Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2018 April 13

< April 12	April 14 >

April 13

Template:User WikiProject Amiga

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 Procedural close. Moved to Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/Template:User_WikiProject_Amiga (non-admin closure) Galobtter (pingó mió) 08:42, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User WikiProject Amiga (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Used only on about 6 userpages. The wikiproject is long defunct, so misleading. Legacypac (talk) 21:25, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Legacypac, Usersboxes are discussed at WP:MFD (see the directions at the top of WP:TFD). Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 18:40, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Awe yes forgot that. See Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:User WikiProject Amiga Legacypac (talk) 18:44, 14 April 2018 (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:Indian Idol Junior

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. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 22:38, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Indian Idol Junior (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Nothing to navigate --wooden superman 13:59, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

delete, not needed. Frietjes (talk) 15:33, 20 April 2018 (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:India's Next Top Model

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. (non-admin closure) — JJMC89 (T·C) 07:45, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:India's Next Top Model (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Nothing to navigate --wooden superman 13:58, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: added info. Mr. Smart LION 04:06, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
weak keep, connects several season articles. Frietjes (talk) 15:31, 20 April 2018 (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:Insular Areas TV

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 It appears the issues may have been corrected. Please feel free to renominate it if you still feel it should be deleted. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 23:03, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Insular Areas TV (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template is inaccurate; Palau, Marshall Islands, and FS Micronesia are all independent sovereign states and are not US territories, despite the respective Compacts of Free Association. That leaves us with the Northern Mariana Islands, which don't have enough bluelinked TV stations to justify a navbox. Lojbanist ^{remove cattle from stage} 23:14, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 02:08, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I believe US broadcast regulations apply to these three countries so grouping them together like we group a state's stations makes sense. The part about the Pacific Ocean was confusing too as not all of these places are in the Pacific. I've modified the template to correct the issue identified in the nom. Legacypac (talk) 18:52, 14 April 2018 (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:Infobox historic subdivision

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:Infobox former subdivision. (non-admin closure) — JJMC89 (T·C) 03:46, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox historic subdivision (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Infobox former subdivision (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Template:Infobox historic subdivision with Template:Infobox former subdivision.
They apparently serve the same purpose. Timmyshin (talk) 00:46, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support per WP:INFOCOL. Capankajsmilyo (talk) 03:52, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Should've been done years ago. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:14, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. I've used Template:Infobox former subdivision a bunch but never Template:Infobox historic subdivision; I'd prefer a merge that took more from the former, as it is (or at least was) broadly consistent with the related Template:Infobox former country, but it's a little while since I've done all that much editing in the Former countries space, so I'm open to persuasion on that point. — OwenBlacker (talk; please {{ping}} me in replies) 15:41, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I work with Template:Infobox former subdivision quite frequently in articles about the Second Polish Republic. There's a semantical difference between 'former' and 'historic' which is worthy of note. Former means the one which is different from the current one. It does not mean historic, but the one known previously. Meanwhile, historic can (and perhaps should) include also all other subdivisions going back in time. In case of merging please make sure that no parameters which signify that difference, would be lost or improperly substituted. I'm equally afraid of unnecessary template bloating. Poeticbent talk 22:17, 20 April 2018 (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:Infobox monument

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. As a note, there has been some mention of an alternate merger target, so while there is a consensus to keep these two templates separate, there is NPASR if there is another target that might be a more valid alternative (i.e. {{infobox artwork}}). Primefac (talk) 22:58, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox monument (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Infobox building (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Template:Infobox monument with Template:Infobox building.
per WP:INFOCOL. Capankajsmilyo (talk) 09:53, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:26, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
oppose, Four Corners Monument isn't a building. Frietjes (talk) 11:57, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Nobody said it was. It is, though, a built structure. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:51, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Is it even a monument. From what's written at Monument, it doesn't seem like one. Capankajsmilyo (talk) 04:03, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Checking a few of the transclusions, I would suggest replacing the uses with either {{Infobox artwork}} (for Civil Rights Memorial, Nelson's Column, Countess Pillar, Tian Tan Buddha, ...) or {{Infobox dam}} (for Offa's Dyke) or {{Infobox church}} (for Hagia Sophia). Some may be buildings, but most seem to be sculptures. So, simply deleting the "monument" template after replacing the uses seems more appropriate. Or, redirect it to {{Infobox artwork}}, since that appears to be the most predominant usage. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 18:39, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose because although buildings can be monuments not all monuments are buildings.--GlobalSecretary (talk) 22:26, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment PS. that this discussion has nothing to do with them being a building or not. If you read WP:INFOCOL, you can get a sense of what I'm talking about. Capankajsmilyo (talk) 03:59, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Do not merge with building, instead merge with artwork as per GlobalSecretary above.--Newbiepedian (talk · C · X! · L) 05:57, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - The needs of monuments and buildings are different. Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:00, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Also oppose merger with artwork. Just leave it alone. Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:01, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - Buildings are occupiable with so many detailed information to make it as a place for living thing, monument are mostly just a shaft. Chongkian (talk) 09:06, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - WP:INFOCOL is nothing but someone's opinion, aka, POV. If monuments are building because they are built structures, cars are built structures too. If monuments are works of art, so is -fundamentally- just about everything that results from human creativity, Barbie dolls included. WP:INFOCOL is being given way too much credit in this nomination; extremes are never a good thing. Infobox monument is missing the following parameters:

|memorializes = Abolition of Slavery, End of World War II, Epiphany, Liberation of Palestine (EXAMPLES)

|celebrations = Passover, Christmas, Fourth of July, Cinco de Mayo (EXAMPLES)

|significance = Black heritage, First Man in Space, The last Judgment (EXAMPLES)

|relatedto = Culture, History, Science (EXAMPLES)

Once a few missing parameters are added, it's easier to see how infobox monument is a distinct monster from buildings. Mercy11 (talk) 01:33, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Template:Infobox artwork, per arguments of GlobalSecretary, and Newbiepedian, while adding proposed parameters of Mercy11. Chicbyaccident (talk) 13:51, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - per much of what's above. WP:INFOCOL is an interesting essay but I'd stop there. Monuments and buildings are distinctly different, you can find good definitions in the Art & Architecture Thesaurus. In that hierarchy they could be paired under an infobox called "single built works (built environment)". Prburley (talk)
Oppose There is no improvement proposed. Alaney2k (talk) 19:35, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, not all buildings are monuments, and not all monuments are buildings. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 04:50, 22 April 2018 (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).