Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2015 July 28

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< July 27 July 29 >

July 28

[edit]

Template:Spamonly

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

The result of the discussion was Merge. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 08:47, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Spamonly with Template:Uw-soablock.
Both are indefinite block templates. Spamonly has a nearly identical initial text to {{Uw-soablock}}. They also have the same explanation. There is also a notalk parameter for block templates, Spamonly does not have the notalk parameter. Eyesnore 22:49, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • What would be gained by merging them? Template:Spamonly is rarely used, but if any administrator wishes to sue it instead of Template:Uw-soablock, why should he or she not be allowed to? Or, to put it another way, what harm does having both alternatives available do? Unless either the nominator or someone else can tell us what benefit would be achieved by merging, we should leave it as it is. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 20:36, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The category Category:Wikipedians who are indefinitely blocked for link-spamming would be gained as the block reason. Eyesnore 21:56, 30 July 2015 (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:Miss Ecuador Provinces

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

The result of the discussion was Delete (no objections; now has only four links). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 08:52, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The parent category, which was created by the sockuppet of a banned/blocked editor, was deleted and many of the entries are at AFD also. ...William 16:43, 28 July 2015 (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:N.E.C.

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

The result of the discussion was Keep. A useful aid to navigation, can be expanded, was not aware links had been broken due to name change. Fenix down (talk) 19:26, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Appears to link to just one other article. Not currently a useful aid to navigation. Fenix down (talk) 16:36, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    • I have fixed the broken links on the template. It now links to two articles, two subsections and two categories. Hopefully it is enough to keep the template. THe links had been broken due to all the name changing of categories pertaining to the club, but they are fixed now. I will see if I can write the article for the training grounds, since it is o common site on NEC TV, and also hosts good youth tournaments, this weekend. Thank you. (Subzzee (talk) 18:52, 28 July 2015 (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:Sheikh Noor Muhammad

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

The result of the discussion was Delete (no objections raised). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 08:54, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unused template that purports to provide a navbox for the family of a notable person, but that person has no article (it's only a redirect). WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 16:30, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete A review of the redirect shows that the original article about Sheikh Noor Muhammad was deleted 20 July 2015. The template was created on 27 June 2015; apparently, it was orphaned when the article was deleted. It serves no purpose now. The redirect now goes to his son's article where Sheikh Noor Muhammad is briefly mentioned, and his photograph appears. The original article and use of the template can be seen here. The tragedy in all this is that a fairly new user created the template (and it looks like he did a pretty good job of it), and he created or edited a lot of other content. His talk page is full of deletion notices, however, and he seems to have stopped editing on or about 1 July 2015. I cannot help but wonder if he wasn't feeling bitten.  Etamni | ✉  07:21, 30 July 2015 (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:Kurds infobox

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

The result of the discussion was Subst and delete. Any further changes can be discussed at Talk:Kurds. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:30, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This template is currently being used in only one article, after used a cut-down version in Kurdish population (which fixed the redundancy of the population figures in that article). I suggest merging it with Kurds. could history merge it with template:Kurds image array or move it to article space and redirect. for precedent, see World War II/Infobox and related discussion. Frietjes (talk) 15:58, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Subst and delete: This serves no purpose as a template, and it's causing problems (like duplicate citations, and WP:POVFORKing of population data). I spent several hours cleaning up both the article's and template's citations and figures.This appears to have been dumped into a template to keep the infobox shorter (some of the citations are excessively long, with highly detailed quotations), but the fix for that it is obviously to move the citations into the article body and only cite in the infobox with <ref name="Foo" />. Standard operating procedure per WP:INFOBOX: All data in the infobox should be somewhere in the main body of the article, too. (In this case, as most of it is population data, it's obvious where that goes.)  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  09:20, 3 August 2015 (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:Plays by D. C. Moore

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

The result of the discussion was Delete (no objections). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:02, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not enough links to provide useful navigation Rob Sinden (talk) 12:27, 28 July 2015 (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:Highest-grossing Bollywood films

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

The result of the discussion was delete. (nac) Alakzi (talk) 17:37, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Contents are contained at List of highest-grossing Indian films with actual sources. Here the information is unsourced and differs with the contents there. This template is not necessary to keep a running list of the top box office films (in particular when two current ones are moving) and given the massive amount of fighting over this stuff, the article is better than a overly simplistic table. Ricky81682 (talk) 11:26, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Have added two more similar templates of Tamil and Telugu films for same discussion on same rationale. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 11:32, 29 July 2015 (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:Discreet abbreviation

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

The result of the discussion was delete. (non-admin closure) Kraxler (talk) 12:11, 23 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fork of {{Abbr}}, with inline styling to hide the usual dotted underline, If there is consensus to use that style, it should be applied to the original template, in our core CSS. Otherwise, this template should be deleted.

[Given the nature of this template, I'll 'noinclude' the TfD notice, and place a note on {{Abbr}}'s talk page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:02, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • The idea is that there are some abbreviations that anybody would understand in context (like month abbreviations) that we don't need to identify visually, but which screen readers would still pronounce in their abbreviated form if it were for the lack of <abbr>...</abbr>. Alakzi (talk) 11:13, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. That said, I think we do need to do something about the in-yo'-face nature of the current style. Reduce the underlining's contrast to just within accessibility limits, so it's less prominent and annoying. That would inspire fewer people to make templates like this.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  09:24, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per all of the above. Alakzi (talk) 09:08, 6 August 2015 (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:Infobox computer peripheral

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

The result of the discussion was merge. Opabinia regalis (talk) 01:09, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Infobox computer peripheral with Template:Infobox computer hardware.
Largely overlapping; many parameters in common. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:30, 28 July 2015 (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:Round in circles

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

The result of the discussion was merge both templates, maintaining all features of both, the name "Recurring themes" seems to be more appropriate for the resulting template. (non-admin closure) Kraxler (talk) 12:21, 23 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Round in circles with Template:Recurring themes.
Largely similar; shared function. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:05, 28 July 2015 (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:FAQ group begin

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

The result of the discussion was keep. Now that the template has been rewritten per a commenter's suggestion and this has stood, and considering the number of keep votes, I judge the consensus is for the status quo. (non-admin closure) BethNaught (talk) 06:46, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Redundant to {{Collapse top}} (same goes for the equivalent 'end' templates). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:02, 28 July 2015 (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:Infobox concert tour

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

The result of the discussion was merge. Opabinia regalis (talk) 01:12, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Infobox concert tour with Template:Infobox concert.
Redundant, with the exception of |number_of_legs=, |budget= and the 4 extra misc parameters. Alakzi (talk) 09:26, 28 July 2015 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2015_July_28&oldid=1251197341"