Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019 December 14

< December 13	December 15 >

December 14

Template:Vehicle manufacturing in Ukraine

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) ‑‑Trialpears (talk) 01:44, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Vehicle manufacturing in Ukraine (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Just three links but two of them are to non manufacturig articles. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 12:50, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 19:43, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

delete, better to use categories. Frietjes (talk) 16:33, 16 December 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:Associations of the Christian faithful

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. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 00:37, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Associations of the Christian faithful (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Catholic laity (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Template:Associations of the Christian faithful with Template:Catholic laity.
New, forked template. Largely overlapping content, it seems, though. Why not merge? PPEMES (talk) 00:23, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Haven't studied it so will not comment for now. Too many nominations at once. Randy Kryn (talk) 02:21, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- replying to a nearly useless comment. Frietjes (talk) 15:53, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
support, most of the links are already in the {{Catholic laity}} template, so a merge seems sensible. Frietjes (talk) 15:56, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I think {{Catholic laity}} is ultimately a hopelessly broad navbox. There are simply too many categories of them with too many instances in each. It's a bit like having a navbox that tries to list all "Schools", "Hospitals" or "Parks". The more articles are created, the more untenable the broad navobx will become. If anything, {{Catholic laity}} should be split to each type of lay organization. Each of those can be potentially expanded many-fold. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:58, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Theoretically, possibly, but past years doesn't show a rapid expension getting out of hand, does it? PPEMES (talk) 00:05, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Adding completely useless relist comment
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ‑‑Trialpears (talk) 21:51, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 19:34, 14 December 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:In defensum castitatis

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. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 00:37, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:In defensum castitatis (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Catholic saints (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Template:In defensum castitatis with Template:Catholic saints.
While admittably it is a large template, shouldn't this be estimated one of the larger excepetions for a descent overview? Better keep it together? PPEMES (talk) 00:46, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose this one. The first template is large enough and is a specific enough topic for its own template. Let it stand as is. Randy Kryn (talk) 02:17, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or merge - there is no article for "In defensum castitatis" which fails WP:NAVBOX#4, so this is pure WP:OR which cannot be WP:V. Merge as secondary option. --Gonnym (talk) 07:42, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ‑‑Trialpears (talk) 21:55, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 17:59, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral on the merge, yet I think it would probably be helpful to be able to quickly access these similarly classed individuals. Perhaps a specific cat would serve. Manannan67 (talk) 04:30, 18 December 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:Catholic protection

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. Opinions vary greatly with the 3 comments suggesting drastically different paths forward. No consensus can thus be determined. (non-admin closure) ‑‑Trialpears (talk) 16:13, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Catholic protection (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Prayers of the Catholic Church (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Template:Catholic protection with Template:Prayers of the Catholic Church.
Seems like rather mergable content? PPEMES (talk) 00:18, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 22:26, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Sacramentals are numerous enough to have a navbox of their own. See Category:Sacramentals and subcats (basically all are Catholic). – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 19:59, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 17:58, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. In the first place, I see no purpose for the "Catholic Protection" template at all. It could well be deleted in its entirety with no particular loss. As for Sacramental, I think that's a bit premature as there appears to be some confusion, even among Catholics, as to what are currently termed sacramentals. Both the catechism and the USCCB [1] use the term essentially equating it to "blessings" of one kind or another, with other things previously termed sacramentals described as either "expressions of popular piety" or "devotional articles". Maybe that should be sorted out first. Manannan67 (talk) 07:11, 17 December 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:Horizontal Maya

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 December 25. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 00:36, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

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).