Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2018 April 12
April 12
[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 2018 April 20. Primefac (talk) 16:13, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
- Template:Qhm (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- 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 merge to Template:ScreenActorsGuildAward CastMotionPicture. Primefac (talk) 13:15, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
- Template:ScreenActorsGuildAward CastMotionPicture (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:ScreenActorsGuildAward CastMotionPicture 1995–2000 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:ScreenActorsGuildAward CastMotionPicture 2001–2010 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:ScreenActorsGuildAward CastMotionPicture 2011–2020 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Propose merging Template:ScreenActorsGuildAward CastMotionPicture 1995–2000 with Template:ScreenActorsGuildAward CastMotionPicture.
Naboxes with ensemble casts like this do not perform a useful navigational function. I don't really think that anyone would want to navigate between the individuals in the navbox in this manner. This kind of information belongs in an article, not a navbox. Per discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2018 March 16#Template:Satellite Award for Best Cast – Motion Picture, there seems to be some consensus for including the films, but not the individuals. Therefore, I propose the navboxes are merged and the individuals removed. --woodensuperman 12:54, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
- @Philafrenzy, MarnetteD, Randy Kryn, TonyTheTiger, and Primefac: Pinging all contributors to the previous discussion. --woodensuperman 13:45, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
- Merge just the films. The film articles would be a quick one-stop link to the casts. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:57, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
- Merge the templates and remove the actors per both the recent TFD regarding the Satellite awards and the consensus here Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2013 September 19#Category:Outstanding Performance by an Ensemble in a Drama Series Screen Actors Guild Award winners. MarnetteD|Talk 14:45, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
- Weak Keep as is On the one hand, I like to use the links to the actors in the articles. On the other hand, this is not much different from listing actors in templates for individual films. I would prefer to WP:PRESERVE the content in the templates, but can see the arguments on the other side. I think for the Primetime Emmys, The Golden Globes and the SAG award Cast templates, the information is more notable/important than for the subject of the prior discussion and I think it might be worth keeping in those cases.TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:11, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 03:04, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
- Keep SAG Ensemble is a major win for an actor/actress. Satellite's ensemble award is minor and can't compare.--charge2charge (talk) 05:46, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 13:58, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
- merge, no need to split the templates by decade. Frietjes (talk) 20:17, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
- 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 relisted on 2018 April 20. Primefac (talk) 12:14, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
- Template:Infobox_Muslim_leader (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Infobox_religious_biography (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- 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. Primefac (talk) 12:13, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
- Template:Vatican City topics (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Holy See (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Propose merging Template:Vatican City topics with Template:Holy See.
As an evaluation. Arguments pro and con would be welcome. The idea would be that Vatican City and its details would be be part of the Holy See template as subsection of the whole, since the scopes indeed much coincide, and indeed Vatican City is ultimately subject to the Holy See. Chicbyaccident (talk) 14:36, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
- Strong Oppose, two different topics with different entries. This was done once in a bold move and was reverted. Being "subject" to the Holy See doesn't mean Vatican City, in terms of Wikipedia articles and links, has lost its status as a separate and independent state. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:52, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 13:49, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
- 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 Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:05, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
- Template:PulitzerPrize Music Runners-up 1951–1960 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
unused; not aware of any other "runner-ups" award templates in this category Frietjes (talk) 12:40, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
- 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 Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:05, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
Unused, no parent article found that it could link to. Ajf773 (talk) 09:35, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
- Keep. Now linked. Useddenim (talk) 22:27, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
- Usedemin has improperly linked this template to two articles, Durham Region Transit and Whitby Transit by substituting the template link to that of an article title that doesn't exist. The later of those two linked articles doesn't appear notable either. Ajf773 (talk) 08:29, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
- @Ajf773: please explain what is “improper” about the link. Useddenim (talk) 10:15, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
- Templates are meant to be added to article space, not linked from other articles. Ajf773 (talk) 10:24, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
- delete, not transcluded. Frietjes (talk) 11:59, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
- Delete, no transclusions. Doesn't appear to be notable. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 18:43, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
- 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 relisted on 2018 April 20. Primefac (talk) 16:13, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
- Template:Infobox_Upanishad (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Infobox_religious_text (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- 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).