Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2016 August 21

< August 20	August 22 >

August 21

Template:WikiProject Mathematics

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 2016 August 31. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 01:36, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WikiProject Mathematics (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Maths rating (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Maths banner (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

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:IEC

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 at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2016 August 30#Template:IEC (non-admin closure) Omni Flames (talk) 10:46, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Single use. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:45, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep if it would be useful in articles from Category:IEC standards but otherwise delete —PC-XT+ 00:51, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- There are no other links to the target site, on this Wikipedia. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:23, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This would surely see more use if it were categorized in Category:Specific-source templates where people could find it. [Update: I just added that category to it.] The main reason to ever link to an IEC standard is as a source. Citing specs is not something people usually think of an a WP:EL matter rather than a WP:CITE one, so it's simply miscategorized. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼ 01:07, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- You offer absolutely no evidence for your belief that recategorising this (or any other) template will result in its greater use. Do you have any? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:20, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:Mmuk phoetc

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 at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2016 August 30#Template:Mmuk_phoetc ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 09:32, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Mmuk phoetc (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Target site is defunct, and links now redirect to a Bing map, not an aerial photo. Also redundant to {{Coord}}. Only 34 transclusions. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:58, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

delete after replacing. Frietjes (talk) 18:54, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:MMBR

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 01:34, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:36, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

~~userfy or~~ delete as unused except in a sort of sandbox —PC-XT+ 00:47, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- That user, the template's creator, made 51 edits in all, and last edited in 2008. I think we can safely assume they're not going to make further use of it. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:27, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  - !vote updated —PC-XT+ 03:42, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:ICD9cm

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 01:36, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:ICD9cm (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages) - Single use
Template:ICD9cm-pcs (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages) - Unused

No other links to the target sites on Wikipedia. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:12, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

delete, this seems to work fine. Frietjes (talk) 18:52, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:Meyers Online

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 2016 August 31. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 01:34, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:Bien de Interés Cultural

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 12:45, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Bien de Interés Cultural (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Odd external links template with no parameters, and no subject-specific (deep) links, but including links to search pages. Appears to be mostly used in citations, so may need to be replaced with {{Citation needed}} or similar. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:19, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 01:34, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Search engines are not sources. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼ 00:48, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:DBNAME

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 at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2016 August 30#Template:DBNAME (non-admin closure) Omni Flames (talk) 10:46, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:57, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep Useful when needing to create multilingual links, although a server side Magic Word would be better. — Dispenser 21:18, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 01:33, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep apparently substituted —PC-XT+ 00:57, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- It is considerably quicker and easier to type enwiki than {{Subst:DBNAME}}. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:28, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom unless there's evidence this is used in a programmatic way by projects or tools across multiple language's Wikipedias (if it is, then keep it as a background, subst-used scripting tool). — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼ 00:50, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This is quite odd. On the English Wikipedia, this template will only ever output "enwiki" when substituted. I don't see how this could even be used as a programming tool unless it were created on all language Wikipedias and other projects, but at that point, why not just type the database names directly into your code? It's at most the same amount of effort as manually creating this template on all projects. Either way, there's no evidence this is being used in such a manner, unless Dispenser can provide some. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 09:38, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:Vanish

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 at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2016 August 30#Template:Vanish (non-admin closure) Omni Flames (talk) 10:46, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Vanish (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:HD/vanish (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Template:Vanish with Template:HD/vanish.
No need for two help desk templates about courtesy vanishing. Pppery (talk) 15:09, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

oppose, no demonstration of a merged template. Frietjes (talk) 13:26, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Frietjes: IMO such a merged template is basically one redirecting to the other without change in the other. Opposing in such a vein as yours seems WP:BURO (on this particular template--I've seen good use of that argument). --Izno (talk) 19:30, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Izno, so which is redirected to which? It must be hard to decide since after 14 days no one has been able to decide what the merged template will be. Frietjes (talk) 20:54, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  I'm inclined to keep {{vanish}} since it a) has documentation and b) is much more concise about what is or is not expected. --Izno (talk) 20:57, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  Actually, Izno, my preference is to do it the other way. All help desk templates should be under {{HD}}, rather that forked out everywhere. Pppery (talk) 12:23, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  I have no opinion on the final page title, so that seems fine. I have a preference for the text and documentation in {{vanish}}. --Izno (talk) 12:33, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Merge. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:53, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- @Pigsonthewing: Why? Isn't that just a vote? Pppery (talk) 01:22, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  - You're demanding to know why I agree with you?!? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 08:25, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    - Yes, Pigsonthewing, you are correct. And the reason for me asking is that just voting, as you did, is an argument to avoid in deletion discussions. Pppery (talk) 13:39, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 01:31, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to {{HD/vanish}}, favoring the content of {{Vanish}}, per the above, as the default output, since it is going to be more helpful to the intended audience. It could maybe be pared down a little, but that's up to discussion as the template talk page. Having two templates for this purpose is redundant. Project-specific things should live in the project's space. If the icon is part of the standard presentation of these responses, then retain it. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼ 00:54, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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