Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 February 22

February 22 edit

Template:Round corners edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. — The Earwig (talk) 00:20, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Insufficiently complex to require a template at this time. Izno (talk) 19:31, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Subst and delete - can't see why this requires a template. It's easy enough to add the relevant CSS, and thereby allow for customisations (e.g. radius) as needed. ƒirefly ( t · c ) 11:01, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • weak keep, used over 8000 times and much easier to type than the corresponding css, but I would support replacing this with something like {{box|shadow=y|radius=1em|text=...}} and/or banning the use of this in articles. Frietjes (talk) 16:52, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Its uses are almost exclusively outside article space already. Box, among one or two other templates, does indeed exist for the person who wants round corners. Of the 8000, 5000 are in talk spaces, and nearly the entirety of the remaining 3000 are on user pages. This template is similar in sense to others I've recently nominated that can't use the more proper mechanism, which is templatestyles. --Izno (talk) 18:34, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - This is an excellent support tool for use in the user namespaces. Lets you type in {{Round corners}} instead of the lengthy inline parameters border-radius:1em; box-shadow: 0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba(0,0,0,0.75);. That's quite a reduction in complexity, and a substantial convenience, especially for those who can't recall all that from memory (like me), or who do not have time to track down an example for copying and pasting. As this template greatly simplifies adding round corners, especially for new users, please keep. A bonus for having this in template form, is that if the code ever needs to be tweaked, you can do that for all 8400+ pages just by changing the template. Looking at the template's history, we can see that it has been tweaked many times over the years, making having this template well worth it.    — The Transhumanist   12:46, 26 February 2021 (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:Top Ten Indonesian Badminton Players - Men's singles edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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 is a slight bureaucratic irregularity with the three lower templates, but I'm going to WP:NOTBURO this. Izno (talk) 15:02, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Top Ten Indonesian Badminton Players - Men's singles with Template:Top Ten Indonesian Badminton Players.
Others template to be merged :

All the templates should be merged to Template:Top Ten Indonesian Badminton Players, since all the information already mentioned in that template. See also: Template:Top Ten Indonesian Badminton Players - Mixed doubles. Stvbastian (talk) 02:52, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 16:33, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all 5 per Nigej. Indeed, "templates that are rarely updated... are worse than useless" Tradediatalk 17:04, 22 February 2021 (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:Kyangin Township edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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) 20:01, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

List of red links with no reasonable chance of ever becoming an article. Bot created. The Banner talk 10:46, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. * Pppery * it has begun... 16:00, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all nominated Myanmar township templates. Most of the bluelinked "settlements" are unrelated topics with coincidentally similar names, and many more have been converted to redlinks over the years. Although created in good faith for understandable reasons, they have become a maintenance headache with little benefit to the reader. See also similar nominations on adjacent dates. Certes (talk) 11:41, 23 February 2021 (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).