Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 September 10

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< September 9 September 11 >

September 10

[edit]

Template:Gaziantepspor squad

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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) 00:20, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The club has been dissolved. There are no players at this club anymore, since it doesn't exist anymore. KingSkyLord (talk | contribs) 23:02, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 15:08, 11 September 2021 (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).

Module:Codeforces Color

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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) 00:22, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's appropriate to blindly copy the color scheme from an external website when displaying ranks in an infobox like this. * Pppery * it has begun... 22:23, 10 September 2021 (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:Indic glyph

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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 split and refactor. VanIsaac, MPLL contWpWS 22:27, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I honestly don't know what to do with this template. As a general infobox supporter, this is simply excessive. I think it could feasibly be turned into some sort of 'gallery-like' template in a non-lead section of an article, but this template is not something anyone should have to deal with in the lead.

Listed for deletion, but definitely seeking discussion. Izno (talk) 21:18, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: Is this really an infobox in terms of how it is used? It seems like it is grouping a whole bunch of historically-related glyphs so that the reader can observe their similarities and differences as used in different languages. The problem with reducing the complexity is that a glyph with the same meaning and name is represented differently in different scripts, and there is no clear way of prioritizing any of the major ones over each other. So instead of a Latin letter's infobox where there is a clear primary representation, here there are about 10. (Also, maybe the major editors of the template, User:Kutchkutch and User:Vanisaac, might be interested in commenting.) TheFeds 23:45, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Right, it's really just not an infobox with that much crud in it. The crud might be valid to put somewhere on the page, again, in some sort of gallery thingy, but this is just a mess as-is. Izno (talk) 03:07, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Maybe the only action needed is to improve the formatting? It looks like it is transcluded in just 52 places (mostly the Indic glyphs themselves), and in each of those cases there seems to be a need to represent several different scripts that share the same glyphs in different forms. At least doing it this way ensures consistent visual presentation, even if that presentation is unusual for an infobox, and leans hard on Unicode to be intelligible. Maybe it could be changed to not inherit the infobox styles, if that is an issue? But I don't think most readers will be particularly harmed by its presence (even though people who don't read these languages might be confused by the symbols themselves). I can imagine that if assistive technology output (like from a screen reader) gives priority to an infobox, this one is going to give them a whole lot less benefit. (That's speculation; I don't know if it is actually an issue.) TheFeds 06:24, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    The reason for using infobox was mostly just to position it correctly on the page and to help organize the IAST/IPA/ISCII information at the bottom. If there is a better option for that formatting that doesn't have the drawbacks of using an infobox (Google scraping, etc.) I'd be happy to see it migrated over. Given Izno (talk · contribs)'s declaration that this is more of an invitation to discussion, would this be better handled as an WP:RFC at the talk page instead? VanIsaac, MPLL contWpWS 17:10, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Nah, the D in TFD stands for discussion. Izno (talk) 17:16, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, split tables, move to article proper, added explanations to tables. Infoboxes, in general, give a fast-glance summary of the article. When I look at Ka (Indic) as a random example I have no idea what I'm even reading. This means that it fails in its purpose. If the tables need more information to be understood then they belong in the article itself. Regarding the formatting, this infobox creates visually broken tables in mobile. Gonnym (talk) 22:11, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Gonnym: Would you be against converting this template from an infobox to a gallery thingy? Not a <gallery> or {{gallery}} but just some flex-box/list of items displayed like a gallery? Izno (talk) 22:47, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm wondering if there maybe isn't an argument for a content fork here: Use the half dozen examplar characters and IPA/IAST/ISCII information as a true infobox that can include more infobox-like information, like the derivation of the Brahmi script via the Aramaic hypothesis and its cognates outside the Brahmic script family. Instead of running the navigation through the template, make an actual navbox - something like {{kana gojuon sidebar}} would probably work well - either appended by default to the infobox or as a stand-alone navbox. Then migrate this template to be a full listing of characters with codepoints, but format it in a way that allows for a more meaningful presentation - possibly a genetic tree showing the derivation of Indic scripts. VanIsaac, MPLL contWpWS 20:02, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Not against a gallery or any other kind of presentation, so long as the content there is understandable by someone that doesn't already know what they are looking at. The current style fails in that. Gonnym (talk) 07:12, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Okay, I've created a new navigation sidebar to replace the bespoke navigation buttons on this template, and I've included that template in this one until we get the new infobox up and running. It will definitely take a while to get this template converted into the form of a genetic table, but I think we have a workable plan to make this better. VanIsaac, MPLL contWpWS 23:43, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have migrated all of the articles at category:Indic letters to use the new infobox. It's still quite unwieldy, but once we have built a new version of {{Indic glyph}} with better presentation of its information, we will be able to get it into the article body and get the infobox and lede into a much more elegant state. Could someone please close this discussion and remove the notice from the template? VanIsaac, MPLL contWpWS 22:06, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Samantha Stosur

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. Izno (talk) 15:21, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is already on Samantha Stosur's article and Samantha Stosur career statistics. The only place this will go is on the bottom of Stosur's own article. Per discussions at Project Tennis I see no need for templates for every player in tennis. And these are being created suddenly by the same editor/clones Fyunck(click) (talk) 18:48, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete This is basically article content on a navbox. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 19:40, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: @Fyunck(click):, your ad hominem doesn't work here as an proof. You simply don't value navigation in the template. Templates' main point of existence for me is rivalries pages, coaches & other meaningful info that allows Wikipedia readers, not just tennis journalists, to get a clue about tennis. It's up for further discussion and not deletion. They have been created so far only for singles GSs champions or people with interesting careers and unique achievements (SF at a first GS). Sam Stosur template is not the best for cleansing, imho. You'd better start with the Jew, Template:Aslan Karatsev. Just kidding. Revolynka (talk) 11:26, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know how you get the nomination as an ad hominem attack but your comment on here is absolutely not constructive. – The Grid (talk) 18:05, 11 September 2021 (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:Shreekant Ahire sandbox

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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) 22:00, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Misplaced user sandbox - also exists at User:Ashishraj 1906/sandbox GoingBatty (talk) 14:45, 10 September 2021 (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:A.S. Livorno Calcio squad

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. ✗plicit 13:54, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Club no longer existing, excluded from football in 2021, all of its players released from their contracts. It has been refounded under a different name and restarting as a regional amateur club in Eccellenza. See [1] as a reference for the club's exclusion. (Please note only professional footballers are generally deemed to be notable, so playing for the refounded Livorno in this season would not be considered a factor of notability) Angelo (talk) 09:11, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 15:08, 11 September 2021 (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/2021_September_10&oldid=1046677727"