Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2018 January 29

< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion‎ | Log
< January 28 January 30 >

January 29 edit

Template:AIBA Youth World Boxing Championship 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) 04:26, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused fork of Template:WC Amateur Boxing Frietjes (talk) 22:15, 29 January 2018 (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:8TeamBracket-2Legs-NoAggregate-NoSeeds 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) 04:26, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused; not clear where this is needed Frietjes (talk) 22:13, 29 January 2018 (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:CAlso starring 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. NPASR Primefac (talk) 03:03, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Completely redundant. Has the exact same function as {{CMain}}: It designates a person as part of the ensemble cast. The text label is different but {{CMain}} already support customizing its text label too. There seems to have been previous cases of editors having created such redundant templates, which ended up getting deleted: {{CSpecialGuest}}, {{CAppeared}}, and {{CCameo}}. —Codename Lisa (talk) 06:09, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'm not that worried about this, but I agree that CMain with altered text should be fine here. - adamstom97 (talk) 06:21, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's true it does exist to serve the same purpose as {{CMain}} however I created this specifically for use in character charts. The main templates used in these are {{CMain}}, {{CRecurring}}, and {{CGuest}}. Recently I have noticed more and more television shows crediting main actors as "Also starring" along with main. Generally in character charts actors that are credited as Also Starring use a different color than green to differentiate between those credited in the opening credits and those not. This template goal is to simplify and make that process easier because with out editors are forced to enter the code listed at this template within the character charts which makes it confusing for new editors and it also clutters that section of the page. See examples in this edit at Blue Bloods (TV series) and this edit at List of Hawaii Five-0 (2010 TV series) characters. The reason it links to the same article is because these type of cast members are almost always treated the exact same way as main cast members with the exception of the credit difference. TheDoctorWho (talk) 06:23, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi. I'd say you fixed it the wrong way around. You should have disposed of the "Also Starring" wording, coloring and everything else altogether, replacing it with {{CMain}}. Motion pictures are one of our most notorious examples of outlets that use words that we avoid. —Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 06:30, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • The template also uses a different colour to {{CMain}}. Each of these templates uses a different colour to identify the different credit used, so while you can change the wording used in CMain, you can't change the colour. It's not entirely true that "also starring" characters are treated the same as main characters. Often they are recurring characters that just get a bit of extra credit. I don't see how the "Also starring" wording is an issue. This is how the actor is credited, so this is what we use. The template is also used primarily in articles about TV characters, not characters in motion pictures. --AussieLegend (✉) 07:08, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I do see your point. But I am not seeing your point in the template. For an ordinary reader, it is just a different color, a different word and a link that eventually proves the wrong link. The template must communicate what you said. And still, the main point is that actors either a get an ensemble cast contract, or they don't. So, check all those "also starring" characters on a case-by-case basis and apply either {{CMain}} or {{CRecurring}} as appropriate. For the items that you don't know, there is the {{Dunno}} template. {{CAlso starring}} isn't any better than omitting the mention. Also, what was that part about "motion picture" and "TV"? TVs don't show still pictures, you know. (I am feeling the term "motion picture" here is being confused with "feature film".) —Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 07:25, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is exactly the point though. Cast members who are also starring generally receive higher billing than guest or recurring but not as high as main. Therefore they don't fit into either {{CMain}} or {{CRecurring}} and as for the contracts AussieLegend was right they're not always treated exactly the same they may have a contract as ensemble cast but may not receive all the same luxuries as a main cast member. TheDoctorWho (talk) 07:44, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • That's a bit weasel-wordy. There isn't such thing as a fixed ensemble cast salary. One filming project might pay more than the other. (So is the salary of the recurring or guest actors.) But the contract of a main cast is different from that of the recurring cast. The former has more rights and more benefits.

    Be that as it may, the template must somehow communicate some of these. If it had, I wouldn't have been here.

    —Codename Lisa (talk) 08:00, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • The point of the template is that it avoids the need for editors to add the correct code to the table. They just need to add | colspan="x" {{cAlso starring}} to create a row that is consistently coloured and labelled across the project. Sometimes, OK it's often, they don't even get that right as it's still beyond the skill set of many editors. I've never seen the link to Ensemble cast as very helpful since it was first added (here by the original creator) but the rest of the template is. Some of the tables that we had before creation of these templates were positively awful. I've been very tolerant of their creation for this reason. --AussieLegend (✉) 09:30, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I feel like this is redundancy as Lisa pointed out, and that one can pipe either CMain or CRecurring to make it it "Also starring". Though really, it should be either simply "CMain" or "CRecurring". I don't see the need to have a fourth color option added to the existing Main, Recurring and Guest options. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:52, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 14:56, 29 January 2018 (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:F2 Logistics Cargo Movers 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) 04:26, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

used in only one article Frietjes (talk) 20:12, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete all hard to read, useless. --Osplace 02:57, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 14:02, 29 January 2018 (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:Chinese literary awards 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) 04:26, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Chinese literary awards and Category:Chinese-language literary awards contain several times more entries. Timmyshin (talk) 04:26, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete, the categories are enough for navigational purposes. Frietjes (talk) 00:10, 6 February 2018 (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:Ktile 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) 04:27, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Another test page "For Personal Use". Drmies (talk) 01:36, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete or move to user space. Frietjes (talk) 21:14, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Drmies, I am joining Template:Kanjimemo-top to this discussion (hope you agree). Frietjes (talk) 21:16, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      • Frietjes, go for it--there's plenty more where that came from, it seems. As for "move to user space"--some material from that user's space has already been deleted, as a violation of NOTWEBHOST. Drmies (talk) 03:32, 31 January 2018 (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:Ntile 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) 04:27, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"For personal use"? Unused, seems like a test page. Drmies (talk) 01:35, 29 January 2018 (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:Tile 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) 04:27, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, appears to be an experiment. Drmies (talk) 01:33, 29 January 2018 (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/2018_January_29&oldid=824726946"