Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2020 April 16

< April 15	April 17 >

April 16

Template:Dark Side of the Ring

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) 21:24, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Dark Side of the Ring (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Docummentary or TV series navigational boxes should not just contain links to articles of subjects simply covered by/depicted in it. If we did it that way articles like George Washington and Adolph Hitler would have hundreds of them stacked at the bottom. Navboxes like these should contain links to articles about episodes, not just treat people or events like episodes. ★Trekker (talk) 22:02, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Hmmm. I get your reasoning. This is the first template I've ever created. Since templates and categories aren't viewable on mobile, they seem kind of pointless anyway. I see you've single-handedly created thousands of categories and templates that no one will ever see. I will defer to your infinite wisdom on this subject. TheNewMinistry (talk) 00:55, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- @TheNewMinistry: Templates and categories are absolutely not pointless whatsoever, they exist primarily for navigation. And Wikipedia is not centred around mobiles. Mobile versions of websites are simply an inferior format to ones because they're smaller, thus not everything can be fit in them.★Trekker (talk) 12:25, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - Please don't undermine our entire category system as being never seen. It has incredible worth to our project. Categories and Templates are view able on mobile. Templates only don't appear on the mobile view (for a lot of reasons), but I am unaware of a mobile view that doesn't include categories. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:29, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Since it looks like none of the episodes are notable in their own right (only the subjects are), delete for now. Ideally, show navboxes link only the existing articles on episodes, but in this case they don't exist. The seasons' main claim to fame so far is just that they "[feature] notable figures such as Scott Hall, Tony Atlas [...] and more." I couldn't find any in-depth sourcing for them either. Even if this could gain population later, Wikipedia isn't a crystal ball and we can just restore it if there turns out to be a number of notable episodes (something which I do sadly doubt). –ToxiBoi! ^(contribs) 03:31, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, Bruiser Brody may be notable, but we don't go around writing navboxes for every single thing he's had involvement with. –ToxiBoi! ^(contribs) 03:37, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - This is not what navboxes are for. If this were for articles on the episodes, then it's fine, and a suitable navbox. Miss Elizabeth for instance has nothing to do with the docuseries, other than the series having an episode about her. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:29, 22 April 2020 (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:Christian denominations in the English-speaking world

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. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 16:23, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Christian denominations in the English-speaking world (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Noteworthy intersection of embedded templates? Doubtly. Seemingly not used neither in List of Christian denominations nor in English-speaking world. PPEMES (talk) 19:23, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - No reasoning is given by PPEMES for removing this useful and used navigation box. tahc ^chat 13:52, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per taho. Templates seem to do a fine job as is. --Tom (LT) (talk) 05:56, 20 April 2020 (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:Other uses2

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 2020 April 28. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 14:45, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Other_uses2 (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).

Template:Uw-bizlist

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) 21:28, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Uw-bizlist (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This template was originally created to refer those attempting to use Wikipedia to promote a business to Wikia's Yellowikis instead. When that website became defunct, the referral there was removed from the template. Now it's just inferior to the multilevel UW template series uw-advertX. Bsherr (talk) 15:05, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and then redirect? PPEMES (talk) 16:18, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I thought about that, but we try to avoid redirecting to any one multilevel template because we want users to specifically consider which level is appropriate. --Bsherr (talk) 16:27, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak redirect to {{Uw-advert3}} or deprecate and dab to the "advert" or "spam", per MarginalCost user warning series. ~~The template in question is completely unused (outside of the navbox and docs)~~. Also, I think directing a user to "alternative outlets" (which, mind you, the link is broken and the page outdated) on what has to be their third warning is a little late. –ToxiBoi! ^(contribs) 23:53, 16 April 2020; edited 04:27, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- It may appear unused, but that's because user warning templates are commonly subst'd. The actual text appears on about 3,000 user talk pages. MarginalCost (talk) 22:05, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - @MarginalCost: Thanks for pointing that out (that's a big thing I didn't catch for some reason), but after reviewing the page you sent (and sorting by editing date) I still think my rationale stands, considering most of these subsitutions were added last year. It would also appear that usage of this template slowed after this edit in May 2019. –ToxiBoi! ^(contribs) 04:27, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Bsherr. No sensible single-level warning level template to redirect to; uw-advertX or uw-spamX would be logical successor. MarginalCost (talk) 22:05, 17 April 2020 (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:Uw-infobox

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 2020 April 28. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 14:44, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Uw-infobox (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).

Template:Internet slang variants

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 2020 April 28. Primefac (talk) 01:46, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Internet_slang_variants (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Internet_slang (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).

Template:Footer Nine Muses

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 do not merge. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 16:23, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Footer Nine Muses (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Greek mythology (deities) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Template:Footer Nine Muses with Template:Greek mythology (deities).
Same issue as right below. PPEMES (talk) 10:26, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. These templates have very defined scopes. One is about the nine muses, one is a super template stretching over a page. I feel readers will suffer from removing the small and well-defined template. --Tom (LT) (talk) 05:56, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, per Tom (LT). The nine muses have their own place in cultural consciousness aside from, and in addition to, their goddess stature. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:50, 24 April 2020 (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:Greek myth (primordial)

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:Greek myth (primordial). Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 16:25, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Greek myth (primordial) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Greek myth (primordial-cthonic) sidebar (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Template:Greek myth (primordial) with Template:Greek myth (primordial-cthonic) sidebar.
Duplicate redundancy. PPEMES (talk) 09:42, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. The destination template already has the content. --Gonnym (talk) 10:05, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. These appear to have the same scope and are very similar. --Tom (LT) (talk) 05:56, 20 April 2020 (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:Greek myth (titan-concept)

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:Greek myth (Titan) sidebar. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 16:26, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Greek myth (titan-concept) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Greek myth (Titan) sidebar (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Template:Greek myth (titan-concept) with Template:Greek myth (Titan) sidebar.
Surely a subtopic to be included. PPEMES (talk) 09:38, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Half the template is the same, so there is no reason to have to decide which to use. They are both serve the same scope of "titans". --Gonnym (talk) 10:05, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. These appear to have the same scope and are very similar. --Tom (LT) (talk) 05:56, 20 April 2020 (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:Greek myth (Olympian)

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 2020 April 24. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 16:26, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Greek_myth_(Olympian) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Greek_mythology_(deities) (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).

Template:Christology

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 do not merge. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 16:24, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Christology (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Jesus (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Template:Christology with Template:Jesus.
Significantly related. If destination template would then be considered too large (although sections are collapsed), then the merged contents coud replace the section called "Jesus in Islam", which anyone seems a bit out of propoortion for this template? PPEMES (talk) 09:11, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I think there are some issues here. On the merits, I'm concerned that Christology is more relevant to Christianity, which has its own sidebar Template:Christianity sidebar, than to Template:Jesus, of which Jesus in Christanity is only one group, and is already large. On the implementation, making Christology its own group on equal level with Jesus in Christianity misrepresents the subordinate relationship between the topics; worse, removing Jesus in Islam decreases the coverage of the template, and that topic seems to be selected arbitrarily. As of now, the merged solution seems worse than the two separate templates. --Bsherr (talk) 16:21, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Per Bsherr. There are really not that many pages on both template. tahc ^chat 21:30, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Templates have well-defined scopes. --Tom (LT) (talk) 05:56, 20 April 2020 (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:Keisha

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) 16:24, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused navbox with no useful navigation. The article for the main subject has been deleted. Half of the links don't even mention the subject. The remaining links are to lists containing the subject. • Gene93k (talk) 05:02, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Agree with nom's rationale. Links in template are not notably associated with main article. --Tom (LT) (talk) 08:16, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The substantive links contravene WP:FILMNAV. --Bsherr (talk) 17:01, 16 April 2020 (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:Family of Zeus and Hera

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 2020 April 24. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 16:28, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Family_of_Zeus_and_Hera (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).

Template:The Blazing star barnstar

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 and redirect to Template:The Plantae Barnstar. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 16:29, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template:The Blazing star barnstar (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Created in 2015, it's supposed to be a barnstar awarded to those who significaly improve pages related to Plants. It's quite obvious though that's not a barnstar. Just a picture slapped in a template and labeled "barnstar". WP:PLANTS does not even use it. Fails WP:B2G. Also, I created Template:The Plantae Barnstar in February which is the official barnstar of WP:PLANTS. Jerm (talk) 03:49, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ _Talk 04:38, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Userify. Not sure of a specific guideline to cite, but this template seems to be the personal creation of a particular editor, so I think it could be userified back to their user space in the event they'd like to use it again. Delete as a second-best option to this. --Tom (LT) (talk) 08:16, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Merge - in essence delete and redirect - to Template:The Plantae Barnstar. PPEMES (talk) 09:16, 16 April 2020 (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:Rugbyleaguedeccat

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) 17:16, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

unused category navigation template. All uses just replaced by me with the generic {{Navseasoncats with centuries below decade}}, via Template:YYY0s in rugby league category header. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 00:02, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Thank you for your help. PPEMES (talk) 09:30, 16 April 2020 (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).