Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2017 July 31

< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion‎ | Log
< July 30 August 1 >

July 31 edit

Template:Scott Alexander and Larry Karaszewski 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. (non-admin closure) Winged Blades Godric 16:52, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:FILMNAV we should only be including "primary" creators in navboxes. In terms of films, this is usually taken to being the director, so if we trim the film writing we would be left with just two links. Rob Sinden (talk) 11:44, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • I do not agree: They more than qualify for having a navbox, having written, directed and created multiple media properties. This comes off as a very narrow use for navboxes, not showing the breadth of a creator's output, and I ask the moderators to reconsider. --SavageEditor (talk) 14:39, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Invalid reasoning. They have directed, and plenty of director's navigational templates include "writing only"s and an assortment of other items. And their work is "plenty" primary. And the tool is useful. Ribbet32 (talk) 22:09, 24 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) 23:09, 31 July 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:PD-USGov-HHS 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:13, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, replaceable by {{PD-USGov}} FASTILY 21:14, 31 July 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).

Redundant Doctor Who Episode head/body 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 8. (non-admin closure) Winged Blades Godric 16:52, 8 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:Thoroughbred fatalities 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 speedy delete per author approval Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:10, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This template is only transcluded on 10 articles and has no real benefit to navigation; there are about 10,000 articles in WP horse racing and at least a couple thousand of them would fit this criteria for inclusion; this is better off as a category. Montanabw(talk) 18:15, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - looks like its meant for Catastrophic injuries but is by no means complete. "Fatalities" is too general a term - colic and laminitis for example kill far more horses, and sometimes even in their racing prime. Jlvsclrk (talk) 18:36, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete, it looks like I moved the content from the article. removing it completely from the articles is also fine with me. Frietjes (talk) 18:51, 31 July 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:Minhaj-ul-Quran International 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 8. (non-admin closure) Winged Blades Godric 16:52, 8 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:Tt 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:36, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template is not transcluded in the main space and there are fewer than 50 uses outside.

It would be good to re-purpose as a wrapper for <span style="font-family: monospace"> to quick-replace uses of <tt>, which is a deprecated HTML 5 element, where a replacement using <samp>, <code>, or <kbd> is not obvious. I would not be against a rename and replace on affected pages also, for that reason. Izno (talk) 16:10, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • comment I agree that this is a bad name for this particular template, and I would support moving it to a new title (maybe {{template table row}}? or ?) so that this title can be used for the suggested purpose (i.e., a redirect to {{mono}}). by the way, you may want to change {{ttt}} as well? Frietjes (talk) 16:30, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Whatever rolls off the tongue - I'm not going to be picky. We might also simply subst and delete since the use case seems both limited and not the best use of a template given how complex it makes an otherwise simple table. A redirect to mono seems fine. I don't see an issue changing the other but it wasn't my first priority--if you want to add it to this nom, go ahead (if I don't get around to it in the next 24 hours). --Izno (talk) 00:40, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    All uses of {{ttt}} were equivalent to {{mono}} so I've just redirected it. --Izno (talk) 02:10, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Izno, great, I just remembered {{tlrow}}, so we can migrate any uses to that template (which has a better name). Frietjes (talk) 13:33, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Seems like a reasonable replacement and name. --Izno (talk) 14:53, 1 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:Callimachus 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 8. (non-admin closure) Winged Blades Godric 16:52, 8 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:Infobox civilian attack 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. A merge as of now is rejected. (non-admin closure) Winged Blades Godric 16:53, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Infobox civilian attack into Template:Infobox event.
Very similar templates, with no clear differentiation in purpose - all civilian attacks are events.

Many of the parameters are common to both templates. I list below, in collapsed sections, those which are unique to each template. Most of these are synonyms, albeit with the benefit of greater granularity in the civilian attack template:

  • |injuries= vs. |reported injuries=
  • |fatalities=/ |victims= vs. |Casualties=
  • |assailants=/ |numparts=/ |dfens= vs. |participants=
  • |susperps= vs. |perpetrators=
  • |inquiry= vs. |inquiries=

and the remaining five parameters of {{Infobox civilian attack}}:

  • |partof=
  • |target=
  • |timezone=
  • |weapons=
  • |motive=

could each easily apply in the event template.

Parameters unique to Infobox civilian attack
{{Infobox civilian attack
| partof      = 
| target      = 
| timezone    = 
| fatalities  = 
| injuries    = 
| victims     = <!-- or | victim = -->
| perpetrators= <!-- or | perpetrator = --> <!-- alias: | perps = or | perp = -->
| assailants  = <!-- or | assailant = -->
| susperps    = <!-- or | susperp = -->
| weapons     = 
| numparts    = <!-- or | numpart = -->
| dfens       = <!-- or | dfen = -->
| motive      = 
| inquiry     = 
}}
Parameters unique to Infobox event
{{Infobox event
| image_upright            =
| english_name             =
| duration                 =
| venue                    =
| also_known_as            =
| theme                    =
| cause                    =
| first_reporter           =
| budget                   =
| patron                   = <!-- or |patrons= -->
| organisers               = <!-- or |organizers= -->
| filmed_by                =
| participants             =
| outcome                  =
| casualties1              =
| casualties2              =
| casualties3              =
| reported deaths          =
| reported injuries        =
| reported missing         =
| reported property damage =
| burial                   =
| inquiries                =
| inquest                  =
| arrests                  =
| suspects                 =
| trial                    =
| sentence                 =
| publication_bans         =
| awards                   =
| url                      =
| blank_label              = <!-- or |blank_data= -->
| blank1_label             = <!-- or |blank1_data= -->
| blank2_label             = <!-- or |blank2_data= -->
| notes                    =
}}

The result of the merge should be at {{Infobox event}} with {{Infobox civilian attack}} kept as a redirect. A custom pro-forma blank for civilian attacks can be provided in the documentation, just as done for bands (vs. individuals) with {{Infobox musical artist}}

Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:50, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - Reject Merging: The missing fields in "event" are said to "could each easily apply" but there is no proof that they will be after any such merge. Factually add the missing fields and then a conversation could begin, but not before. In any case, the "event" infobox was clearly made for concerts and the like, and not for terror attacks such as 11-Sept-2001. XavierItzm (talk) 14:14, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • XavierItzm, not a good idea. we first discuss merging, then if there is consensus to merge, then we add any important missing parameters needed to facilitate the merge. the method that you suggest was tried back in 2013, then when the discussion was closed the premature merger before consensus was reverted. discuss changes first, before making changes in this case. Frietjes (talk) 14:29, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • A merge means that all parameters would be available in the resultant template. The "event" template is actually the result of an earlier merge, which included "Infobox news event" - just look at the parameter list for the "event" template, which includes things like |reported deaths=. It is not for "concerts and the like", for which we have {{Infobox concert}}. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:22, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Reject Merging - I don't think making the current events template any more broad is a good idea. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 14:56, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • This would not be "making the current events template more broad", it would resolve the existing overlaps and duplication; and add just five parameters (|partof=, |target=, |timezone=, |weapons=, |motive=), each of which can be applied to news events which are not civilian attacks. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:22, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Reject Merging specifically tailored templates are good because the "event" infobox is already very "one size fits all" and that's not really very precise. DrStrauss talk please use {{ping|DrStrauss}} when replying 20:53, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • These are not "specifically tailored templates"; the distinction is vague and ill defined; and the parameters largely duplicative, as I have clearly demonstrated. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:22, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • comment, if anyone wants to read prior merger discussions, see 2014 May 7 and 2013 October 1. Frietjes (talk) 14:33, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep I don't think motive should be a parameter at all, and I don't want to support a merge that would be destructive to the current events template.Seraphim System (talk) 04:43, 7 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:What Now 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:35, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Empty ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:03, 31 July 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:Cleaning companies 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:35, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Such a broad definition is better suited by a category than a navbox. – Train2104 (t • c) 23:35, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete, better to navigate by Category:Cleaning companies. Frietjes (talk) 14:29, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom and Frietjes. Zhangj1079 (T|C) 22:07, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep (I am the creator of this navbox). I see no problem with displaying this as a navbox. Many of the articles included in this navbox list to others in the navbox under the see also section. Daylen (talk) 02:20, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 00:42, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Vastly different subjects that aren't interrelated enough to warrant a navbox. If this were limited to a specific country I might think differently. --Paul_012 (talk) 00:27, 3 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:San Beda Red Cubs 2013-2014 NCAA Junior Basketball Champions 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:06, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

HS tournaments and awards are usually non-notable and not shown in articles. Babymiss fortune 05:51, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep These templates are being used as records for their season/championship pages (Ranbill Tongco and Javee Mocon) Linsanity (talk) 22:42, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete, navbox cruft. junior squad templates have been deemed not notable in prior TfD threads. Frietjes (talk) 13:00, 17 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) 23:34, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Please note that this is the combination of three identical nominations and votes, with nearly-identical templates. Original (separate) nominations were made on 22 July 2017.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 00:32, 31 July 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:NCAA Season 92 juniors' volleyball match-up results 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 merge to articles using labelled section transclusion. This preserves the content of the templates themselves, but also removes the need for a template only used in one (maybe two) places. Primefac (talk) 02:33, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

HS tournaments and awards are usually non-notable and not shown in articles. Babymissfortune 05:49, 15 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) 23:34, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Please note that this is the combination of three nearly identical nominations and votes (Only change between them was the wikilink to '92 volleyball tournament being the '92 and '91 basketball tournaments). Original (separate) nominations were made on 22 July 2017.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 00:32, 31 July 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:Euro coin copyright tag 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 8. (non-admin closure) Winged Blades Godric 16:54, 8 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_July_31&oldid=1144684238"