Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 June 8

< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion | Log
< June 7 June 9 >

June 8

edit

Template:Aftermath of the Cuban Revolution

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; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:08, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. The articles in the category of the same name that relate between Cuba and the United States, which a majority of them do, can be better used on Template:Cuba–United States relations. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:40, 8 June 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).

2020 and 2021 Film award ceremonies

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) 01:02, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

All the award ceremonies listed in the templates have their own navigational boxes. There shouldn't be navboxes for listing film ceremonies held each year. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:28, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep The individual navboxes are for ceremonies and categories belonging to one award, hence irrelevant, and listing all the ceremonies in one year is a fantastic way to keep track when some award ceremonies are numbered, some listed by year held, and some listed by the year of films being awarded (i.e. previous year) - the inconsistency in the industry makes this really useful. Kingsif (talk) 21:35, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Irrelevant? They are not irrelevant. There is no inconsistency on how the awards are listed by the way they honor the previous year, it's done by only a few of them, not the majority. If you search for say 2020 Golden Globes, you'll be linked to the ceremony held in 2020. And disambiguation pages such as 2020 Academy Awards layout which Oscars ceremony you're looking for, the one held in 2020 honoring 2019, or the one held in 2021 honoring 2020. While you have a noble idea, it doesn't work because people mainly search for the award show through the respective award navboxes or by simply using the search bar. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 00:45, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Of course they're irrelevant, you're trying to compare a navbox that lists years of ceremonies for a single award - i.e. organized by award, not year, so you can click through all the years of Oscars but not find other ceremonies for a given year to quickly be linked to and see what different groups awarded from the same selection of films. Not everyone knows what they're searching for, and going through searches and then disambig links for each of the ceremonies they may or may not know exist is a lot more clicks than a navbox. Kingsif (talk) 23:21, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Feel free to open discussion on improving bias. Ceremonies without articles have been removed, which will keep it trim, but does retain that bias (more US ceremonies have articles than not). I don't see a massive issue with that, though - the navbox doesn't have to aim to be more neutral than WP, the aim of navboxes is to link to existing articles. If I'm reading the Oscars page and want to see if the same films got awards at other ceremonies, that's all we need. Kingsif (talk) 23:21, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
--Birdienest81 (talk) 20:04, 18 June 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).
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 merge to Template:Constlk. The name can be changed in the usual manner (through bold moves, technical requests, or the requested moves process). (non-admin closure) ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 23:55, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Constituency link with Template:Constlk.
Effectively the same template. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 19:23, 8 June 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:Indefinite article

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 redirect to Template:A or an. This can just redirect to {{a or an}} without any negative consequences. I don't think that needs a TfD discussion as the usage etc will remain identical, it's just a straightforward improvement to Indefinite article. (non-admin closure) User:GKFXtalk 20:45, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Redundant to Template:A or an but much less capable of dealing with words like European. (a European vs a European). User:GKFXtalk 17:32, 8 June 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:Uw-paid4

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 relisted on 2021 June 19. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:03, 19 June 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:Uw-accessdate2

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 relisted on 2021 June 19. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:04, 19 June 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).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2021_June_8&oldid=1029282014"