Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2015 November 24

< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion‎ | Log
< November 23 November 25 >

November 24 edit

Emmerdale family navigational templates edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was relist to Dec 17. Primefac (talk) 01:42, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:NENAN. These are redundant to Template:Emmerdale characters. - JuneGloom07 Talk 20:35, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Tending to keep. Rather the other Navbox, which presents a huge but incomplete selection of characters, should be deleted. PanchoS (talk) 07:58, 28 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete, the combined navbox works fine, and doesn't try to provide extraneous non-navigational information. Frietjes (talk) 17:02, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Smile edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was keep. Withdrawn by nom, as it was a technical issue (which has since been fixed). (non-admin closure) Primefac (talk) 17:00, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete this template, unless it can be fixed in such a way that it cannot be put on a talk page unsubstituted. At present, if an editor ignores the instruction to substitute it, a misleading message "Xyz has smiled at you" appears on the talk page when Xyz was the last editor to edit it. This can be extremely misleading, misrepresenting the views of editor Xyz. PamD 10:52, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Frietjes: That looks just what I was asking for. Thank you very much! PamD 15:05, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Withdraw nomination, now that the "...unless..." clause has been satisfied. Thanks. PamD 15:05, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • User:PamD, we should probably get a bot to fix all the transclusions. unless it is easy to figure out who left the message, we should just replace the REVISIONUSER with 'a user' or something generic (in the old unsubstituted transclusions). Frietjes (talk) 15:08, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).


Template:YouTube user edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was relisted on December 12. Opabinia regalis (talk) 06:18, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This template is completely redundant with Template:YouTube. 117Avenue (talk) 04:16, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to {{YouTube}} after converting existing instances to use the target template. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:32, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete There's no need for redundant templates. Jimp 05:48, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Not redundant. It's already a wrapper of {{YouTube}}. Also, 1000+ transclusions. PanchoS (talk) 07:52, 28 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Because it's a wrapper it's not redundant? YouTube user does not have less parameters. 117Avenue (talk) 01:32, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong keep It is a very useful template, why is this even under discussion? Close this debate now. Neptune's Trident (talk) 16:34, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This is under discussion because YouTube user is redundant to another template, a template that is more useful than YouTube user. Why do you think YouTube user is useful enough for a standalone template? 117Avenue (talk) 03:47, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2015_November_24&oldid=1141875817"