Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2018 October 25

< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion‎ | Log
< October 24 October 26 >

October 25 edit

Template:American South Conference Men's Basketball Tournament navbox 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) 21:39, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Has only one link. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 21:55, 25 October 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:American West Conference Men's Basketball Tournament navbox 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) 21:39, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

provides no navigation Frietjes (talk) 16:54, 25 October 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:Akademisk Boldklub seasons 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) 21:39, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

all red links Frietjes (talk) 16:46, 25 October 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).

Goodreads 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. There's an overall consensus here that the vast majority of uses of the templates do not satisfy WP:EL and so the template should be deleted. (non-admin closure) Galobtter (pingó mió) 05:54, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Goodreads is a for-profit business and is part of Amazon. We should no more have links to it than we should to Amazon itself, and we should not be facilitating its use with these templates. Additionally content there is mostly user-generated - not just the reviews but apparently even the book information. There was a rather sharply divided discussion at ELN here back in 2016, yet these templates have continued to be used, and now are even plugged into Wikidata. These are basically spam, in my view.Jytdog (talk) 16:43, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with your view. 175.156.168.211 (talk) 08:01, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Not every link to a commercial website is bad. For a long time I did not use Amazon to buy books, but to read what others wrote about books. So, yes, most visits will be from people looking for information about that book, rather than seeking to buy the book. Tgeorgescu (talk) 20:34, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • See Piers Anthony#External links and Ada Lovelace#External links if you're interested in seeing how the first template is used. WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:15, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete (phase out current uses by removing or converting to wikitext). The question is whether these links are consistently worth including in External links sections to warrant a template that encourages their use. The vast majority of these uses, in my experience, do not constitute neutral and accurate material that is relevant to an encyclopedic understanding of the subject and cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to copyright issues. The links tend to be a handful of subpar user reviews. We already list selections of works/publications within the article. What else is this source meant to provide? Otherwise no different than linking to an author profile on Amazon, which too links to user reviews of books. (not watching, please {{ping}}) czar 12:45, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Too spammy and unsuitable as external link. --Dirk Beetstra T C 20:36, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep – Bookreads itself is notNOT a "for profit business". It is a service provided by Amazon, edited by vetted users, and none of the contributors are paid for their edits. My Gosh, we have even a template dedicated to Amazon (see {{asin}}), which argues against the "Amazon is 'for profit' ergo bad" argument. More importantly, it is useful to WP readers because it provides links to useful/helpful information. – S. Rich (talk) 04:41, 31 October 2018 (UTC) AND, I notice that IMDb is owned by Amazon. Perhaps the IMDb templates and ELs should be eliminated too. Yes, how far would such a quest go if successful with Goodreads? Point is, Goodreads might be an easy target for deletion, but the rationale would then (properly) be applied to all "Amazon-related" templates. Srich32977 (talk) 05:26, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Goodreads was always a for profit business. What are you talking about? Jytdog (talk) 05:54, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, Goodreads is a business. But what is the policy about having or using templates that contain data from businesses? My gosh, Category:Templates_using_data_from_Wikidata (and other categories) contains hundreds of such "for profit" templates, from ESPN to The Broadway League to Template:Bandysidan teams. The template itself is not a problem. – S. Rich (talk) 15:01, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
If this is going to be a fact-based discussion you could strike your "NOT". The template is a problem because it encourages spamming a commercial site with little encyclopedic value. What you have posted here so far has just been distraction pointing elsewhere. You haven't made any argument that providing links to Goodreads is useful other than simply stating that you believe it is useful (which is not an argument, but rather a claim). Jytdog (talk) 15:15, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • One of my biggest concerns with Goodreads is that it's actually fairly easy to become a vetted user or "librarian". The main qualification is that you have 50 books on your shelf and express an interest in becoming one. There's an application process but I've always seen it as something that they grant to pretty much anyone who comes forward to ask for it unless they've done something to show that they'd be really incompetent, like trolling. This means that it's fairly easy to mess up information on the site or to upload something incorrect. However that said, in general the material is correct but is always subject to some human error. It's the same issue with IMDb, FWIW - it's user submitted. The main thing with IMDb though is that it's very widely visited and is something that the average user would likely click on before or after visiting a film or cast/crew article, if they wanted more information. It's generally expected, in other words. I don't know that there's ever been that expectation with IMDb. There's also the question of why Goodreads should be chosen over other, similar outlets like LibraryThing, I suppose. I'm sort of ambivalent about Goodreads at this point, but it's not something I will typically go to if I wanted to find basic info not in an article. ReaderofthePack (｡◕‿◕｡) 19:03, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Of course not, the very thought! Goodreads doesn't have the concept of a COI editor. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:07, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
But it has to be said that that book is utter nonsense, we all know that Jesus is buried further east. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:21, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom and lack of any real value. Goodreads might be useful for readers, but provides no, or minimum, value to readers of an encyclopedia. As always, local consensus could go toward including a link in the external links, but thee is no need for this template either way. zchrykng (talk) 15:49, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • No one has shown that any the 4 "Reasons to delete a template" apply. The only complaint is that of misuse. If such is the case (shown by facts), the listed methods of curing the misuse should be undertaken. Also, there was no notice of this discussion given on the template talk pages. This discussion should be closed, and the earlier discussion can be re-opened on the WP:ELN. – S. Rich (talk) 16:33, 1 November 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:Italian general election, 2006 – deputies 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) 21:38, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused and generally duplicates Italian general election, 2006#Results for the Chamber of Deputies; note that the Italian version of this template was deleted back in 2012 Frietjes (talk) 16:32, 25 October 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:JudoAt2016SummerOlympics 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 History merge. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:38, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused; earlier edit history should be merged with Template:Judo at the 2016 Summer Olympics Frietjes (talk) 16:09, 25 October 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:Johnson Family Enterprises 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) 21:34, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused; no parent article; could possibly be merged with Template:S. C. Johnson family Frietjes (talk) 16:06, 25 October 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:John & Jehn 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) 21:34, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused; no core links (only related articles) Frietjes (talk) 16:06, 25 October 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:Johannesburg sports 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) 21:34, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused; could be merged with Johannesburg#Sports if it's useful Frietjes (talk) 16:05, 25 October 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:Ballinger1992Table3 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) 21:34, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused; should be merged with an article or moved to userspace or deleted Frietjes (talk) 16:00, 25 October 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:Jewels of Elizabeth II 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) 21:33, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused; partially duplicates Template:Elizabeth II? Frietjes (talk) 15:59, 25 October 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:Jewel Riders 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) 21:33, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused; links 3 articles (Characters is a redirect) Frietjes (talk) 15:57, 25 October 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:Ives symphonies 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) 21:33, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused; duplicates navigation found in Template:Charles Ives Frietjes (talk) 15:48, 25 October 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:Hungary Squad 2001 FINA Water Polo World 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) 21:33, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

5th place squad Frietjes (talk) 15:47, 25 October 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:AMD Ryzen Embedded 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) 21:33, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused, appears to be a partial fork of template:AMD Ryzen Frietjes (talk) 15:34, 25 October 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:ABS-CBN comedy shows 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) 21:33, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused Frietjes (talk) 15:32, 25 October 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:2011 National Challenge Cup Group A 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. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:47, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

no longer needed after I merged them with the article Frietjes (talk) 14:37, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Frietjes, I hope you're doing good. I wanted to know why are these nominated for deletion and since you've merged them with the article, I hope it doesn't effect the respective article. Waiting for your reply. Have a Good Day. AkephalostheHeadless (talk) 14:48, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
AkephalostheHeadless, no impact to the article, there is just no need to keep these in a separate template when the tables can be put in the article directly. Frietjes (talk) 14:51, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Frietjes Thanks and appreciated. AkephalostheHeadless (talk) 15:10, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
AkephalostheHeadless, if you have time, it would be great if you could help expand 2013 National Football Challenge Cup. thank you! Frietjes (talk) 15:23, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Frietjes from tomorrow I'll be working on 2013 National Football Challenge Cup, I have a little of information gathered from the 2012 to 2015 edition. It'll be great to work alongside you, I needed someone to work alongside me because I spend 9 hours in job so I don't have much time, so it takes me a lot of time for me update and article. Working with you will help me a lot. Thanks for the idea. AkephalostheHeadless (talk) 15:29, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hey! I have created the article for 2014 edition of NFCC, I hope you can have a look at it, sorry I wasn't able to find much information about the half completed 2013 edition. I'll update that as soon as I get the information and results. Have a good day or night cause I don't know which country you reside in.AkephalostheHeadless (talk) 10:27, 31 October 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:Una Vez Más Holdings 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. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:49, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The company folded in 2014, after the stations were sold to Northstar Media, and now owned by HC2 Holdings. Thus making this template unnecessary. Csworldwide1 (talk) 13:59, 25 October 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:Granite Broadcasting 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) Pkbwcgs (talk) 07:50, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Most stations have been sold to other groups, within the last few years. And with one station left in the group, there's no need for this template. Csworldwide1 (talk) 13:02, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete per nom Hhkohh (talk) 08:47, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • reconsider this is smacks of recentism.   All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 13:50, 30 October 2018 (UTC).[reply]
  • Delete Since this template navigates between current assets, there is no recentism in saying that as currently the company only owns one station this navbox doesn't have any value. Galobtter (pingó mió) 06:00, 2 November 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_October_25&oldid=866896628"