Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019 October 20

< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion‎ | Log
< October 19 October 21 >

October 20 edit

Template:Newark Mayor and Council 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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 22:28, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Following on the lead of this one, this AFD discredited Newark from being a city that makes all of its city councilors notable. Both bluelinks go to the current mayor of Newark and a councillor who is an ex-mayor of Newark. ミラP 22:20, 20 October 2019 (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:Massachusetts Pirates 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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 22:29, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A navigational template that is not in use other than the team page itself. Per WP:BIDIRECTIONAL, the only places it could be used is the team page, the city (already linked via Template:Worcester, Massachusetts), the league and the arena (already both linked via Template:NAL). Team navigational templates are only useful if there are team subpages, and for low level teams such as this, it is unlikely that sub-topics on the team would independently meet WP:GNG. Template should be deleted as it is just more template creep. Yosemiter (talk) 16:01, 20 October 2019 (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:2016 Belarusian Premier League table 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) 20:48, 26 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

unused after being merged with the parent article (with attribution) per consensus at WT:FOOTY Frietjes (talk) 15:24, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 08:32, 21 October 2019 (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:Former WWE Championships 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 2019 November 3. Primefac (talk) 17:25, 3 November 2019 (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:World Championship Wrestling 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 Template:World Championship Wrestling. Reasonable request with no objections. (non-admin closure) --Trialpears (talk) 08:11, 29 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:World Championship Wrestling with Template:WCW Championships and Template:WCW programs.
Template:WCW Championships only has 5 lines which all could be subgrouped into a "Championship" grouping. Template:WCW programs only has 1 line item which could be combined and given its own line called "programming".

The combined template would only have 13 lines and would still be very easy to navigate. Galatz גאליץשיחה Talk 16:26, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Also this is the first time I tried doing a 3 way template merge and I am not sure I set it up right, since the header on the individual pages only lists one page. Can someone who has done this more double check for me? - Galatz גאליץשיחה Talk 16:36, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 13:58, 20 October 2019 (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:Linux containers 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 Administrative close. The nominator has been blocked as a sock puppet and since no one else has commented on the proposal I see it fit to close this discussion as Keep with no prejudice against nomination. (non-admin closure) --Trialpears (talk) 08:47, 29 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A navbox containing a poorly organized group of very loosely related links. The bulk of its links are red, which are forbidden in navboxes.

It is wholly replaceable by {{Virtualization software}}. All we have to do is to add "Apache Mesos" and "Container Linux" to the "Orchestration" category of the {{Virtualization software}}. flowing dreams (talk page) 13:46, 20 October 2019 (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:South Western Football League 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:30, 26 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

NAVBOX with just 2 links. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 14:21, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Template no delete. I added final members and I will add more season in the future Denebleo 14:49, 22 September 2019 (UTC)
  • Delete As noted on User talk:Denebleo and by the ongoing prod of a lot of these articles are probably non-notable. It is very unlikley that this template will get more articles and should be deleted. --Trialpears (talk) 09:05, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:31, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Its seasons are notable and perhaps will be finished eventually. Number 57 11:05, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Per WP:EXISTING we should have navboxes that navigate among exsisting articles, not redlinks. If 5 season articles are created I wouldn't have any problem with recreation since notability probably is established by then and there is a high liklyhood more will be created, but as it stands the navbox isn't useful. --Trialpears (talk) 08:41, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 13:28, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Not enough links....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 12:30, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Is there any reason why the teams in this template are not linked? They do exist... BLAIXX 15:57, 23 October 2019 (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:NJ Senate 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. There are two issues at play here. The first is the original concern that the information in this template does not need to be on every New Jersey-related article. The second concern is that text like this should not be held in the template space. The first issue precludes the second, as if there's a consensus to not have this text then the template is largely unnecessary. Recommend having a discussion somewhere relevant (New Jersey WikiProject, Village Pump, etc) to see if this information is necessary. If it is not needed, then this template can be deleted. If this information is decided to be necessary, then there is NPASR for this template to be deleted. Primefac (talk) 17:24, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Adds unnecessary bloat to municipal articles. People who want to know the names of New Jersey's senators can go to the New Jersey article. It does not need to be repeated on 500 other pages. Rusf10 (talk) 03:52, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep it takes up very little room on pages and on municipal pages is a piece of the section regarding Representation. I think that the Senators are arguably the most powerful representatives in this county, therefore they belong. JerseyThroughandThrough (talk) 17:54, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
So would you also favor adding "The president of the United States is Donald Trump" to every municipal article? After all, the president of the United States is considered the most powerful man in the world. Your argument is simply not supported by policy.--Rusf10 (talk) 21:55, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete This is impermissible storage of article text in a template, regardless of whether the nominator's argument is supported or not. * Pppery * it has begun... 20:31, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I think I made a valid argument. But good point, WP:TG says that templates should not be used to store article text.--Rusf10 (talk) 21:55, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The bloat claim in not substantiated by the percentage of space info takes up in articles; indeed a template ultimately uses less space. As mentioned, government representation is part of the story. Additionally, use of templates is extremely effective way to keep articles up-to-date since one edit as opposed to 100s allows for election election result changes to be added efficiently, thus maintaining the quality of Wikipedia.Djflem (talk) 09:05, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Consensus regarding the inclusion of this material has been in place for the past decade as reached at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject New Jersey/Hudson County Task Force#Use of templates for federal, state and county representation, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject New Jersey/Archive 4#Regarding municipality articles and here at TfD at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2011 February 19#Category:New Jersey government templates. It's not evident in any way that anything has changed since then. The clear consensus is that this is appropriate content for these articles and provides relevant information to readers in a small fraction of article content. Use of these templates allows the data to be added and updated across hundreds of articles,which is the exact purpose of templates. Alansohn (talk) 05:12, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I agree with the bloat claim since this wouldn't be relevant information for readers of these articles. If you are looking for this information there is an obvious place to find it. It doesn't matter that it's only a small percentage of the article, it is still irrelevant bloat. I fully agree with keepers that this is the best way to store this information if we were to include in most municipalities as we currently do, but ultimately that is irrelevant since the question isn't if we should substitute and delete, but if we should remove these templates from the articles. Taking a quick look at the linked discussions it seems to be a contentious discussion each time and I see no harm discussing this again as the general view on what should be included an d what shouldn't can change over time as shown in the recent portal discussions and more relevant to this discussion at the NJ Governor deletion discussion. Finally as pointed out previously this template is against the template namespace guidelines which discourage use of templates for article text. This consensus would be considered stronger than the consensus in the linked discussions as well. --Trialpears (talk) 08:40, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note The above cited WP:TG clearly states should not be normally used and that templates that are intended for long-term use and are likely to require changes should be transcluded for easy future updates. This is not a normal situation since election results require regular updates to keep Wikipedia up-to-date.Djflem (talk) 18:33, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:35, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to get thoughts on section transclusion, which could mitigate some of the concerns on both sides; for the "keeps" it allows for usage across multiple pages, and for the "opposes" it removes the text from the Template space.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 11:24, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, but make it look more like a template. This is a NJ resident speaking; while this is a useful template for the long-term, I have serious doubts that a single line of text shall suffice. Maybe put a blue box around it or something? 𝕎𝕚𝕜𝕚𝕎𝕒𝕣𝕣𝕚𝕠𝕣𝟡𝟡𝟙𝟡 (talk) 13:01, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - this piece of information belongs in the New Jersey article, not in every sub-article of the state. --Gonnym (talk) 10:44, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The main problem for me is not them being in template space. This is a fine use for template space since it is information used on many pages that need regular updating IF there is consensus that this material should be included in the articles at all. The main argument is that it adds unnecessary cruft that readers would be more well served by having them in the New Jersey article. This seems to me more as a content dispute then about templates as such. --Trialpears (talk) 11:20, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Agree with above: this does appear to be a content dispute and this discussion would be better dealt with on the talk page and not as TfD.Djflem (talk) 20:39, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with @Trialpears:, regardless of whether this is an appropriate use of a template (which it does not appear to be anyway), the main issue is that the articles are being bloated by unnecessary information. @Djflem: Where are you suggesting we have this discussion? I hope you're not suggesting that we need to have it on each article talk page (all 500 something of them). Most of the rest of "Category:New Jersey government templates" need to be deleted too. Each article on Wikipedia should be unique. Occasionally there will be some overlap, but repeating the same exact sentences in hundreds of articles is doing a disservice to our readers.--Rusf10 (talk) 01:42, 28 October 2019 (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/2019_October_20&oldid=924405328"