Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2014 March 17

< March 16	March 18 >

March 17 edit

Template:Gary Oldman sidebar edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete DavidLeighEllis (talk) 04:21, 25 March 2014 (UTC) (non-admin closure)[reply]

Template:Gary Oldman sidebar (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Per Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2014_February_17#Template:Robert_De_Niro_sidebar. The template was accidentally not listed there, and a speedy was declined for whatever reason. All other actor sidebars have been deleted. --Conti|✉ 13:49, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per precedent —PC-XT+ 00:19, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
delete per precedent. Frietjes (talk) 19:45, 24 March 2014 (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:US infantry sidebar edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was relisted on 2014 April 8 Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 23:22, 8 April 2014 (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:PopupImage edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 06:27, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:PopupImage (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Orphaned template, with no clear purpose —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 10:47, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Very weak delete — It appears to be an image spoiler. I don't think there is enough need for this to be a template, but if someone wants it, I won't oppose them. —PC-XT+ 15:26, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
My memory is very hazy here, but I think it came up during the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy. But if it's been around for that long and nothing is using it, then I don't particularly care if it is deleted. --Cyde Weys 16:03, 18 March 2014 (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:Pix edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 06:35, 6 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Pix (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused template, with no clear purpose —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 10:45, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment reading the code, it appears to create a transparent block on a page -- 70.50.151.11 (talk) 06:39, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete — I don't know if there is any need for a transparent gif block like this. This template appears to be unneeded. (Just use the file link itself, if there is a need.) A large transparent link in a blank area can also confuse people who accidentally click on it. (For example, I often click blank areas to deselect text.) —PC-XT+ 14:50, 18 March 2014 (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:Image caption edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 06:36, 6 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Image caption (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This template doesn't seem to be in use —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 10:41, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Template is no longer used and probably won't ever be needed. Of course, if it does, it can be recreated. — X S G 17:35, 17 March 2014 (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 military conflict timeline edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete, or rather repurposed as a simple succession link template. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 23:21, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox military conflict timeline (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Fork of Template:Infobox military conflict that differs from the original in the addition of a navigation bar below the title. 23 transclusion, and it is used exclusively for the 'year x in the Vietnam war' series of articles. eh bien mon prince (talk) 10:01, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as redundant. Use a navbox for related articles. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:22, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Navobx doesn't have the navigation bar below the title -- Esemono (talk) 13:32, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- If needed, this could be added to the original template. We don't fork templates - and thereby increase the workload for those who maintain them - simply to add one or two parameters. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:05, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, or move to a sandbox for possible improvement of the original template if year navigation is useful. —PC-XT+ 00:31, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
reformat as a module, which can be used with the standard template. Frietjes (talk) 19:19, 8 April 2014 (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 referendum edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was merge the new one into the old one. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 23:25, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:Infobox multichoice referendum (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Template:Infobox referendum with Template:Infobox multichoice referendum.

Not all referendums are based on polar questions.
Not all referendums are restricted to two answers and two answers alone.
Not all referendums are restricted to one question and one question alone.
Several referendums have more than one question (or "part") and some questions have several different answers.

Examples of referendums that are not polar include Crimean referendum, 2014 (non-polar, 1 part) and Puerto Rican status referendum, 2012 (2 parts, 1 polar, 1 non-polar).

This new template {{infobox multichoice referendum}} is a superset of {{infobox referendum}} capable of handling polar questions and non-polar questions. It is even capable of handling referendums with multiple questions! You can specify the question, the answer, the colors of the answers, and so on. It also has graphs which makes it look super cute and will definitely get me more babes in real life. AMIRITE BOIS.

Therefore, this new template should supersede the old one.

—Ahnoneemoos (talk) 06:37, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: infobox multichoice referendum is incapable of superseding infobox referendum since it's not backwards-compatible with the latter. The better choice would be to delete IB multichoice and add the desired features to the established template. @Frietjes: who redesigned IB referendum just a couple of months ago.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 07:13, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Disagree. It's backwards compatible. I just need to add 'yes' and 'no' as options for the parameters 'part1_choice1' and 'part1_choice2' in the code to make it backwards compatible. The other custom arguments, like "notes" can also be added quite easily. —Ahnoneemoos (talk) 07:44, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  - What is commonly understood by backward compatibility is that you can redirect the deprecated template to the new one without adverse effect. What happens when you do that in this case is that you get a very broken template. It might be that you are able to fix this, but until you do, it is not backwards compatible.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 09:43, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    - I'm aware of that, but that's just a fix away. It's not impossible to do. I just have not had the time yet. :) —Ahnoneemoos (talk) 14:39, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with the comments above that the existing infobox should just be made compatible with the new parameters (which are an improvement). Number 5 7 12:11, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Improve original template; delete the new one, per Underlying lk. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:25, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sandbox or userfy (or merge if made backwards compatible) the multichoice one if it would help improve the existing template, otherwise delete it —PC-XT+ 00:40, 18 March 2014 (UTC) 17:58, 19 March 2014 (UTC) 03:02, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete multichoice, any additional feature can be added to the existing template.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 18:59, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Please see an inadvertent duplicate discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2014 March 21#Template:Infobox multichoice referendum. As the nominator there, I've requested its closure, but the comments already made should be taken into account here. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:03, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
merge, but keep the template history from original template, and make sure it's backwards compatible. Frietjes (talk) 19:47, 24 March 2014 (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:Picture select edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Delete; deleted as G2 by RHaworth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:09, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Picture select (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

unused test. 174.56.57.138 (talk) 02:01, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I tagged it as CSD G2 test page.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 02:52, 17 March 2014 (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:Uw-ipevadeblock edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was relisted on 2014 April 8 Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 22:48, 8 April 2014 (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.