lets you view a specific location, but this template adds access to a collection of all the coordinates in the article. It can be expected to be changed as Wikipedia technology changes. (SEWilco 15:57, 7 August 2007 (UTC))[reply]

The tool Para has written (see [5]) demonstrates that a set of coordinates from a single article (which contains several {{coord}} tags) can be parsed and streamed to any web mapping service including Google Earth or other services which can decode KML. This disables most "Keep" votes in a constructive way and gives strong evidence that {{kml}} is obsolete. -- Geonick 00:27, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All that Para did in that edit was point {{kml}} at a different tool. This template is still needed to mark the article as having a multiple-coordinate list and providing a way to access the entire list (as opposed to {{coord}}'s access to a single point). (SEWilco 02:54, 8 August 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Indeed. No votes are "disabled". {{kml}} is still needed. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 10:11, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, you lost me there. I understand what that edit did, but I have no idea what you're trying to say. -Theanphibian ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:43, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I previously saw this as a WP:EL problem, which it was - using an external site hosted by who-knows-who to generate the kml file seemed a clear violation. However, it would seem from the last batch of comments (and reviewing the uses myself) that it has been moved to tools.wikipedia just like I was saying before. The two options it gives now: 1.) have tools.wikipedia make me a kml file or 2.) let Google maps make me a map seem to be logical. In order to make a file that contains a host of coords for a map, it would seem that kml is sort of the de facto format. Weather or not the kml file itself it accessible seems like a silly argument to me, someone could make an "accessible" application for it, and if Google maps isn't your cup of tea, the kml file gives you the option to do it however you need. As long as the data is generated from the tools.wikipedia platform, this all seems fine. In short, it looks as accessible as currently possible - isn't that the entire point of our accessibility rules? I see nothing else that would make the template obsolete, though prudence should be exercised when tagging articles with this. Current uses look productive so far though. Further expansion could also be improve greatly, as now it seems to label the points by the text in the first cell of the row the coor template is used in, but I once again digress. -Theanphibian ^{(talk • contribs)} 08:21, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That I'm now hosting an alternative service doesn't change the fact that external links to general geographical information services should be centralised to Template:GeoTemplate, and not in articles. What does prudence have to do with placing a link to an export service? It shouldn't be an editor choice to give readers the possibility to convert the article or parts of it to another format, but a reader choice only. As for the implementation; currently it relies on ad hoc microformat hacks written in articles directly, which can be improved with the coord|name= modification once it gets through. All the same functionality will still be available for the standard GeoHack links. --Para 09:19, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"external links to general geographical information services should be centralised to Template:GeoTemplate" - once again: that's for single waypoints; not sets of coordinates. Your proposed "name=" modifications are still broken. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 10:20, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

coord|name= only adds names for single points, it does not add support for coord collections. Maybe kml should have a different name and a more navbox-like display, but its functionality is needed. Keep the template and discuss its name and formatting. (SEWilco 15:45, 8 August 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Comment - After having hosted the service for a few days, I can say with confidence that the argument that this template would be anything else than an attempt to place a Google service link in articles is total bull. Most of the requests have come from Google Maps. --Para 20:13, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"I can say with confidence that the argument that this template would be anything else than an attempt to place a Google service link in articles is total bull" - You may be able to say so with misplaced confidence, but you cannot do so with veracity. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 20:50, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aren't you just measuring what is popular for viewing coordinate collections, not the intent? But in what way is popularity relevant to providing access to collections of coordinates? If popularity of usage is bad, then we should remove the six most popular GeoTemplate and ISBN service sites. (SEWilco 04:20, 10 August 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Keep - Sorting out the brawl above, I can't call it a 'discussion', was two hours of my life that I will never get back.
1. This template is the only active way in Wikipedia to create links like this which show markers for all the locations in a set (List of impact craters in Africa in this case). That seems to me an useful feature to supply our users with. The template also allows this group location data to be downloaded in a format used by some external tools.
2. People saying this template favors Google or KML format; don't cut off the nose to spite the face. We should add those other options to this template as possible (and as requested in its documentation), rather than taking capabilities away from users. If the other options can't be implemented in Wikipedia yet... well then we aren't really 'favoring' anything except useful features which actually work here. Which everyone is hopefully in favor of.
3. This template should not be merged into Template:GeoTemplate. It is intended to expand to include other coordinate group formats and external sources. In short, where GeoTemplate provides all available links and options for mapping a single point, this template should be developed to provide all available links and options for mapping a group of points. The two templates should not be combined because they serve different purposes... there would clearly be no sense in including the 'group of points' links for single locations or the single location links for groups.
I have seen NO reasonable basis for deletion of this template. That it should be expanded to include other options is not a reason to delete the useful features implemented so far. I do think that as those options are included a name change from 'KML' to something like 'GeoGroupTemplate' would be appropriate. --CBD 12:00, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I like that name, but that's perhaps best discussed on its talk page. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 12:04, 10 August 2007 (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:User HS 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 page.

The result of the debate was delete. Sr13 is almost Singu larity 20:05, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unused userbox; redundant to other (better) userboxes such as {{User Korean}} and {{User South Korea}}. PC78 14:53, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom; actually how about speedy delete per G1, since it isn't even in proper English. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 20:06, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- That's not G1. This is definitely not "patent nonsense". The grammar error can be corrected, that is not the issue here. Mel sa ran (formerly Salaskаn) 00:29, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, redundant. Mel sa ran (formerly Salaskаn) 00:29, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, agree should be speedied. Unschool 22:16, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Definitely not. This doesn't fall under any of the speedy deletion criteria. Let the nomination run its course, there's no need to hurry. Mel sa ran (formerly Salaskаn) 23:55, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - redundant to "This person is from Korea or South Korea". Miranda 13:28, 6 August 2007 (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.

Go player infoboxes 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 page.

The result of the debate was delete. Sr13 is almost Singu larity 20:06, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unused templates; redundant to {{Infobox Go player}}. PC78 14:34, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. eDenE 20:11, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
~~Merge~~ to {{Infobox Go player}}; some of these have language-specific parameters that need to be preserved. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 20:39, 2 August 2007 (UTC) Delete per explanation below. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 03:06, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment {{Infobox Go player}} already contains those language parameters. No need to merge. eDenE 22:04, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- If the merge has already been done, then delete - 52 Pickup 08:24, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 09:55, 3 August 2007 (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:Prime Ministers of South Korea 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 page.

The result of the debate was withdrawn, template formatted to a much smaller size. Sr13 is almost Singu larity 20:08, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Large and ungainly template that is only used in two articles. As it is, this kind of information would be better suited as an article, and indeed it seems to be copied straight from Prime Minister of South Korea. PC78 12:57, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great googlie mooglie! Delete per nom. The template completely obliterates the articles to which it is transcluded. The list in the related article is sufficient. Shalom ^Hello 13:41, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, but should be recreated and reformatted. Something should exist what this was intended to do. Unschool 22:17, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I've redone it in a more compact format. Biruitorul 03:41, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Withdrawn: I've further redesigned it so that it now matches Template:Presidents of South Korea. PC78 10:30, 7 August 2007 (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:Yugoslav First League 80s-90s 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 page.

The result of the debate was delete all. IronGargoyle 02:04, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Already replaced by Template:Yugoslav First League (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs). — Matthew_hk t c 11:13, 2 August 2007 (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:Koreanruler posthumous twonames 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 page.

The result of the debate was delete. IronGargoyle 02:02, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unused template, redundant to {{Koreanruler}}. PC78 10:20, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Shalom ^Hello 04:35, 3 August 2007 (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:Future theatre 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 page.

The result of the debate was delete. IronGargoyle 02:00, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template redundant of {{Future play article}} and {{Future play section}}. Orphaned. Delete. — Music Maker 5376 03:03, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Shalom ^Hello 13:42, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete; totally gratuitous. Unschool 22:18, 3 August 2007 (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.

Various subpages of Template:WikiProject Korea 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 page.

The result of the debate was deleted by NawlinWiki. Shalom ^Hello 04:34, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This all appears to be some kind of test for {{WikiProject Korea}} that predates a recent overhaul of the template, and as such is now obsolete. PC78 02:11, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete as non-controversial maintenance (CSD G6). Mel sa ran (formerly Salaskаn) 16:13, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Some of them were used by old {{WikiProject Korea}}, but not any more. eDenE 16:18, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete per G6. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 19:58, 2 August 2007 (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.

Korean name 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). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete all. IronGargoyle 01:57, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unused redirects to {{Koreanname}}. — PC78 01:53, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. There is nothing wrong with redirects, even unused ones. Mel sa ran (formerly Salaskаn) 16:12, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete These templates has been replaced by {{Koreanname}} a long time ago. Since no one uses it, no need to keep it. There are also similar templates for deletion - July 31, July 29. eDenE 16:22, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Err, the whole point of a redirect is avoiding redundancy. {{Koreanname}} replaced it, but there is no need to delete the redirects. Mel sa ran (formerly Salaskаn) 16:26, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - But no there's no reason to keep them, either. PC78 16:45, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    - Yes, there is. Deleting redirects without a good reason is a waste of time and useless, see WP:RFD and WP:PERF. When there's no real reason to delete, we default to keep. Mel sa ran (formerly Salaskаn) 19:27, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to read the pages you are pointing people at. E.g. WP:RFD: "The default result of any RFD nomination which receives no other discussion is delete"; we do not "default to keep" as you insist. Especially in the template namespace, where unused redirects serve no end-user purpose, the way that Snooker World Championship does as a redirect to World Snooker Championship. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 19:57, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, but we do default to keep when the redirect makes sense and there is no specific reason to delete (when someone has pointed this out, obviously). True, template redirects are less useful than article redirects, but still, there's no reason to delete this. Mel sa ran (formerly Salaskаn) 00:33, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In what way do these redirects make sense then? They are redundant and obsolete, and you still haven't provided any compelling reason to keep something that would otherwise be deleted. PC78 00:50, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They make sense in that it is not nonsense. "Infobox Korean names" would be a perfectly legitimate title for a template, but this time they've chosen for "Koreanname". There is no compelling reason to delete this redirect, either. When there is no reason to delete something, better keep it. Mel sa ran (formerly Salaskаn) 03:42, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You've just gone and voted to delete a bunch of similar redirects; aren't you contradicting yourself now? Are you seriously suggesting that "Template:Korean name image hanja" is a likely search term? PC78 19:17, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My comments were actually primarily pointed at "Template:Infobox Korean names", which seems a logical name (should have said that explicitly). Delete the rest, FWIW. By the way, TfD isn't a vote. Mel sa ran (formerly Salaskаn) 23:54, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply comment: Melsaran, I believe that you misinterpret the nature and purposes of template redirects. You are approaching this from an article redirect point of view that is simply not applicable here. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 00:30, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom and per WP:RFD; or send to WP:RFD for deletion, if anyone wants to be a process super-stickler. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 19:57, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- WP:RFD says "The default result of any RFD nomination which receives no other discussion is delete". This one did receive discussion. Mel sa ran (formerly Salaskаn) 00:33, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply comment I see no material at RFD or elsewhere suggesting that an RfD which receives some discussion, but in which no salient points are raised in support of keeping the redirect, are kept by default. Actually wathing RfD suggests that this is not the case, especially with redirs in template namespace. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 00:30, 4 August 2007 (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 Nascar Racetrack 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 page.

The result of the debate was delete. Sr13 is almost Singu larity 20:09, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Replaced by {{Motorsport venue}}, a universal infobox template that caters for all types of motorsport venues. No longer used on any articles. Deletion discussed at WikiProject Motorsport. AlexJ 00:09, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. "Redundancy bad, standardisation good!". {Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 15:17, 2 August 2007
Delete per nom as redundant. Mel sa ran (formerly Salaskаn) 16:27, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. —MJCdetroit 12:54, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Obsolete vehicle. (SEWilco 18:34, 3 August 2007 (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:Sourcewatch 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 page.

The result of the debate was speedy delete per CSD R1. Shalom ^Hello 13:43, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This was just a redirect to something that no longer exists SallyForth123 00:45, 2 August 2007 (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.