Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2016 April 11

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

April 11

[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 keepIzkala (talk) 00:37, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A free image of the Commonwealth flag is now available. --Neveselbert 18:21, 11 April 2016 (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).
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 deleteIzkala (talk) 10:36, 16 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. ~ RobTalk 17:23, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izkala (talk) 17:12, 11 April 2016 (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).
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 deleteIzkala (talk) 00:38, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Inclusion of these very different organizations or vaguely related topics into this controversial template is neither specified, qualified, or quantified, nor is it sourced or comprehensively covered.
Even if a proper article on this topic existed, I doubt this is an appropriate topic for a navbox. We could have myriads of similar templates claiming to collect groups supported by Putin, Erdoğan, the Saud family, U.S. government agencies, etc. p.p. But I'd rather keep navboxes limited to uncontroversially related articles only. I'm however not opposed to listifying these, if properly sourced. PanchoS (talk) 12:51, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep: the Gaddafi government in Libya was particularly notable for it's foreign policy of supporting and financing revolutionary political movements (the article for this is Foreign relations of Libya under Muammar Gaddafi) across the world associated with the Non-Aligned Movement and this was a key aspect to a number of conflicts. This is an uncontroversial fact. Yes, we could have other templates along similar lines, that could be very useful... I think templates on movements the US or Soviet Union supported as part of their foreign policy during the Cold War would be useful. Or even the Saudi royal family. Claíomh Solais (talk) 15:48, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The question here should be "Will readers want to navigate from one group supported by Gaddafi to all other groups supported by Gaddafi?" The answer to this is a clear no. While a properly sourced list may work in the mainspace, this doesn't make sense as a navbox. ~ RobTalk 00:40, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izkala (talk) 17:06, 11 April 2016 (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).

PUF templates

[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 allIzkala (talk) 00:42, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 130#Close down Possibly Unfree Files. Stefan2 (talk) 16:46, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

see Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 130#Close down Possibly Unfree Files Magog the Ogre (tc) 14:40, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

see Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 130#Close down Possibly Unfree Files Magog the Ogre (tc) 14:40, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

see Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 130#Close down Possibly Unfree Files Magog the Ogre (tc) 14:39, 11 April 2016 (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).
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 redirectIzkala (talk) 00:45, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merged this template to Template:Sonic games; Sonic games is not particularly burdened by the items in this template and the single encompassing template will aid navigation better. Izno (talk) 11:58, 11 April 2016 (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).
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 redirectIzkala (talk) 00:50, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merged the characters into Template:Sonic games, as the number of characters has substantially decreased. Enough so that there is only a single line. Izno (talk) 11:48, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Its worked fine for me for like the last 5 years - every time someone makes a terrible character article, they add it to the template. I have the template on my watchlist. Thus, every time someone adds a character to it, I'm notified, and scope out the article. I've caught many non-notable spinouts for Metal Sonic and Silver the Hedgehog through this method. Yes, I suppose this could also be applied to the massive series template, but with that being so much bigger, its easier to miss additions with so many more items/changes occurring on the big one. Anyways, regardless, I'm just not excited about making a massive template that's already only going to get bigger over time, even bigger with merging this one. Sergecross73 msg me 13:01, 13 April 2016 (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).
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 deleteIzkala (talk) 00:53, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate of {{Inc-video}} : Noyster (talk), 11:03, 11 April 2016 (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).
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. --BDD (talk) 21:34, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

same as Template:Rio Grande Valley FC Toros squad; redundant and unnecessary template Joeykai (talk) 07:48, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. – Michael (talk) 19:22, 15 April 2016 (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).
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 withdrawn. PanchoS (talk) 15:53, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This one is unused and, if I'm not mistaken, seems to be already merged into Template:Election table. PanchoS (talk) 06:19, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

PanchoS, any particular reason why you didn't just ask me? Frietjes (talk) 14:37, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Frietjes: I see, I was a little fast. This one is not merged in, it is just unused. Or is it possibly subst? And is it useful? Something we can find out in a TfD. Sorry if you feel offended, but why should I ask you first instead of filing a TfD? Nominating an article/category/template for discussion is no offense – from what I know this is simply our resolution process for items an editor considers not useful for whatever reason. If the other participants' answer is clear, it can still be withdrawn or snowclosed. --PanchoS (talk) 15:25, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Withdraw following considerable improvement by Frietjes. Doesn't support colspans or rowspans, so no grouping of columns, but for the most basic cases it is useful now. --PanchoS (talk) 15:53, 11 April 2016 (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).
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. These are demonstrably redundant to {{Mem/f}} and so on. Izkala (talk) 15:22, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

While I'm unsure we need any of these fraternity and sorority template sets, we clearly don't need several of them. Producing farily plain tables that are not considerably different from the default table (see for example Alpha Epsilon Phi#Notable members or List of Sinfonians), these are easier constructed from articlespace using basic wikitable markup. Unlike the succession boxes or other template building systems, there's also no need for maximum consistency between fraternity/sorority articles.
Still, for now, I'm nominating only the extra ones, to be replaced by the Template:Mem set of templates. PanchoS (talk) 05:48, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Naraht: All of these can be easily replaced by the Template:Mem and its companion templates with no difference in ease of use. Minimal presentational differences are better resolved by improving the generic template. There is no need for yet another set of templates for fraternity and sorority member lists. See the comparison:
Examples
built using Template:FratMember etc.
Name Original chapter Notability Reference
Martin Luther King, Jr. Sigma 1962 Nobel Peace Prize; Civil rights activist; Co-founder of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC); Martin Luther King, Jr. Day was established in honor; 1957 Spingarn Medal, 1977 Presidential Medal of Freedom, and 2004 Congressional Gold Medal recipient; first African American with a memorial on the National Mall
Martin Luther King, Jr.
built using Template:mem etc.
Name Original chapter Notability References
Martin Luther King, Jr. Sigma 1962 Nobel Peace Prize; Civil rights activist; Co-founder of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC); Martin Luther King, Jr. Day was established in honor; 1957 Spingarn Medal, 1977 Presidential Medal of Freedom, and 2004 Congressional Gold Medal recipient; first African American with a memorial on the National Mall
Martin Luther King, Jr.
--PanchoS (talk) 15:42, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I note that at this point 20 articles use Fratmemberstart, 10 use frat/start, and 4 use mem/fstart, and wait for other users comments.Naraht (talk) 16:15, 11 April 2016 (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).
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 relisting here. (non-admin closure) ~ RobTalk 00:23, 24 April 2016 (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).
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 as unopposed. WP:REFUND applies. (non-admin closure) ~ RobTalk 16:10, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Most links lead to the sections of one of the articles using this template. Sixth of March 04:40, 11 April 2016 (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).
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). ~ RobTalk 16:06, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There is no such thing as "Slavic Orthodox Christianity". That article does not exist and the template it made up of various Eastern Orthodox concepts. Very confusing. Zoupan 18:18, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I got the idea to create this template from some of the articles about the Russian slavophiles and articles like this one Slavic Orthodox. I did not create this article nor the term nor the other releated articles. So I wonder if the above editor can find a source that says there is no such thing as Slavic Orthodox? Since there is of course Slavic Christianity and Slavic neopaganism, Slavic Muslims and sources that use the term Slavic Orthodox [1], [2], [3]. LoveMonkey (talk) 14:42, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ RobTalk 13:54, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ RobTalk 03:24, 11 April 2016 (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).