Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019 February 17

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< February 16 February 18 >

February 17

[edit]

Template:Nutsection

[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 delete. (non-admin closure) Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 00:06, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Redundant to {{nutshell}}. As for the “This section” display, it can easily be replicated with the “title” parameter of that template. Only transcluded on 3 pages. Delete/redirect and replace remaining uses with {{Nutshell|(text)|title=This section}} PorkchopGMX (talk with me - what i've done) 23:09, 17 February 2019 (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 aircraft

[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 2019 February 27. (non-admin closure) Hhkohh (talk) 12:37, 27 February 2019 (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:Permian–Triassic extinction event graphical timeline

[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 delete. (non-admin closure) Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 00:05, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

One transclusion. Substitute and delete. Steel1943 (talk) 23:16, 10 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 21:25, 17 February 2019 (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:List of cult 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).

The result of the discussion was relisted on 2019 February 24. (non-admin closure) DannyS712 (talk) 21:04, 24 February 2019 (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:Navbox subgroup

[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 delete. (non-admin closure) Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 19:37, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Replace with {{Navbox}} - this template was deprecated over 2 years ago in favor of {{Navbox|subgroup}} since it was less efficient, but still has too many pages still using it. Gonnym (talk) 17:49, 17 February 2019 (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:The Television Drama Academy Award Best Supporting Actor Award

[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 delete. (non-admin closure) Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 19:36, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

award without article The Banner talk 14:59, 17 February 2019 (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:The Television Drama Academy Award Best Actress Award

[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 delete. (non-admin closure) Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 19:36, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

award without article The Banner talk 14:59, 17 February 2019 (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:The Television Drama Academy Award Best Actor Award

[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 delete. (non-admin closure) Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 19:36, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

award without article The Banner talk 14:58, 17 February 2019 (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:East Central Minnesota

[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 delete. (non-admin closure) Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 19:36, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Navobox for a very loosely associated group of pages. Article on topic was recently deleted per AFD here[1]. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 14:17, 17 February 2019 (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:Element color legend/metal–nonmetal range

[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 delete. (non-admin closure) Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 19:35, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - The "Element color legend" template series has been deprecated for over 5 years in favor of {{Periodic table legend}}. They are all marked as deprecated and unused. Gonnym (talk) 12:00, 17 February 2019 (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:Being Human summary

[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 delete. (non-admin closure) Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 19:34, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Subst and delete - This template is always created in the "List of episode" article and then transcluded to the main TV series article. In this case, it should be placed in List of Being Human episodes and transcluded to Being Human (UK TV series). There is no reason for this to be different. Gonnym (talk) 10:58, 17 February 2019 (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:TOC-Xiaolin Showdown

[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 delete. (non-admin closure) Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 20:25, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - unused template that I can't even tell if it was ever used in mainspace. Gonnym (talk) 10:54, 17 February 2019 (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:Red vs. Blue characters

[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 delete. (non-admin closure) Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 19:34, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Subst and delete - this template is used only in Red vs. Blue and uses a standard table which a lot of other television shows use. No need for a template, when this code is always placed in the article itself. Gonnym (talk) 10:52, 17 February 2019 (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:Jodi Number One

[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 delete. (non-admin closure) Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 19:34, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Place information in relevant places and delete - The template is only used in one article, the "judges" and "presenters" section can be placed in the {{Infobox television}} template (which is setup for that) while the winners should be written in prose in the lead. No need for a template for that. Gonnym (talk) 10:50, 17 February 2019 (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:HarveyBirdmanEP

[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 delete. (non-admin closure) Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 19:34, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Replace with {{Episode list}} and delete - This episode template creates a non-standard non-accessibility compliant episode "row". Uses of this template should be converted to the standard {{Episode list}} template. Gonnym (talk) 10:46, 17 February 2019 (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 Town AT

[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 delete. — JJMC89 (T·C) 00:55, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

So far as I can tell, this wrapper only exists to facilitate the use of a large number of non-English parameters. I can't see any reason that every one of these transclusions cannot simply use a direct implementation of {{Infobox settlement}}. (WP:INFOCOL)

I also think it is worth noting that of the 2,411 transclusions, 2,328 of them contain unknown parameters. To be clear, the unknown parameters issue is NOT a reason alone for deleting the template! Not saying that it is, but I think it might be indicative of the larger issue. Use the standard template and you won't have so many unknown parameters. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 06:59, 17 February 2019 (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).

Module:String

[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 merge to Module:String. Although Module:String is fully-protected. Feel free to ask an admin to reduce protection or just use {{edit protected}} template to let admins assist with the module. Since Module:String is being merged with more modules, so it is necessary to use sandboxes for many tests before actually merging not merge with Module:String2 and no consensus to merge others I missed to read Module:String2 was created per WT:Lua outcome while closing. Although I did not count !votes while closing. Note that Module:String is currently under Cascading protection. So this module can only be edited by admins and override any other common protection. Hope RexxS becomes an admin. (non-admin closure) Hhkohh (talk) 12:37, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Module:StringFunc and Module:String2 with Module:String.
No need for three separate lua modules containing string functions. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 02:08, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • As long as all current uses continue to work and proper documentation is added, I don't think this is an issue. A working sandbox with testcases should be created before any change happens. --Gonnym (talk) 12:57, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support - with caveat that the module protection is reduced to Template-protected (OR is it possible that a new Module-protected level can be created?) so previous creators can still edit and maintain their code. In RexxS's specific module, the last addition was specifically something that I asked for at Wikipedia talk:Lua, so without him being able to edit the module, I'd either not have that piece of code, or it would be in a new module, which brings us here again. --Gonnym (talk) 07:15, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Seems like a very sensible suggestion. The only reason I can't support with the current wording is that the three modules have different maintainers and different levels of protection:
    Module:String is fully-protected and is maintained by two or three admins;
    Module:String2 is template-protected and is maintained by me;
    Module:StringFunc is unprotected and has been maintained by Falconjh.
    If String2 and StringFunc are merged into the fully-protected module String, none of the template-editors will be able to maintain them, unless the protection level of the merged module is altered. --RexxS (talk) 13:17, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    The fact that none of the modules has been edited in two months suggests they don't need much maintenance. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 15:04, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    That's true: they don't need much maintenance. But when they do, it's not a good idea to prevent the editors who know them best from editing them. I assume that whoever performs the merger will clean up all of the #invokes that will break? --RexxS (talk) 16:20, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support makes it easier to find the functions you need (and to maybe add new ones). – BrandonXLF (t@lk) 20:49, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support no concerns with the nomination. Kraose (talk) 13:59, 25 February 2019 (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).

Module:Bots

[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 delete. — JJMC89 (T·C) 01:01, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary Lua module, can be implemented in Wikitext using Module:String ({{#if:{{#invoke:String|match|{{{1}}}|MassMessage|ignore_errors=1}}|[[Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery]]}} {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 02:03, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

comment from creator Could we implement the potential alternative at {{Bots}} and see if it indeed works before deleting the module? --DannyS712 (talk) 07:05, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, at {{bots/sandbox}}, and it works. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 16:33, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Question How many #invoke:Bots will be broken and need fixing as a result of the deletion? --RexxS (talk) 16:24, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
one. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 16:33, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Move functionality to template and delete Should be easy to do (fwiw, search insource ignores all non-alphanumerics, so you can simplify your search). --RexxS (talk) 18:35, 17 February 2019 (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 Partido Argentina

[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 delete. — JJMC89 (T·C) 00:57, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unneeded wrapper. Just use the standard {{Infobox settlement}}. The precedent has long been established (for example: Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2011_July_14#Template:Infobox_Argentinian_Department). Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 00:55, 17 February 2019 (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:September 2008 image loss

[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 delete. (non-admin closure) Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 19:33, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template used for a short period in 2008 and is unused. Should be deleted, as there is no reason to keep it for historical reasons (there isn't even a page on Wikipedia dedicated to this event, which shows how notable it was). Gonnym (talk) 00:43, 17 February 2019 (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).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2019_February_17&oldid=888078184"