Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2024 October 11
- The template doesn’t meet the threshold of WP:SERIES („very broad subjects“).
- It is redundant, because we already have Template:Historical definitions of race.
- The template seems an arbitrary selection of articles, mostly from the template mentioned in point 2. The POV character of this template has been discussed at WP:FT/N#"Historical_race_concepts"_sidebar
- The template is not used by any article. It had recently been added to some, but I removed it from there because I see no constructive reason for adding it.
- All historical race concepts have been debunked and are pseudo-scientific according to modern biology. We should not give those concepts extra prominence by this template.
- The picture in the template is clearly racist, being a scan from an old book containing three pictures of an ape, a Black and a White person, the text claiming the superiority of the latter. Rsk6400 (talk) 09:15, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment. I think this should be procedurally closed on account of OP's very strange conduct in the last few days. Some highlights:
- They have been formally invited by me to simply remove individual entries they find to be POV; they could, of course, also provide an alternate illustration if they knew one. This has not happened. Instead, they remove every single transclusion of the template for being POV (*including in the very article for historical race concepts[1][2]), and then simultaneously ask for it to be deleted on grounds of not being in use (cf. also their FT/N thread). I have harshly criticized this practice on one of the various redundant discussions they have opened;[3] they have not responded.
- OP failed to point out that there was already a massive POV shift with the inclusion of "Racism, Scientific Racism and Pseudoscience" via an "above" parameter (i.e. of greatest relative prominence within the template).[4][5][6]
- Of course the illustration is racist; though not in some kind of infectious sense, as this is a now more comical than legitimate illustration from a 1898 textbook.
- The selection is not arbitrary, as has been pointed out to OP on multiple occasions.
- OP has - for frankly irrelevant reasons he could have quickly fixed himself - reverted my expansions of the footer with new entries I originally included only in this new sidebar. So the two are, in fact, not even redundant with each other. But even if they were, this would not, in itself, be grounds for deletion.
- Don't misunderstand me: I am not seeking sanctions in this thread, simply asking for a procedural close so that this discussion may continue in some more appropriate venue, e.g. the template's talk page. Biohistorian15 (talk) 09:56, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment. I think this should be procedurally closed on account of OP's very strange conduct in the last few days. Some highlights:
This new template appears to be redundant to {{Uw-voablock}}. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:14, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
This new template appears to be redundant to {{Uw-uhblock-double}}. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:13, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Template:Diplomatic missions of Tajikistan (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Diplomatic missions of Kuwait (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Pointless to have a nav box with just 2 English entries. LibStar (talk) 04:03, 11 October 2024 (UTC)