Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019 April 5

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< April 4 April 6 >

April 5

[edit]

Template:Infobox web browser

[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 merge to Template:Infobox software. — JJMC89 (T·C) 23:21, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Infobox web browser with Template:Infobox software.
These two templates are almost identical. This one has an additional |engine= parameter. Recently, there has been a TfM which merged Template:Infobox OS component into Template:Infobox software (see discussion) for no reason other than "software is software", whatever it means. But if there is consensus in favor or merging totally different templates, merging almost identical templates must be a no-brainer. 37.27.101.41 (talk) 13:51, 5 April 2019 (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).

Template:Mss

[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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:07, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This template isn't really in use. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 21:17, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Implausible as it is for me to support keeping anything Neelix created, in this case I can see that even if it's not currently in use, it's a template with a legitimate use case that would be quite fiddly to recreate manually. If someone else has a claim for the name—as a three-character name it's quite valuable real estate—I'd have no issue with renaming it to something else. ‑ Iridescent 21:41, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CoolSkittle (talk) 22:24, 5 April 2019 (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).

Template:Lights Out

[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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 23:18, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not enough links to warrant a navbox. WP:NENAN --woodensuperman 11:55, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CoolSkittle (talk) 20:52, 5 April 2019 (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).

Template:Cr-IPL

[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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 23:14, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Completely useless template, it's easier to just use the team name rather than the template for the team. And if team name changes, that forces a new template- no such issue with just linking the name Joseph2302 (talk) 16:37, 5 April 2019 (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).

Template:Globalize

[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 merge to Template:Globalize. — JJMC89 (T·C) 23:07, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging all Template:Globalize sub-templates with the main template. See also 11 July 2010 discussion.

It seems ridiculous to me to have half a million templates that are effectively the same. So I propose that instead everything is merged to {{Globalize}}, with a new structure {{Globalize|TOPIC}}. Categorization can then be added automatically by the template, and created new categories becomes a cinch. Creating {{Globalize/Uganda}} would involve a lot more effort than simply supporting {{Globalize|Uganda}}. And we also save the trouble of having half a million templates to independently maintain, with independent talk pages, independant documentation pages, and so on. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 15:49, 5 April 2019 (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).

Template:Rfam box

[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 merge to Template:Infobox rfam. (non-admin closure) Pkbwcgs (talk) 15:58, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Rfam box with Template:Infobox rfam.
Overlapping scope; "infobox done wrong"; latter is more systemic. Artoria2e5 🌉 13:55, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template arguments for migration
Rfam box Infobox rfam
acc Rfam
description Name
type RNA_type
image image
abbreviation Symbol
Length, identity, and seed are specific to alignment in one database. SS is... usually published? Not much point in indicating.
--Artoria2e5 🌉 21:33, 8 April 2019 (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).

Template:New Super Mario Bros.

[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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 23:11, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary overlap and sub-selection of Template:Super Mario. Everything on this navbar is on the parent navbar, which is not so large as to necessitate breaking them out. This navbar is simply duplicating links from another navbar on every page it is on. -- ferret (talk) 12:10, 5 April 2019 (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).

Template:Infobox surname

[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 relisted on 2019 April 19. (non-admin closure) DannyS712 (talk) 07:21, 19 April 2019 (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).

Template:Hinduism in Africa

[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 no consensus. Primefac (talk) 19:40, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Navbox is redundant to just doing {{Africa in topic|Hinduism in}}. Was previously unused and all current transclusions used the above code. I attempted to CSD under T3, but a user replace the code above with this template. No reason for this template to be used at all. In my opinion this still is a WP:T3. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 18:46, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Zackmann08: mistake? Christian75 (talk) 19:13, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
(The TfD said template:example (or similar) in the original tfd Christian75 (talk) 08:12, 6 April 2019 (UTC))[reply]
  • Zackmann08, I think you might find it that people will be a bit less exasperated if you listened to what they'd said to you before bombarding them with the next deletion notice. Now, as I've explained on my talk page, {{Africa in topic}} is a quick and dirty way to create a variety of navboxes that might be suitable for some circumstances, but it doesn't really wor here. See for example how this template appears on Hinduism in Sierra Leone: you see quite a few redlinks (most of them permanently so: they were formerly blue but got deleted at AfD or RfD), and most of the blue links are actually redirects, usually to broad articles where Hinduism (or the country) are only mentioned in passing. If you want a navbox consisting mostly of redirects and redlinks, then yes, {{Africa in topic}} will do just fine. But if you want a navbox that does what navboxes are expected to do – navigate between articles, then you can't easily avoid having a dedicated template like {{Hinduism in Africa}}. The situation, however, gets complicated by the existence of {{Hinduism by country}}, which I've just noticed now. In a way, this makes {{Hinduism in Africa}} (+ {{Hinduism in Oceania}} and the like) redundant. Its downside is that it is a sidebar. So the question is, do we prefer a sidebar or navboxes at the bottom of the article. Personally, I'd opt for the less intrusive navboxes, but I'd rather leave the issue to others to decide. – Uanfala (talk) 22:20, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, DannyS712 (talk) 03:55, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, the replacement gives a lot of red links and a lot of redirect to articles which barely mention the topic if at all. The red links will probably be (re)created. Christian75 (talk) 08:11, 6 April 2019 (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).

Template:Manichitrathazhu character map

[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 relisted on 2019 April 19. (non-admin closure) DannyS712 (talk) 07:21, 19 April 2019 (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).

Template:Nuvvostanante Nenoddantana character map

[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 relisted on 2019 April 19. (non-admin closure) DannyS712 (talk) 07:22, 19 April 2019 (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).

Template:Mosques in Lebanon

[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 relisted on 2019 May 20. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 14:26, 20 May 2019 (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).
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2019_April_5&oldid=1073153433"