Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2020 March 24

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< March 23 March 25 >

March 24

[edit]

Template:Cite doi family

[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; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:05, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and now useless. Historically used in the documentation of defunct templates. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 23:09, 24 March 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:Infobox tram network

[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 2020 April 1. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 13:22, 1 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:Infobox monster truck

[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 no consensus. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 13:18, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Infobox monster truck with Template:Infobox automobile.
WP:INFOCOL. PPEMES (talk) 22:37, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Both templates seem appropriately scoped as designed, not seeing a strong rationale for merging. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:02, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge – My own rationale for merging the two is because monster truck is a type of automobile. --Soumyabrata wash your hands to protect from coronavirus 09:01, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Monster trucks are a specialized piece of Motorsports equipment, not a general commercially available automobile. Plus monster truck articles are really about the racing team that operates them. Most monster truck teams have multiple trucks across their life, and in the case of more popular teams multiple trucks at once. It's incorrect to treat them as merely a motor vehicle. oknazevad (talk) 20:07, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. These infoboxes should be kept separate. "automobile" refers to series production vehicles which are street-legal. Monster truck may have some ties to production vehicles but are essentially custom made individual vehicles for a single purpose. -- Ralf König (talk) 16:49, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom - the documentation for the automobile template clearly and prominently says (emboldening added) "This template is used in articles about motor vehicles including, but not necessarily limited to, cars, buses and trucks.". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:17, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The parameters for production vehicles and those for specialized purpose-built motorsport trucks are different enough that merging the infoboxes would do more harm than good. --Sable232 (talk) 00:40, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The extra monster truck fields will overburden use of the automobile temple and confuse editors not expecting them. Many automobile fields (eg production dates) don't apply for monster truck articles and lead to more confusion. Better to keep it as a speciality template.  Stepho  talk  03:21, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Ralf, Stepho et al, Both are entirely different things and therefore should continue to be seperate, Another ridiculous nonsensical proposal from this nom. –Davey2010Talk 19:49, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Monster truck fits perfectly into {{infobox racing car}} already (with far more detailed parameters); no point to this discussion here. --SteveCof00 (talk) 12:06, 1 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:Infobox motorcycle club

[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 Template:Infobox organization. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 13:19, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Infobox motorcycle club with Template:Infobox organization.
WP:INFOCOL. PPEMES (talk) 22:34, 24 March 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:Infobox treaty

[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 do not merge. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 13:22, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Infobox treaty with Template:Infobox document.
WP:INFOCOL. PPEMES (talk) 22:29, 24 March 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:New South Wales Police Force

[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 Template:Infobox law enforcement agency which effectively means substitute and delete the NSW box Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 13:24, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:New South Wales Police Force with Template:Infobox law enforcement agency.
WP:INFOCOL. PPEMES (talk) 22:23, 24 March 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:Infobox U.S. national banks

[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 no consensus. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 13:24, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Infobox U.S. national banks with Template:Infobox company.
WP:INFOCOL. Since Template:Infobox bank redirects to Template:Infobox company. PPEMES (talk) 22:16, 24 March 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:Infobox sporting event organization

[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 2020 April 1. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 13:24, 1 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:Infobox property development

[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 2020 April 1. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 13:25, 1 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:Infobox shopping mall

[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 do not merge. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 13:20, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Infobox shopping mall with Template:Infobox building.
WP:INFOCOL. PPEMES (talk) 21:47, 24 March 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:Infobox KFC

[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 Infobox KFC.

Propose merging Template:Infobox KFC with Template:Infobox company.
Is it really meaningful to create a "template of a template" like that? PPEMES (talk) 21:42, 24 March 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:Infobox McDonald's

[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 the McDonald's box.

Propose merging Template:Infobox McDonald's with Template:Infobox company.
Is it really meaningful to create a "template of a template" like that? PPEMES (talk) 21:42, 24 March 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:Infobox Burger King

[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 the Burger King box.

Propose merging Template:Infobox Burger King with Template:Infobox company.
Is it really meaningful to create a "template of a template" like that? PPEMES (talk) 21:42, 24 March 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:Infobox record label

[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 do not merge. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 13:20, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Infobox record label with Template:Infobox brand.
WP:INFOCOL. PPEMES (talk) 21:32, 24 March 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:Infobox tea

[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 2020 April 1. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 13:31, 1 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:Infobox theological work

[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 do not merge. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 13:31, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Infobox theological work with Template:Infobox theologian.
WP:INFOCOL. PPEMES (talk) 21:17, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox theologian. PPEMES (talk) 23:10, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A theologian infobox needs the date of birth, family members etc. and the theological work infobox is completely different. A person has very different attributes to a document. --Mullafacation (talk) 15:26, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If it is only used alongside {{Infobox theologian}}, doesn't that just make it part of the other infobox? --Mullafacation (talk) 10:04, 30 March 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:Infobox medical details

[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 no consensus. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 13:32, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Infobox medical details with Template:Infobox medical person.
WP:INFOCOL. PPEMES (talk) 21:11, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As for which template to merge into, I think that the 'details' template is where the real meat of the template is (and thus, where the more valuable page history is), but the 'person' template has the more logical name. So I think we should delete Template:Infobox medical person, then rename Template:Infobox medical details to "Infobox medical person". –IagoQnsi (talk) 04:59, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That was how it was before. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Infoboxes/embed. These nominations are ill-advised and should be closed. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 17:37, 25 March 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:Infobox engineering career

[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 no consensus. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 13:32, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Infobox engineering career with Template:Infobox engineer.
WP:INFOCOL. PPEMES (talk) 21:01, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand the expected outcome. This is a wrapper template which adds extra fields to {{infobox person}}. It was split precisely due to INFOCOL concerns. What do you want to happen here? If you don't understand this setup then I'd strongly advise a moratorium on similar TfDs. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 21:15, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
See Wikipedia:WikiProject Infoboxes/embed. This distinction is deliberate. This should be closed. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 17:38, 25 March 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:Infobox YouTube personality

[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 do not merge. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 13:21, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Infobox YouTube personality with Template:Infobox presenter.
Would this be considerable per WP:INFOCOL? And also trying to keep things as commercially neutral as possible? PPEMES (talk) 20:57, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support-These internet celebrities are a major, growing and ongoing phenomenon. The template certainly needs to be kept up to date. Many of them work cross platform so we should have a means to provide directions to their various channels. So in this case a youtube celebrity would be primary but they might also have an instagram, twitch, Facebook etc etc. I also see the great possibility of these being poached with our open editing policy. I will suggest that some editing protection be applied if these get changed and send a notification to someone of a developing problem. Trackinfo (talk) 22:21, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support BUT only changed to Oppose; if the parameters specific to YouTube are kept (channel and link to the channel, channel views, subscribers, date of stats update, genre, awards). Same goes for the Twitch infobox parameters being kept (channel + link, games played, followers, total views, genre). These are vital to the infoboxes for these individuals, in the same way that an NFL player's teams, awards, and stats are vital to be included in those infoboxes. Soulbust (talk) 22:49, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. While I agree with Trackinfo and Soulbust, shouldn't the YouTube and Twitch infoboxes instead be merged into a new Template:Infobox internet personality since they are not "presenters" and share no custom parameters with Template:Infobox presenter? - Brojam (talk) 00:17, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I would agree with Brojam, a new, more specific for internet personality sounds much better. Don't worry about its usage, there will be plenty for this specification, without branding. Trackinfo (talk) 00:04, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I would welcome a discussion on such a solution as well. I would support merge to infobox Internet personality or equivalent. PPEMES (talk) 14:12, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Davey2010: Do you often insist on banning users you don't agree with, or is it just the casual way you go about winging WP:AGF? PPEMES (talk) 19:07, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not the one making ridiculous and nonsensical nominations. I'm entitled to point out disruption where I see fit, If you don't like people criticising you over your ridiculous TFDs then kindly don't make any TFD nominations. –Davey2010Talk 19:37, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
In this case I would say a lapse in judgement on your part is to blame which merits constructive criticism. When citing essays you have to point out where x applies to each instance. In this instance you seem unsure if the essay even applies here, so why not take things you are unsure of to a discussion instead? When editors start to get annoyed then it would be wise to work things out with them rather than to dismiss it as not assuming good faith. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 19:45, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Constructive criticism, sure. I don't mind that. I think the above discussion has been good. I have changed my mind, due to good arguments. I now hope a merged Internet personality infobox will be considered. Doesn't this make Wikipedia better? PPEMES (talk) 20:54, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Suggesting merging 2 infoboxes together that quite clearly should not be merged is not "making Wikipedia better and doing this a number of times with other infoboxes also doesn't make Wikipedia better, Without being condescending may I suggest you focus on articles that need improving ?. –Davey2010Talk 21:04, 30 March 2020 (UTC).[reply]
WP:INFOCOL implies a number of merge nominations out there are still motivated. Not all of mine ended up attaining consensus. In this particular one above, it seems another result may materialise than I expected, but in a process that was needed and that I am happy to have initiated. One or two entries can be considered a mistake on my behalf in that process. I regret that. Now, I would be more impressed of your contributions if you helped do you part "in the arena" in this context - including if you did a couple of mistakes - rather than reducing your effort to doing nothing but providing quite unpolished and user-focused criticism of single entries. PPEMES (talk) 22:33, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's fair to say the majority can be considered a mistake on your behalf,
I have no desire to spend my time suggesting merging infoboxes when my time could be much better spent on articles which incase you forgot is the sole reason why we're all here - for our readers.
"rather than reducing your effort to doing nothing but providing quite unpolished and user-focused criticism of single entries." - Perhaps you should look at my contribs more closely as it would appear I've done a lot more than "nothing" as you so put it..... –Davey2010Talk 12:03, 31 March 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:Infobox Twitch streamer

[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 do not merge. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 13:21, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Infobox Twitch streamer with Template:Infobox presenter.
Would this be considerable per WP:INFOCOL? And also trying to keep things as commercially neutral as possible? PPEMES (talk) 20:57, 24 March 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:Lists of wars by date

[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 do not merge. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 13:21, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Lists of wars by date with Template:War navbox.
WP:INFOCOL. PPEMES (talk) 20:31, 24 March 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).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2020_March_24&oldid=948515838"