Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2015 November 8

< November 7	November 9 >

November 8

Template:Chris Amon Racing

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).

The result of the discussion was relist at Nov 16. Primefac (talk) 06:22, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Chris Amon Racing (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

a) lacks notability: b) not necessary for a team that only produced one car T v x1 22:19, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete; as stated above, there is little, if any, use for this template. Eagleash (talk) 11:36, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

They entered as a privateer team in the 1966 italian gp but dnq — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.106.226.6 (talk) 17:53, 10 November 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).

Template:VGgenre/sub

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).

The result of the discussion was relist at Nov 16. Primefac (talk) 06:23, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:VGgenre/sub (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

A template that is not used anywhere, and as far as I can see never has been, created by an editor who left Wikipedia over four years ago. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 17:54, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

delete, unused and not needed. Frietjes (talk) 18:02, 9 November 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).

Template:Disney dubbing languages

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).

The result of the discussion was delete. (non-admin closure) Primefac (talk) 05:35, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Disney dubbing languages (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template is of dubious utility. Though I would personally expect that Disney films have probably been dubbed in every major language on the planet, which sort of makes this template useless, it's not clear to me how we know that Bedknobs and Broomsticks was dubbed in Galician. This is the sort of thing that would need to be adequately sourced in articles first, yet film and TV manuals of style do not endorse the inclusion of this content. WP:TVINTL specifically instructs TV editors to only include broadcast info for English-seaking nations only. This effectively means that we are allowing a template to make assertions that would otherwise go unsourced. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:09, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

strong delete, navigation overload. we don't need this at the bottom of French language. imagine what we would have at the foot of the language articles if we did this for every movie production studio. Frietjes (talk) 18:05, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete per nominator and Frietjes' rationales above. If ever there were a perfect example of Not Everything Needs A Navbox per WP:NENAN, this is it. Cluttering the bottoms of article pages for languages with this trivia is just plain goofy. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 04:57, 10 November 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).

Smart conversion templates

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).

The result of the discussion was relist at Nov 16. Primefac (talk) 06:23, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Uncomma (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Uncommanum (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

The so-called "smart conversion templates" are completely unused. Their purpose is to remove commas but this can be done with Module:String instead (and much more efficiently). Delete these redundant unused templates along with Category:Smart conversion templates. Jimp 12:14, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

delete, unused and not needed. Frietjes (talk) 15:19, 9 November 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).

Template:Gundisp

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).

The result of the discussion was delete. (non-admin closure) Primefac (talk) 05:24, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

Created five years ago, this template is still unused. This is good evidence of its uselessness. Delete useless templates. Jimp 11:44, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Unused, and there is no conceivable good way it could be used. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 19:52, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
delete, unused and not needed. Frietjes (talk) 18:05, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not used. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 20:20, 9 November 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).

Template:Cvt

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).

The result of the discussion was relist at Nov 16. Primefac (talk) 06:24, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

This is an unused fork of {{convert}} which would fall under WP:T3 but I'm listing it here because the T3 tag from a year ago was removed. Jimp 11:37, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment irrelevant to the discussion itself, but I have removed the lvl-4 header these two templates were listed under because they are being treated as separate nominations. Primefac (talk) 18:17, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unnecessary fork. Jackmcbarn (talk) 20:42, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
delete or redirect, although calling it a fork isn't really accurate. it's a frontend. Frietjes (talk) 15:21, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep by author. I created {{cvt}} five years ago to simplify the coding of abbreviated conversions in thousands of pages, as making typical conversions twice as short in perhaps 70%-80% of conversions, such as using {{cvt|4|km}} rather than the verbose "{{convert|4|km |abbr=on}}". In reality, {cvt} should be in use more than 2x the number of {convert} template calls, but some people have been systematically removing the use of {cvt} to thwart its use and frustrate the users who want conversions to be less-wordy in pages. Over the past 5 years, {cvt} has been used hundreds of times and should be used in more than one million articles. -Wikid77 (talk) 18:24, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment this isn't a fork, it's a wrapper -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 10:00, 11 November 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).

Template:Convert/E

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).

The result of the discussion was relist at Nov 16. Primefac (talk) 06:24, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Convert/E (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This was created before {{convert}} could handle E-notation as input (without outputting E-notation). {{Convert}} has since been updated so that this is no long a problem thus making {{convert/E}} redundant. It's also unused (except in about half a dozen places like archives and test pages). It probably falls under WP:T3 but I'm listing it here just in case. Jimp 10:41, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete unnecessary fork. Jackmcbarn (talk) 20:42, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
delete or redirect, unused and not needed. Frietjes (talk) 18:06, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep by author. The Template:Convert/E is a wp:wrapper template (not a fork) used with Template:Convert/old, formerly with Template:Convert, to handle units not supported by the Lua {Convert}. For example: {{Convert/E|9E17|USqt|UStsp}} shows "9 × 10¹⁷ US quarts (4.2 × 10⁹ US teaspoons)" while Lua {Convert} could not yet handle that conversion: 9×10¹⁷ US quarts (^{[convert: unknown unit]}). -Wikid77 (talk) 20:49, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- If these units are worth having they can be added to {{convert}}. Jimp 01:13, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep used with OLDconvert, so should be kept. I suggest that @Wikid77: copy over {{convert/old}} to Wikia Templates [1]. Indeed, all the old ParserFunction general utility templates should be undeleted and transferred before being hidden again on Wikipedia. It's a great loss to the MediaWiki user community that Wikipedia has deleted all the old templates, since they can be used without LUA. -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 10:03, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by "used with"? {{Convert/old}} doesn't use {{convert/E}} and {{convert/E}} wasn't using {{convert/old}} until yesterday. What's more, {{convert/old}} isn't even in use anyway. Why are we keeping this stuff? Jimp 11:01, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Why are we deleting this stuff so soon, when there are still problems with the Lua script version of Template:Convert? Meanwhile, using Template:Convert/old supports unit-codes not provided by the Lua version and helps spot errors, such as Lua "{{convert|1|m2|cm2 in2}}" giving "1 square metre (10,000 cm²; 1,600 in²)" while {convert/old} shows the correct "

This userpage has been blanked. If this is your userpage, you can retrieve the contents of this page in the page history. Alternatively, if you would like it deleted, simply replace the content of this page with {{db-u1}}.

". Years ago, we decided the square-inch symbol would show "sq in" and never "in²" as in the Lua version during 2015. {Convert/old} still works correctly, and quickly provides unit-codes not supported by the Lua version, although people have been removing many instances of {convert/old} to pretend it is not needed. -Wikid77 (talk) 16:30, 12 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This discussion isn't about deleting {{convert/old}}, it's about {{convert/E}}. Jimp 02:01, 13 November 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).

Template:Call of Juarez chronology

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).

The result of the discussion was delete. (non-admin closure) Primefac (talk) 05:16, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Call of Juarez chronology (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

As per this decision, contains unsourced in-game trivia. Bertaut (talk) 01:06, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note, the only reason not to delete this template is because the series takes place in American history, with the infobox indicating in which years which games take place. The simple setting per game and how this changed over time is more notable than that of pure fantasy series such as Silent Hill or Dead Space. That being said, I have no strong opinion one way or the other, as the infobox isn't particularly important and can easily be explained in prose in more detail. ~Mable (chat) 07:59, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. From a previous discussion, the idea came that chronological templates can be useful if it isn't clear how the games are chronologically set (so there are still a couple of video game chronology templates). Back to Call of Juarez, from what I gather from Call_of_Juarez#Prequel_and_sequels is that the series does not have a strong chronological continuity. Bound in Blood is a prequel, featuring characters from the first game, Gunslinger isn't related at all, The Cartel takes place in the modern period and has characters with the same last name. With four entries, two of which are barely connected, I'd say the template is not useful. --Soetermans. T / C 11:14, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
delete per precedent. Frietjes (talk) 18:06, 9 November 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).