Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2011 March 17

< March 16	March 18 >

March 17

Template:Depression video

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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 00:02, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Depression video (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

We don't need a template for a single external link. Can be replaced by

{{external media
| video1 = [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dcAZRHnYIxc How to Identify and Treat Depression (multiple subtitles)]
}}

which I was going to do, but then Xlinkbot reverted my edits :( Which is probably a sign that we shouldn't have this template :) 134.253.26.6 (talk) 23:26, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

More importantly, this is unused on articlespace and is purely prescriptive, so it has no place on our encyclopedia in the first place. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 08:25, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. It was being used in Dysthymia, where the IP had attempted to remove it. I took the initiative to replace it as the IP suggested (and previously attempted). Frietjes (talk) 15:28, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I created it but, with more experience under my belt, now realise it fails to conform to MOS. --Anthonyhcole (talk) 13:34, 21 March 2011 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Hyphenated double-word name

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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 00:03, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Hyphenated double-word name (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This is explanatory overkill - in hatnotes we only need the barest of explanation so people know where the surname is, not a lengthy treatise on variations of Chinese names -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 23:15, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

IMO hatnotes shouldn't be discussing the formatting of someone's name anyway, and it's high time we got rid of the likes of {{Spanish name}} as well because they're not actually fulfilling the purpose of disambiguation that hatnotes are supposed to be there for. We certainly shouldn't be encouraging new variations of the same, which is what this appears to be. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 08:28, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This is far too confusing. If someone created a template that said Western-surnames-has-one-word, it would also have been deleted. You could have tagged every bio article with it. Benjwong (talk) 06:30, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Look at the hatnote mess it creates at Lee Cheuk-yan -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:40, 23 March 2011 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Double-word name

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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 00:03, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Double-word name (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

I'm not sure this is very helpful. For one thing it assumes meanings of "word" and "unit" which are not obvious. And it sort of clashes with {{chinese name}}, and implies we'd need both for HK Chinese names. And it's not really clear - is it saying that HK given names are sometimes stated without a hyphen? Do we really need that level of explanation in addition to Chinese names in general? -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:59, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - there is some discussion on the Template talk page. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 23:08, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This doesn't disambiguate pages from one another, which is the purpose of hatnote templates, and so is pointless. IMO we should be working to remove the likes of {{Chinese name}} for the same reason, rather than creating new and obscure forks of it. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 08:30, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - A template to explain names are two words or one word.... is questionable. What makes it even more confusing is if the person has a two word surname and two word first name. Then any template applies. Benjwong (talk) 06:33, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It creates a bit of hatnote mess at Lau Kong-wah -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:45, 23 March 2011 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Coord unknown

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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was keep, but modify to make it invisible to the reader. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 00:04, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Coord unknown (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This template is intended to indicate that an article is missing coordinates, and that it is not possible to resolve this problem. I would argue therefore that since it is only intended for use when the information which it states is missing simply does not exist, it is a permanent content disclaimer, and should be deleted per WP:NDA. G W… 08:48, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The template does not duplicate information at any of the five standard disclaimer pages, therefore WP:NDA does not apply. The presence of this template helps discourage bots and human editors from slapping {{Coord missing}} on the relevant articles. -Stepheng3 (talk) 00:07, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Rewrite this should be invisible to readers, so that only bots or people looking to add coord templates / coord missing template would see it. If it needs to be visible, it should be a talk page notice instead. The text of the article should explain why the coordinates are unknown. Possibly rename to something more descriptive... like {{coords not obtainable}} 65.95.13.139 (talk) 03:19, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- How about turning it into a talk banner, like {{needs infobox}}? That seems like a sensible solution to me. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 08:31, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - Whilst that is better than having a banner on the article itself, I still have an issue with posting a cleanup tag for an issue which is by definition impossible to resolve. --G W… 10:03, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - ...Ah, I somehow missed that in the nomination. In that case you're entirely correct: this is nothing more than a disclaimer, and has no place in a tag. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 19:11, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- The template wasn't intended as a disclaimer. I agree there's no need for it to be visible to casual users. —Stepheng3 (talk) 03:19, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per Stepheng3, and I agree that it should be made invisible. Bazonka (talk) 21:52, 23 March 2011 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Jumpf

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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 00:05, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Jumpf (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Used for attribution on a handful of files. I'm sure there must be a better way of doing the same thing than a completely nonstandard tag. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 08:11, 17 March 2011 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:KOS

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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 00:05, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:KOS (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

The problem with this template is that acronym KOS is listed neither at ISO 3166-1 alpha-3, nor at List of IOC country codes nor at List of FIFA country codes (which are all mentioned at {{MKD}}, {{CHN}}, and {{IRL}}) - so its legitimacy as a standard shorthand for Republic of Kosovo is questionable. Biblbroks (talk) 16:11, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all transclusions should be replaced by {{flag|Kosovo}}, which is the normal flag template wiki markup for regions that don't have standard country codes (and widely used even for countries that do have them). I'm happy to help with this replacement (via AWB) if the discussion ends with a delete consensus. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 18:55, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. This is not standard for the Republic of Kosovo. --WhiteWriter ^speaks 19:09, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. If {{flag|Kosovo}} does the same thing, no need to make up a country code for it. --Lasunncty (talk) 02:17, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The United Nations specified multiple times that Kosovo is not a country and cannot enter institutions other than the World Bank and IMF. The Security Council Resolution 1244 clearly states that Kosovo is an integral and indivisible part of Serbia. More than half of the world agrees with that notion and state that Kosovo is not a country nor will it be referred to as one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.108.100.197 (talk) 20:27, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This is utterly irrelevant. The only point is whether or not an "invented" three-letter country code should be the name of a template used to render Kosovo's flag, since the standard flag template system is sufficient, as it is for {{flag|Vojvodina}} Vojvodina, to name one of a thousand examples. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 15:54, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. If Kosovo wasn't disputed then you can bet your bottom dollar that KOS would be used as its 3-letter code. People wanting to use a Kosovo flag in articles may well guess that {{KOS}} is the template to use. By removing it, we are making things more difficult. I suspect that this nomination for deletion came about due to the nominator's Serb POV rather than matters of practicality. Bazonka (talk) 21:20, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I encouraged this nomination, and I have no Serb POV whatsoever (in fact, I find it repugnant). My concern is that we are crystal-balling that "KOS" will be the ISO 3166-1 alpha-3 code assigned for Kosovo, and we shouldn't be guessing. We were actually bitten by this before, when {{MNT}} was created for Montenegro, prior to {{MNE}} being the actual ISO code assignment. Another example is "SBH" for Saint Barthélemy, prior to "BLP" being assigned. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the standard {{flag|Kosovo}} wiki markup syntax. The discussion here should have nothing to do with Kosovo's international status; it should be exclusively about whether or not we want to set a precedent for inventing country codes for flag templates. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 21:53, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Andrewsc, I understand your point and totally agree that this discussion should not be about Kosovo's status. My comment about Serb nationalism was directed to Biblbroks with whom I have crossed swords before on matters of (perceived) Serb POV. My main point is that the probable risk of picking an inappropriate 3-letter code is miniscule. Bazonka (talk) 22:01, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment on content, not on the contributor. No matter on his possible POV, he is right. KOS is nonexistent as Republic of Kosovo code anywhere in the world, except in Wikipedia. Therefor, it should be replaced, as we should not bet on official standards and codes. :) If we dont know the (possible) code, we should not guess it. --WhiteWriter ^speaks 22:06, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) You may find it "miniscule", but I do a lot of maintenance work on the Flag template system, and I frequently see new editors trying to create a large batch of new templates in the style of {{USA}}, {{FRA}}, {{JPN}}, etc., but with invented acronyms for their "missing" territories/regions/etc. We have consensus to restrict the set of three-letter "shortcut" flag templates to just those regions that have assigned ISO/FIFA/IOC codes, and I do not wish to weaken that consensus by allowing "KOS" to remain. We should be steering editors to use readable wiki markup, so {{flag|Country}} should be preferred over these TLA style of flag templates anyway. For example, {{DZA}} isn't editor-friendly, but {{flag|Algeria}} is. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 22:10, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - the flag template works fine and we should not be creating codes that could be confused for real ISO codes (or other similar codes). --Khajidha (talk) 01:33, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep "KOS" is the simple three letter code for Kosovo. It isn't about legitimising Kosovo's independence ect. It is for practical reasons when editing articles when people want to add Kosovo's flag. IJA (talk) 07:34, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as Ian mentioned KOS is just the accronym for Kosovo; it's neutral term, replacing it with a new template will create another debate about RKS v Kim. I say leave it alone. I don't understand why someone would want to replace it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.29.68.213 (talk) 10:23, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"KOS" is not "the" acronym for Kosovo, it is made-up for Wikipedia use. Also, we're not suggesting that it will be replaced with a "new" template; {{flag|Kosovo}} has been around longer and is already used in more places. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 16:46, 24 March 2011 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.