Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2016 October 5

< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion‎ | Log
< October 4 October 6 >

October 5 edit

Sort mode 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 Delete (non-admin closure) Primefac (talk) 06:10, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused templates whose technology is no longer supported by current MediaWiki Javascript. This could also include Template:Smd (Q14402248) and w:zh:Template:Smd. 50.53.1.33 (talk) 20:04, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 03:51, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • We cannot generate consensus for other wikis. You will first need to approach the other wikis regarding deletion, and then Wikidata after that. That said, delete here as we have other technologies. --Izno (talk) 16:10, 6 October 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:Pygmalion 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 no consensus. (non-admin closure) Primefac (talk) 01:32, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Pygmalion with Template:My Fair Lady.
Fair amount of duplicate links. May be beneficial to merge the two, with perhaps a little bit of a trim... Duck, You Sucker!? Honestly? Rob Sinden (talk) 10:14, 23 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 02:56, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I think each template has a slightly different emphasis despite the overlap.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:32, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per the nom. I agree there's a slightly different emphasis, but I don't see a need for such. --Izno (talk) 16:13, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Personally, I think there's substantial enough differences here that the two navboxes are warranted. In particular, I struggle to think why people would navigate from Pygmalion (play) to My Fair Lady Loves Jazz or similar. ~ Rob13Talk 17:13, 15 October 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:Philadelphia Phillies Radio and TV Network 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 Delete ~ Rob13Talk 17:10, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unsuitable navbox topic. Seems to be (although there is no article to back it up) a list of radio stations that broadcast Philadelphia Phillies content. Rob Sinden (talk) 11:27, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. There is an article. Link added. And it's a navbox of affiliates of a radio network. Those are closely related enough for a navbox. oknazevad (talk) 13:24, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Not really - If you're going to have a navbox for this, you might as well have a navbox for all the radio and TV stations that broadcast Premier League matches, etc, etc. It's really not a suitable topic for a navbox. Best left to that list article you linked, if it's even notable. --Rob Sinden (talk) 13:33, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Also, the principles of WP:NOTTVGUIDE apply. --Rob Sinden (talk) 13:34, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 02:52, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Per Rob, delete. --Izno (talk) 16:12, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete, better to link through a category and/or list article. Frietjes (talk) 18:16, 7 October 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).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2016_October_5&oldid=744560641"