Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2024 November 12
How often are people getting both of these rights at the same time? I don't see why we should have a template specifically for this instead of just using {{Rollback granted}} and {{Pending changes reviewer granted}} separately. – 🌻 Hilst (talk | contribs) 23:40, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
- Weak delete – these are "thematically related", so I can see why the template was created, but I don't think that outweighs the costs of duplicating templates. If this could be reimplemented as a "thin wrapper" around {{rollback granted}} and {{pending changes reviewer granted}}, I'd support keeping it. jlwoodwa (talk) 23:46, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. I frequently assign both at the same time because both are useful for recent changes patrolling and I use this template. I find it baffling to see two non-admins debate the use of a template tyat is always substituted and only used by admins. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 09:49, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
- Neutral; reviewer is a very low risk right and I tend to just throw it in with other rights (namely autopatrolled and, yes, rollbacker); perhaps make a "multiple rights granted" template and make this a wrapper of that? charlotte 👸♥📱 13:14, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. I'm inclined to the simpler substing of the two separate templates. Forking the commentary in the others is also not a good thing. Izno (talk) 22:36, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Harmless, if people grant these two rights together they may as well use a template saying they did it. * Pppery * it has begun... 04:21, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
- The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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) 22:32, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
Only links two pages (Lithuanian–Bermontian War and Battle of Radviliškis), which are already linked to each other. Should be either deleted (per WP:NENAN), or possibly merged with others into a wider navbox about the Lithuanian Wars of Independence. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 20:03, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 19:17, 17 November 2024 (UTC)
- The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 2024 November 19. Izno (talk) 22:33, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
- Template:Gaardebaach (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- Template:Lzh (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Unnecessary wrapper of {{lang}}. We're moving away from specific templates for each language as they require an additional maintenance burden and are less flexible. See similar discussion for lang-?? templates. Replace usages with {{lang|lzh}}
and delete template after. Gonnym (talk) 15:22, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect Can't this usage just be redirected to (or wrap)
{{lang|lzh}}
? This template only has transclusions on about forty articles and talkpages, but I'm worried what precedent this is setting for {{zhi}} (639 transclusions) and {{zh}} (~70,000 transclusions), both of which wrap {{lang-zh}}.Reducing maintenance burden is fine, but I neither A. want a bot run to blow up my watchlist on hundreds of articles substituting {{lang}} for wrappers of {{lang-zh}}, nor B. want to have to type{{lang|zh}}
every single time I have to type Chinese characters somewhere, which might be dozens to hundreds of times per article, depending on the subject.Seems like it would be better to handle cases like these on the backend instead of forcing more specific syntax onto all editors (which is also a kind of maintenance burden). Folly Mox (talk) 16:37, 13 November 2024 (UTC)- I agree with Folly, but I've created enough headaches for TfD maintainers based on templates I've created to suit my own particular preferences, and will defer to see if others find them potentially useful or not. Remsense ‥ 论 22:18, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
{{lzh}}
is already a wrapper around{{lang}}
. It could be made a redirect.{{zhi}}
is a very poorly named redirect to{{Zh-no-labels}}
which invokes Module:Lang-zh – poorly named becausezhi
is the ISO 639-3 tag for Zhire, a Nigerian language.{{zh}}
is a redirect to{{lang-zh}}
which also invokes Module:Lang-zh.- You wrote:
I neither ... B. want to have to type
{{lang|zh}}
- Wait! What? You are quite willing to type:
I neither ... B. want to have to type {{code|1={{((}}lang{{!}}zh{{))}}}}
{{tld|lang|zh}}
is much shorter/easier. Seems like that argument doesn't carry much water.- —Trappist the monk (talk) 15:04, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect Can't this usage just be redirected to (or wrap)
- @Gonnym this is essentially a typing shortcut. Would it be satisfactory to have it auto-subst per AnomieBOT? Remsense ‥ 论 22:19, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
- I'm firmly against having any sort of subst only template for any language template. We've just deleted over 1400 lang-xx templates, and over the years deleted even more language related templates. This is an extremely outdated system (having a template for each language) that causes much more harm then it saves. The 5 additional characters you save aren't worth this hassle. Fox is worried about his watchlist, so instead you are suggesting that every single edit now will have an additional bot edit? Regarding {{zh}} that template is not a wrapper but a redirect. It has nothing to do with this discussion and is red herring. Gonnym (talk) 12:03, 17 November 2024 (UTC)
- I understand, and don't want to create more headaches. Would you like me to go through and replace it? Remsense ‥ 论 20:19, 17 November 2024 (UTC)
- delete per nom. —Trappist the monk (talk) 15:04, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
- I'm firmly against having any sort of subst only template for any language template. We've just deleted over 1400 lang-xx templates, and over the years deleted even more language related templates. This is an extremely outdated system (having a template for each language) that causes much more harm then it saves. The 5 additional characters you save aren't worth this hassle. Fox is worried about his watchlist, so instead you are suggesting that every single edit now will have an additional bot edit? Regarding {{zh}} that template is not a wrapper but a redirect. It has nothing to do with this discussion and is red herring. Gonnym (talk) 12:03, 17 November 2024 (UTC)
- Interesting discussion. Who doesn't love templates? But we have a problem here in user space. I came to this discussion because of Simplified Chinese characters#History. {{lzh}} now linking to ‹See Tfd›. Dcattell (talk)
- If you are talking about the ‹See Tfd› annotation, that has nothing to do with the discussion but is added by
{{Template for discussion}}
via{{Template for discussion/dated}}
. - What do you mean by
we have a problem here in user space
? The article you link is not in the User names space. - —Trappist the monk (talk) 17:01, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
- What I meant is that goal of Wikipedia is for people to be able to use an online encyclopedia as an encyclopedia. That is our goal, is it not? The average user in that sense is in "user space", I would say. "User name space" of course is different and more technical. What I am saying is that we should be mindful to help the actual end "user" (by which I mean "reader" not "editor" or whatever). Having a completely public-facing link to our discussion about template deletion just before various Chinese characters in numerous articles is not a good thing. I suggest that you reverse the template deletion immediately until something better is figured out. I guess I should have said "article space" not "user space". However, I think of user space as the Wikipedia area where mostly non-Wikipedia editors, administrators, sysops, or whatever just want to read a decent article. The "end user". Our readers all around the world see this in real time. Maybe actually look at actual article? Does not look good. This humble editor requests a fix as soon as possible. Dcattell (talk) 17:36, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
- PS I added the tfd link via the lzh template, not the one(s) you mention above. Dcattell (talk) 17:44, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
- As part of the TfD process, discussed templates are modified to add one of several possible tags, one of which is ‹See Tfd›; see step 'I: Tag the template' at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion § Listing a template.
- —Trappist the monk (talk) 18:02, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
- If you object to the labeling that is part of the normal WP:TFD process, this discussion is not the right venue. Perhaps the correct venue for such complaints is WT:TFD. This discussion is about
{{lzh}}
and nothing else. - —Trappist the monk (talk) 18:02, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
- My discussion here is solely linked to this particular template as currently implemented in a very bad way. My point is that the current state of lzh template is breaking stuff in article space. I am sure that there are complex technical reasons for this, possibly pre-existing, but more probably related to recent changes. I'm not sure what went wrong or when. Full disclosure: I don't use this template. I really don't care that much, except generally trying to improve Wikipedia.
- Probably what I should have said is:
- Article space broken
- Urgent action required. Recent changes to the {{lzh}} template are potentially an embarrassment to Wikipedia and those particular individual(s) involved leading to this incident. Articles with {{lzh}} tag now link to this discussion, in real life.
- Obviously, every article with this template should not be linking to this discussion with every instance of the transcluded template, but they do, and I am pretty sure that any discussion labeling is not supposed to be carried out in this manner throughout main article space, but it is.
- I'm pretty much done with this. I was merely attempting to provide some helpful feedback on the apparently unexpected current performance of this template tag. I would not expect the performance of this template transclusion in article space to lead to a link to a discussion about template deletion. However, that is what is going on. This can be verified by going to an article with this template tag: you don't even need to look at the code. If you want every article on en.Wikipedia with this template tag to link to this discussion in each and every instance of its use, then you have indeed achieved your desire. My tendency when I see something on Wikipedia that can be improved, then I tend just do it when and if I have the time. In this case I think that I will leave it up to someone else.
- Respectfully yours toward a better Wikipedia,
- Dcattell (talk) 20:42, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
- PS My sincere apologies to everyone involved here. I did not due my due diligence to research everything going on here, who did what, and whatever, and how the whole template process is working these days. I went on for far too long about various issues about the whole process. I have looked a bit more into things, as I should have done to begin with. My only excuse is that changing out the lzh template for a link to this discussion was a bad idea, and in fact the one which lead me here, where I've probably just been a big waste of time. I guess I was a bit shocked to see a discussion tag in front of Chinese characters, which could better have appeared without any tagging. Sometimes I just want to read articles, and find the editorial discussion inclusions to be intrusive. Other times I edit articles. But here I go again...
- Thank you everyone, and especially Trappist the monk, for helping point me in the right direction.
- Dcattell (talk) 21:51, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
- PS I added the tfd link via the lzh template, not the one(s) you mention above. Dcattell (talk) 17:44, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
- What I meant is that goal of Wikipedia is for people to be able to use an online encyclopedia as an encyclopedia. That is our goal, is it not? The average user in that sense is in "user space", I would say. "User name space" of course is different and more technical. What I am saying is that we should be mindful to help the actual end "user" (by which I mean "reader" not "editor" or whatever). Having a completely public-facing link to our discussion about template deletion just before various Chinese characters in numerous articles is not a good thing. I suggest that you reverse the template deletion immediately until something better is figured out. I guess I should have said "article space" not "user space". However, I think of user space as the Wikipedia area where mostly non-Wikipedia editors, administrators, sysops, or whatever just want to read a decent article. The "end user". Our readers all around the world see this in real time. Maybe actually look at actual article? Does not look good. This humble editor requests a fix as soon as possible. Dcattell (talk) 17:36, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
- If you are talking about the ‹See Tfd› annotation, that has nothing to do with the discussion but is added by
- Delete per Ttm. Izno (talk) 22:39, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
- The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 2024 November 19. Izno (talk) 22:33, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
- Template:Alt (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 2024 November 19. Izno (talk) 22:34, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
- Template:WikiProject_Bangladesh_Premier_League_Member (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:WikiProject_Bangladesh_Premier_League_Member/Inactive (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:WikiProject_Bangladesh_Premier_League_Members (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:WP_BPL_Article_Improvement_Program (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 14:24, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
Unused as A514 road was redirected. Gonnym (talk) 13:52, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 19:19, 17 November 2024 (UTC)
- The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 14:24, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
Unused sub-page and not found in an insource search. Gonnym (talk) 13:38, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 19:19, 17 November 2024 (UTC)
- The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 Speedy delete. G7 SilverLocust 💬 23:32, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
- Template:Certification Table Entry/Sales/SpanishPeriod (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Seems to be no longer used anywhere in the code? [1]. Solidest (talk) 12:48, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
- Speedy WP:G7 as author. --Muhandes (talk) 22:59, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
- The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 14:23, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
- Template:Polytonic (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template was deprecated years ago and is only found in one misuse of .css page. Template should be deleted. Gonnym (talk) 10:02, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
- I've removed the use on the .css page. Izno (talk) 20:47, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. * Pppery * it has begun... 05:00, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
- The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- Template:Lang-grc-gre (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
This template should be replaced with the newly created {{langx}}, which accepts various Greek languages:
- ["grc-x-aeolic"] = "Aeolic Greek"
- ["grc-x-attic"] = "Attic Greek"
- ["grc-x-biblical"] = "Biblical Greek"
- ["grc-x-byzant"] = "Byzantine Greek"
- ["grc-x-classic"] = "Classical Greek"
- ["grc-x-doric"] = "Doric Greek"
- ["grc-x-hellen"] = "Hellenistic Greek"
- ["grc-x-ionic"] = "Ionic Greek"
- ["grc-x-koine"] = "Koinē Greek"
- ["grc-x-medieval"] = "Medieval Greek"
- ["grc-x-patris"] = "Patristic Greek"
- ["grk-x-proto"] = "Proto-Greek"
Which Module:Lang/data, which handles the code says the above codes are
preferred alternates to the non-standard catchall code grc-gre
. See also the related TfD which deleted most individual lang-?? templates. Gonnym (talk) 09:56, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: {{Langx}} does not support parameter for
grc-gre
, unlike custom {{Lang-??}} templates {{Lang-rus}}, {{Lang-zh}} and {{Lang-sr-Latn-Cyrl}}. Absolutiva (talk) 23:19, 14 November 2024 (UTC)- You are marginally correct. It is true that
{{langx}}
does not support thegrc-gre
language tag. This is becausegrc-gre
is not a valid IETF language tag;gre
is not a valid extlang; see the IANA language-subtag-registry.{{lang-rus}}
,{{lang-zh}}
, and{{Lang-sr-Latn-Cyrl}}
have nothing to do with{{lang-grc-gre}}
. Both{{lang-rus}}
and{{lang-zh}}
support a variety of parameters that are not shared between them and were never supported by{{lang-grc-gre}}
or the now deleted 1150-ish{{lang-??}}
templates.{{Lang-sr-Latn-Cyrl}}
is specifically intended for languages where two scripts have equal standing and where the Latin form is not a romanization of the Cyrillic form; again, characteristics not shared with{{lang-grc-gre}}
and the{{lang-??}}
templates. - —Trappist the monk (talk) 02:18, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
- You are marginally correct. It is true that
- replace with
{{langx}}
and then delete: According to its documentation,{{lang-grc-gre}}
is to be used for Ancient Greek; hence thegrc
in its name. Internally, the template uses{{lang}}
with the language taggrc
.{{lang}}
and{{langx}}
understandgrc
to be Ancient Greek so comparing{{lang-grc}}
to{{langx|grc}}
shows that their outputs are quite similar: - The obvious differences are the linked labels and
{{lang-grc-gre}}
incorrectly uses double quotes for the gloss. The outputs are sufficiently similar that there is no real need to keep{{lang-grc-gre}}
– it does nothing special. - —Trappist the monk (talk) 02:18, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
- Replace en masse and delete, per Trappist the monk. Judging by the example given above, the two are largely identical in terms of output, with the few minor differences between the two favouring langx. In particular, I don't know why a template for ancient Greek would contain the descriptor "Greek" instead of "Ancient Greek", especially with a link to Greek language, rather than to Ancient Greek, as this seems somewhat misleading. – Michael Aurel (talk) 10:15, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
- Modify Parameters before replacement. There seems to be an conceptual error, you speak of "various Greek languages" and this is not accurate: what difference is there between Attic Greek and Classical Greek? It is not best to consider them separate languages. The English equivalent is to say "Victorian English is a language different from American English" and in some sense you would be right, but most words are written and even pronounced the same, and it would be mad to have a dozen English tags. Also you are missing entirely the Homeric Greek which under these assumptions would be yet another different language. So pick a side. Either keep it as it is now ("we herby declare there are no dialects and every smallest variant is its own language") or better, simplify all categories into a lump category for all polytonic greek. El Huinca (talk) 18:50, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
- You can use {{langx|grc|...}} for output in ancient Greek generally, and in the majority of cases this is surely what would be used. I don't really see any issue with having the added choice of specifying a dialect or variant, for cases in which that's useful or appropriate. – Michael Aurel (talk) 19:31, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per Ttm. Izno (talk) 22:39, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
- The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 14:21, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
- Template:Welcome-he-wiki (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Welcomeen-en (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Templates are redundant; Template:Welcomeen-he and Template:Welcome-foreign can be used instead (respectively). Frostly (talk) 04:26, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Seems to duplicate other templates. Gonnym (talk) 10:20, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
- The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.