Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2022 March 20

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

March 20 edit

Template:Weather box/colgreen 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. ✗plicit 12:36, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Was used in one article and currently used in one sandbox. I've replaced the article usage with Template:Weather box/colp as the /doc says this is the standard color style. Both templates together have 2 transclusions so having alternative styles for this is a complete overkill. The sandbox version should also be replaced and this deleted. Gonnym (talk) 12:26, 20 March 2022 (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:Weather box/cols 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. ✗plicit 12:36, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused other than in the docs. Gonnym (talk) 12:26, 20 March 2022 (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:Weather box/colpastel 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. ✗plicit 12:37, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Was used in 1 template and 1 article which I've replaced with Template:Weather box/colt as the /doc says this is the standard color style. No reason to have an alternative style that is barely used. Gonnym (talk) 12:33, 20 March 2022 (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:Weather box/cold 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. ✗plicit 12:37, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused other than in docs and 1 archived talk page. Gonnym (talk) 12:34, 20 March 2022 (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:Weather box/colh 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. ✗plicit 12:37, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused weather box sub template. Gonnym (talk) 12:35, 20 March 2022 (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:Weather box/FtoC 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. ✗plicit 12:37, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused weather box sub template. Gonnym (talk) 12:35, 20 March 2022 (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:Weather box/CtoF 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. ✗plicit 12:37, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused weather box sub template. Gonnym (talk) 12:35, 20 March 2022 (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:Weather box/inchtometric 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. ✗plicit 12:38, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused weather box sub template. Gonnym (talk) 12:38, 20 March 2022 (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:Weather box/line 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. ✗plicit 12:42, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Used in 2 user sandboxes and 1 talk page from ~2008. Subst there and delete as this is no longer used with this its parent template. Gonnym (talk) 12:40, 20 March 2022 (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:Weather box/metrictoinch 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. ✗plicit 12:42, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused weather box sub template. Gonnym (talk) 12:41, 20 March 2022 (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:Weather box/oneline 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. ✗plicit 12:44, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Used in only 1 sandbox from 2009. Subst there and delete. Gonnym (talk) 12:44, 20 March 2022 (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:Weather box/oneline/date 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. ✗plicit 12:45, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Used in only 1 old talk page. Subst there and delete. Gonnym (talk) 12:45, 20 March 2022 (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:Weather box/precise 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. ✗plicit 12:47, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Was used in a single article where I subst it. No longer has any usages. Gonnym (talk) 12:47, 20 March 2022 (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:Pumas Morelos squad 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. ✗plicit 14:07, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

no need for a current squad template as team is defunct Joeykai (talk) 13:02, 20 March 2022 (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:Chiapas F.C. squad 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. ✗plicit 14:08, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

no need for a current squad template as team is defunct Joeykai (talk) 13:02, 20 March 2022 (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:Formerly 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/keep. Delete "formerly" due to the ambiguous name and keep "thread retitled" (nothing to merge). Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 18:40, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Formerly with Template:Thread retitled.
All the 11 transclusions of Formerly are a misuse of the template when it was supposed to be used for "former title of a thread". — DaxServer (t · m · c) 16:27, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment it seems like {{formerly}} should be deleted, to avoid confusion, and all proper uses replaced with the other template -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 02:10, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Formerly seems quite useless and heavily misused, where it should be replaced with plain text since an anchor isn't what is wanted in the other cases. I don't see anything to merge here so deletion seems like the term to use and I don't see a need for a potentially confusing redirect. --Trialpears (talk) 14:47, 25 March 2022 (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:Header simulation 2 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 as a duplicate of Template:Fake heading Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 18:31, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This set of templates goes completely against the MoS. If a header should be used then the it should use the proper syntax. These templates also do not work with new software features like the subscribe option. Usages should be replaced with the relevant header syntax and the templates deleted. Gonnym (talk) 20:07, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment These seem to be used for mocking up what a revision to an article should look like, or what an extraction from the article looked like. Those should not use headers, since they do not represent real sections. Such as at Talk:The Hague Institute for Global Justice, you wouldn't want to use actual headers there. Also at Talk:Bergen County Executive, where it is being used to mock up suggested changes to the subject page, and not a representation of addition sections on the talk page. Similarly at Talk:Patient_advocacy, where it is used to illustrate what was excised, and not separate sections of the talk page, as would occur if actual header code was used. And Talk:Fred Malek, where it is used to illustrate what content is being discussed -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 02:29, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    All 3 examples you've shown are horrible editorial decisions that make it harder to follow the discussion. Unsparingly that two of them are also collapsed. If someone wants to talk about a specific section, they should just do that. There is no need to mimic the article. The first example of the edit request was just horrible all around. Gonnym (talk) 08:34, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    If one were to rewrite a portion of an article consisting of multiple sections, and show an example of the change on the talk page for discussion, they still cannot use header coding, as that would not be talk page sections. Explaining changes to articles on the talk page is one of the reasons for article talk pages, so, mocking up what the article should look like for discussion, should be something that one can do there. Per Useddenim, these templates can be replaced with {{Fake heading}} -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 05:28, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment yes, it is being abused at Portal:Alps and Portal:Alps/Mountains of the Alps and Talk:Secondary school and Template:NSG-NRW. And yes, these particular uses should be replaced with plain regular header code. -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 02:29, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: How does this template's usage differ from {{Fake heading}}? Useddenim (talk) 12:47, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Replace with Template:Fake heading Atavoidturk (talk) 14:17, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Replace with {{Fake heading}} There are significant accessibility concerns here and I'm uncertain how I would !vote in a discussion about {{Fake heading}}, but I feel it's undisputable that we shouldn't have 5 dubious templates when one would suffice. --Trialpears (talk) 14:55, 25 March 2022 (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:Invisible hr 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) 18:32, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and also seems pretty pointless. The only reason to use a horizontal rule is for its visual element. If a line break is wanted, then there are other, semantically correct ways to produce it. Gonnym (talk) 20:10, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete Frietjes (talk) 19:44, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 18:58, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete It still affects float behaviour which could be a use case, but given the 0 transclusions I think deletion is fine. --Trialpears (talk) 14:59, 25 March 2022 (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/2022_March_20&oldid=1079613881"