Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2017 September 9

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

September 9

[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).

The result of the discussion was relisted on 2017 September 17. Primefac (talk) 02:58, 17 September 2017 (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).
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 no consensus. The opposition largely did not state any policy reasons for keeping the two templates separate, with many of the votes simply stating that "some of the parameters might not be used" post-merge (emphasis added). However, the sheer weight of the opposition is worth taking into account, hence the given result. NPASR provided a sandbox version of the merger and testcases are created first. Primefac (talk) 03:05, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Infobox pageant titleholder with Template:Infobox model.
per WP:INFOCOL and MOS:IB -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 21:09, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: As a comment on the previous !votes, merging of a template (and thus the addition of some new parameters) does not mean those parameters must be used. Clearly if a "pageant titleholder" parameter makes no sense for a "model" (or vice versa), it would not be used on those pages, but that in and of itself is not a reason to prevent a merger from happening.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 14:09, 9 September 2017 (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).
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 keep. NPASR if there are other non-wikilink issues. Primefac (talk) 01:54, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Navbox with just 1 entry. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 23:20, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 14:06, 9 September 2017 (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).