Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2011 April 14

< April 13	April 15 >

April 14

Template:Ahl al-Bayt

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 Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 01:27, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Ahl al-Bayt (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This template is just a list of people, which is currently used in a number of articles in the "see also" section. I feel it's only purpose is to bloat these see also sections. 27.32.186.204 (talk) 19:40, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Agree with nom, this is poor practice. -- P 1 9 9 • TALK 19:20, 20 April 2011 (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:Civil Twilight

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 Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 01:27, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Civil Twilight (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

An album track listing, not something that needs to be in a template. WOSlinker (talk) 18:18, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. What purpose does this serve outside of the album??? -- P 1 9 9 • TALK 19:23, 20 April 2011 (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:Fort Allen, Puerto Rico

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 Speedy delete, non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 03:00, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Fort Allen, Puerto Rico (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Fort Allen, Puerto Rico. Looks like an article. Appears to be used by just one article. Lightmouse (talk) 12:20, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

speedy delete, I tagged it as A10, although it is not in articlespace, it is an article, and should qualify. Frietjes (talk) 15:38, 14 April 2011 (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:CatAZ

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 do not merge, but perhaps move to a better name. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 01:29, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:Category TOC (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Template:CatAZ with Template:Category TOC.
These templates are almost identical, except Template:CatAZ does not have 0–9. Template:Category TOC already has functionality to supress the numbers. The original argument for having Template:CatAZ was not numbers were not needs for people categories. What about people with names like 50 Cent? Supressing the numbers seems far too trivial to warrant its own template. McLerristarr | Mclay1 02:38, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Oppose This is a long-established and easy-to-use template with a clear and useful purpose. Please explain how the project will be improved by its deletion. Are we so short of disk space that we can no longer accomodate it? S a g a C i t y (talk) 09:45, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - no point. As things stand, {{CatAZ}} invokes {{CategoryTOC|numerals=no}} (and does nothing else); and {{CategoryTOC}} is merely a redirect to {{Category TOC}}. So they're effectively merged already. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:27, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- So {{CatAZ}} is effectively pointless. Suppressing the numbers isn't even useful anyway – it barely makes a difference in space and it's so often misplaced. McLerristarr | Mclay1 16:00, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please cite examples of misuse. S a g a C i t y (talk) 16:34, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I tend to correct mistakes when I find them but going through the list of transclusions immediately finds Category:Rock albums. Apart from the fact the subcategories are sorted oddly and the category is too small to need a TOC, if a TOC was needed, many album titles begin with numbers so using the template that suppresses numbers seems unnecessary. There are plenty of times when this template is used in a category which contains pages with names beginning with numbers. It was removing this template from one such category that caused me to start this discussion. McLerristarr | Mclay1 17:54, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I confirm and agree with the view of the above two editors. This template is already merged with Template:Category TOC. {{CatAZ}} is merely a convenient shortcut for a particular configuration of that template. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:32, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- OK, you have a good point. Could we at least move it to Template:Category TOC A–Z or something so it's easier to understand for newbies? McLerristarr | Mclay1 10:50, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - Sure, I will always support clearer names for templates. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:07, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - Oppose. It may be easier to understand what a template with a convoluted name like {{Category TOC A-Z}} is doing, but it's a whole lot easier to remember and type {{CatAZ}}. Dawynn (talk) 11:21, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - You can still use the shorter redirects instead of the full name so I don't see your point. McLerristarr | Mclay1 14:03, 21 April 2011 (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.