Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2009 February 23

< February 22	February 24 >

February 23

Template:PD-Kopimi

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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. JPG-GR (talk) 00:16, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:PD-Kopimi (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

And subpage: Template:PD-Kopimi/doc

The "Kopimi" license (if you can call it that) is not public domain; in fact, it is not even free. The full text is "kopimi (copyme), symbol showing that you want to be copied. use kopimi in your own fancy. kopimi may be put on homepages or blogs, in books, in software, as sound logos in music or whatever." The license only gives reusers permission to copy the work, not to make derivatives. It should be deleted and images using the template need to give a fair use rationale if there is no other license information. Dominic·t 21:33, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, and you say "the opposite of copyright" is non-free too? ViperSnake151 18:10, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you can be against copyright all you want, but you still have to explicitly allow use of one's work beyond simple copying if you would like it to be considered free. This doesn't do that. Dominic·t 01:47, 28 February 2009 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Public transport disambiguation pages

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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Delete. Responding to the concerns over the template being used on dab pages by changing the targets to not be dab pages is also inappropriate. These pages are not suitable lists per WP:LIST and WP:NOT#INFO; they should be restored to their correct status as dab pages.. Happy‑melon 16:17, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, the following pages were converted to "list of..." format, and should be reverted:

Happy‑melon 16:21, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Public transport disambiguation pages (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This template will potentially create a gigantic number of articles, if it aims to be able to link huge amounts of bus and train route numbers, colors, and systems. ←Signed:→Mr. E. Sánchez ^{Get to know me!} / _{Talk to me!}←at≈:→ 19:53, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Actually, it'll be quite small compared with many other existing navboxes. Since most routes are indicated simply by a number, and these numbers can be squeezed into a small space taking up just a few lines. Most numbered transit routes are one or two digits. Whenever one is three digits, the likelihood of multiple routes around the world using that designation is low.

Color-coded transit routes are normally named with colors common to vocabulary, and not obscure color names, so what you see is most likely what there is around the world.

I also plan to add lettered routes to this navbox, but that will take up one line at the most, since there are only 26 letters in the English alphabet, and around the world, English letters are used to name most lettered transit routes. There are some routes using a letter followed by a number, but certain letters (like B, M, or X) are used more consistently, mostly with lower numbers.

In all, the purpose of this navbox is to list routing designations that are likely to be used for multiple transit routes in major cities around the world. The number of route designations that are used often are relatively limited to the above descriptions.

Under WP:NAVBOX guidelines, this is a perfect fit. There is no policy stating the size limit for one. I also tried creating a category for all these pages, but I found that would turn out to be far more cluttered and less convenient to the reader than this. Sebwite (talk) 20:04, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Under WP:NAVBOX guidelines, this is a perfect fit. I also tried creating a category for all these pages, but I found that would turn out to be far more cluttered and less convenient to the reader than this. Sebwite (talk) 20:04, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I guess what I'm worried about is the accuracy of it all. What routes are considered notable enough to have articles? (As, I'm guessing, this template will point to disambigs of those route numbers.) There are some cities around the world (Dallas, New York, Los Angeles, for instance) that have large route numbers. 200, 300, 400, 500, 700, and 800, for example (here in Dallas), and we use Red, Blue, and soon Green and Orange lines for trains. ←Signed:→Mr. E. Sánchez ^{Get to know me!} / _{Talk to me!}←at≈:→ 20:11, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Response Indeed, there are plenty of routes that are notable to have articles. For starters, most rapid transit routes are notable and do have articles. They are usually named with a either a color (as you see, the list of colored routes here takes up just a single line), or low numbers (like New York's trains 1-7 and 9). As for bus routes, some of those in major cities are notable enough to have articles and do. Those with one- or two-digit number designations are likely to be found in multiple cities; for example, there are articles about each of London's bus system with numbers up through 100. Many other large cities do not (yet) have article on their bus routes, but do have redirects to sections within other articles, providing detailed descriptions. The disambiguation pages I have been creating and this navbox are a helpful way for the reader to find them.

You probably won't find multiple articles or redirects for the majority of 3-digit numbers. Same is true for designations that are a letter followed by a number. Therefore, these lists should be short. For example, both Baltimore and New York have a Route M1. New York has a Route M79, but it is less likely any other major cities do.

In any case, there is little room for inaccuracy here. Since these are disambiguation pages, they list links to other Wikipedia articles, where references to the existence of these routes can be found. Sebwite (talk) 20:32, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Sebwite's arguments. Georgia guy (talk) 19:36, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete. Dab pages are navigation tools for the search term in question, and should be kept as free as possible from other content, per WP:MOS-DAB. Adding this to dab pages (like, say "Blue Line") won't help users who are trying to find the article on the particular Blue Line they're looking for. It also creates an extremely large number of phantom ambiguous links--already, it's the template causing the largest number of ambiguous links on all of Wikipedia: [1]. Have left notes asking for comment at WT:DAB and WT:DPL. Dekimasuよ! 13:26, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Striking delete, see below. Dekimasuよ! 02:54, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, such navboxes are inappropriate for disambiguation pages. older ≠ wiser 13:33, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: dab pages just don't have, or need, templates like this. List of public transport disambiguation pages might be useful instead? Or if it's that important, perhaps a category and a template {{pubtransdis}} (like {{geodis}}), with the option of it being a parameter for {{disambiguation}} (eg for Red line which has transport and non-transport entries)? I don't really see the need, as the dab pages should be easy enough to find by inputting the natural search term or, via redirects, any predictable variation of it. We really don't want a template which generates vast numbers of links to dab pages, making it so much more difficult to find and resolve other links to those pages. PamD (talk) 14:43, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Since lists are articles, "List of <foo> disambiguation pages" would be inappropriately self-referent, I believe. And since there isn't anything innate about a dab page that says it has to be so, it would be awfully difficult to maintain. Things are turned into redirects or dab pages are moved all the time. Dekimasuよ! 15:16, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I just don't see the usefulness of this. A disambig page is a navigational tool to help a reader find an article when there is more than one topic that might use a particular title. If the reader is looking for information about the Blue Line on the Washington, D.C. Metro, the disambig page should help them find the link to that article as quickly and easily as possible. I find it hard to understand how this reader would be helped by a navbox showing them how to find lists of Aqua Lines, Purple Lines, No. 37 bus routes, and so forth. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 15:07, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Clearly inappropriate for dab pages, and furthermore, per WP:INTDABLINK, "The purpose of a disambiguation page is to give a user who has typed an ambiguous term into the search box a list of articles that are likely to be what he or she is looking for". Browsing public transport routes would be much better done via a category; PamD's idea seems like a good one. --AndrewHowse (talk) 15:38, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment for all those who are bringing this up about the dab pages, I have been considering changing the title to each article contained within to "List of public transport routes numbered X" rather than having them as dab pages in order to solve this issue, just like the numbered highway lists are titled "List of highways numbered X." This navbox would then be renamed to Template:Public transport lists. Regardless, I feel this navbox is necessary in aiding navigation to the pages.Sebwite (talk) 02:49, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- An interesting idea, but creating the articles you suggest won't alleviate the need for disambiguation pages at the basic titles (so the pages shouldn't simply be moved and stripped of their dab tags), and I don't think there is enough added value to make a parallel construction worthwhile. Dekimasuよ! 03:40, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: Based on various comments here, I am in the process of making changes to the title of each page contained within so they will be considered "lists" rather than "disambiguation pages." They will be similar to the lists used for roads. I have also changed the heading title on this template to reflect that. (ps. I cannot do this all on one day because it is time consuming) Sebwite (talk) 05:20, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- It still doesn't seem likely that that setup can work with the "M<foo>" and "<foo> Line" articles, since they have other dab topics and are valid search terms. What do you plan to do with those? Dekimasuよ! 06:53, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Most of these are already existing pages. It did not seem necessary to create a separate list for M1 because it wouldn't clog an already existing page. But at the same time, to add transit routes to the list of highways pages did not make sense - I already looked into this. Sebwite (talk) 16:41, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    - Large number of unfixable links will still be created for the things that remain dab pages and are linked from the template, even if the template is not applied directly to the ones that remain dab pages. How about a link to a single List of public transport routes by color to replace the bottom line of the template? Dekimasuよ! 02:38, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      - I am slowly in the process of working on fixing various issues, regardless of the outcome of this tfd. I do agree some change is necessary; I felt that way from day one, though it takes time for ideas to be worked out. I'm sure something can be figured out to incorporate colored routes somehow. Also, I am considering making this a navbox that appears on the right side of the page rather than the bottom. In all, we should use this discussion not to abandon a navbox for this purpose altogether, but rather to figure out a way to make it fit best with Wikipedia's guidelines. Sebwite (talk) 02:44, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        The major objections of the "delete" people here, as far as I can see, are (1) links to dab pages, and (2) application of the template to dab pages. If those two things can be avoided, it would be fine with me for the template to survive this TfD (and be moved per the rewording of the header). I've struck my "strong delete" above. Dekimasuよ! 02:54, 27 February 2009 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.