Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2017 March 4

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

March 4

[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 as G7 by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT 00:04, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This was an attempt to get tighter standards on Commons Transfers, but some concerns were raised that it's logic was flawed.

I've reverted my addition of it to a number of templates, (I hope I caught ALL uses of it because it was called selectively something What Links here doesn't pick up on)

Bringing to TfD so some one can blow this up and start again, (Sigh). Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:06, 4 March 2017 (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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:52, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Navigation template for two links (one redirects to a general "scouting in Kentucky" article and the other is just the organization's mission and an official link (tagged for CSD). — Rhododendrites talk \\ 06:39, 4 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment - Going to hold off on nominating any others until I make sure I'm not overlooking something, but it seems like the more I look at these collections of scouting and camp articles (and related templates), the more problems I see (many of the articles seem to have a lot of detail with no reliable sources, or just some promotional text and an official site, etc.). Many are notable, of course, but I think this could use some additional eyes. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 06:58, 4 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete A nav template should have significant content to nav to. This one is all but useless. Stevie is the man! TalkWork 13:52, 4 March 2017 (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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:54, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Navigation template with no links to stand-alone articles (i.e. redirects to general articles). — Rhododendrites talk \\ 06:31, 4 March 2017 (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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:52, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Navigation template to navigate between 1 article (two links to the same article). — Rhododendrites talk \\ 06:29, 4 March 2017 (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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:52, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Navigation template with no pages to navigate between. Last remaining link is a redirect to a general article. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 06:27, 4 March 2017 (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. Primefac (talk) 00:09, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Lists hosts of a podcast. Fails WP:PERFNAV. Rob Sinden (talk) 13:48, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Which also need to be trimmed. Only key people (presidents, CEOs, founders, etc) should be included in navboxes, not all employees. --Rob Sinden (talk) 11:24, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
These are founders of the website. Axem Titanium (talk) 20:17, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 15:45, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Inappropriée detail,per nom. DGG ( talk ) 09:30, 25 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • The purpose of navigation templates is navigation. The people and concepts are highly interrelated and this template aids readers in navigating between them. PERFNAV says nothing about appropriate levels of detail; it is essentially concerned with overproliferation of navigation templates cluttering article footers for incidental production roles. This template doubly falls outside the scope of PERFNAV---it is the only template on each article's footer so there's no worry about overproliferation and the people listed are foundational to the organization, not merely miscellaneous crew. Axem Titanium (talk) 18:40, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 04:34, 4 March 2017 (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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:52, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Subst: and delete--only one transclusion. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 06:35, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 04:27, 4 March 2017 (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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:48, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to be pointless. All links land at the Koli people article, except the one for Tribes. The Tribes link target is a navbox that is displayed at the Koli people article anyway. Sitush (talk) 11:06, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 04:24, 4 March 2017 (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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:47, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Subst: and delete--only one transclusion. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 06:34, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 04:24, 4 March 2017 (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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:45, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Subst: and delete--only one transclusion. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 06:34, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 04:24, 4 March 2017 (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).