Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2017 August 14

< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion‎ | Log
< August 13 August 15 >

August 14 edit

Template:Prussian Royal Family 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 2017 August 25. (non-admin closure) Winged Blades of GodricOn leave 10:08, 25 August 2017 (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:Communes and rural communities of Senegal 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) Winged Blades of GodricOn leave 10:09, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Enormously sprawling template, too open ended Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 04:40, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Disagree, it's very convenient to have them all linked in one place.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:44, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ordinarily there would be a template for every region. I'd be happy to break it down to that level. Regions already have their articles and there is a template linking the regions. Agathoclea (talk) 08:53, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Add to that that the template is not in use so it can definitively be broken up. The only possible advantage I can see that the standalone template has, would be for a specific watchlist. Have a look at the setup at Wikipedia:WikiProject Germany/Cities and Wikipedia:WikiProject Germany/Cities/Bavaria for an alternative. Agathoclea (talk) 09:16, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:17, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • merge the lists of communes with Communes of Senegal, the lists of rural communities with Rural communities of Senegal and delete or move to project space. as far as I can tell, there are only two rural communities listed in the navbox (both redlinked). moving it to a subpage of a wikiproject would also be useful as suggested by Agathoclea above. Frietjes (talk) 13:55, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:33, 5 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:07, 14 August 2017 (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:Neighbourhoods in Santa Cruz, Chile 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) Winged Blades of GodricOn leave 10:09, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:GEOLAND. The neighborhoods are not "legally" recognized by Chilean Law as territorial units (they are not part of administrative, electoral or census divisions). Juntas de vecinos are not a legal recognition of a place, because they are not government bodies, they are voluntary NGOs based in a territory chosen by their founders. In fact, it could be possible to find more than one junta de vecinos in the same neighborhood, or a junta that is composed by neighbors of two or more different neighborhoods. Villa Los navegantes is a little neighborhood (of 200 inhabitants) with no non-trivial coverage in multiple, independent reliable sources.. Sfs90 (talk) 18:48, 5 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:01, 14 August 2017 (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:Body Head Bangerz 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) Winged Blades of GodricOn leave 10:09, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Obsolete rap group not notable enough for a template, as their lone album came out 13 years ago and didn't even chart nationally, while their one hit peaked at #81 on Billboard. Template itself is consequently threadbare with content removed for either having no article (a non-charting single) or redirection to another due to lack of notability (Body Head Entertainment). sixtynine • speak up • 15:40, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • keep, current used in 9 articles (connects 6). if the articles are deleted, then clearly it will be a different story. Frietjes (talk) 17:00, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment With all due respect, the number of articles doesn't mean much. BHB may have warranted a template back in the day, but now they're an irrelevant flash-in-the-pan music group without one legit charting single or album. Magic is deceased and the other two are barely in the rap game today. It's even doubtful that "I Smoke, I Drank" even has enough notability anymore to maintain an article. sixtynine • speak up • 20:33, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
the correct order is "afd" to have the articles deleted, before "tfd" to have the navigation between the articles deleted. Frietjes (talk) 14:36, 5 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:25, 5 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:30, 14 August 2017 (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:VN wikidata/subdivision 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) feminist 03:45, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No idea what this template is used for and is unused in any page. Ssbbplayer (talk) 19:06, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete, no consensus for deployment. Frietjes (talk) 20:08, 16 August 2017 (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:VN wikidata 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) feminist 03:45, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think this is needed since the vast majority of the information on the infobox settlement template is filled out by typing it. This is because it is easier to edit, less error prone (what happens if an edit causes a massive error message that pops up), and easier to fix vandalism/unsourced information (e.g update and add proper sources) should they occur. Should the template have errors or is vandalized with unsourced info, it would be vastly difficult to undo it. Also, the template was created by a user circumventing their blocks (e.g sockpuppetry) in an attempt to push their own POV since the template has been known to change the skyline photo without proper consensus. Ssbbplayer (talk) 19:03, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete, no consensus for deployment. Frietjes (talk) 20:08, 16 August 2017 (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:Unbreakable 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) Winged Blades of GodricOn leave 10:10, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really think we need this. Can be dealt with through normal linking or through {{M. Night Shyamalan}}. --woodensuperman 13:55, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete, although it looks like there is a third film expected in 2019. still, with only three films in the series, we can use "see also" linking. Frietjes (talk) 14:12, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:NENAN. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 01:42, 24 August 2017 (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:History of the Greek language 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; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:01, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deprecated since 2013‎. TheDragonFire (talk) 11:19, 14 August 2017 (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:VN parts 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) feminist 03:46, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, no clear purpose. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:36, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete, no consensus for deployment. Frietjes (talk) 20:08, 16 August 2017 (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/2017_August_14&oldid=1073739955"