Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2016 February 10: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Adding Template:Tptp. (TW)
Line 19: Line 19:
* {{Tfd links|Boxquote}}
* {{Tfd links|Boxquote}}
Unused. It's actually important that we eliminate these random redirects to [[:Category:Pull quote templates|pull quote templates]], since they are a vector for ignoring [[MOS:QUOTE]] and abusing pull quote templates for block quotations in mainspace. <span style="white-space:nowrap;font-family:'Trebuchet MS'"> — [[User:SMcCandlish|'''SMcCandlish''' ☺]] [[User talk:SMcCandlish|☏]] [[Special:Contributions/SMcCandlish|¢]] ≽<sup>ʌ</sup>ⱷ҅<sub>ᴥ</sub>ⱷ<sup>ʌ</sup>≼ </span> 04:30, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
Unused. It's actually important that we eliminate these random redirects to [[:Category:Pull quote templates|pull quote templates]], since they are a vector for ignoring [[MOS:QUOTE]] and abusing pull quote templates for block quotations in mainspace. <span style="white-space:nowrap;font-family:'Trebuchet MS'"> — [[User:SMcCandlish|'''SMcCandlish''' ☺]] [[User talk:SMcCandlish|☏]] [[Special:Contributions/SMcCandlish|¢]] ≽<sup>ʌ</sup>ⱷ҅<sub>ᴥ</sub>ⱷ<sup>ʌ</sup>≼ </span> 04:30, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

* Say what? I'm not sure what you mean by 'a vector for abusing MOS:QUOTE'; however, it sounds as if you think that editors who don't follow the MOS are pathogens and the only way to 'control' them is to make it harder for people to find and use the template that they are (correct to your style standards or not) trying to find. That comes off as rather disrespectful (with a terrifying nod toward the [[Ministry of Truth]]) don't you think?
:In any case, this redirect clearly seems common enough that it should go somewhere: perhaps to [[Template:Quote]] (which is, an 'easier to type and is more wiki-like than the equivalent HTML {{tag|blockquote}}'.) Although I personally feel that the current redirect, to what many people think of when they imagine a block quote, is appropriate. [[User: Crazynas|Crazynas]]<sup> [[User_talk:Crazynas|t]]</sup> 07:42, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

==== [[Template:Worcester Tornadoes roster]] ====
==== [[Template:Worcester Tornadoes roster]] ====
* {{Tfd links|Worcester Tornadoes roster}}
* {{Tfd links|Worcester Tornadoes roster}}

Revision as of 07:42, 10 February 2016

February 10

Unused, and seems unlikely to be used per WP:NOTSOCIALNETWORK. Better known templates are available for specifying who a message is for ({{ping}}, {{to}}) or for indicating (if appropriate) mood (Wikipedia:Emoticons, some of the Image with comment templates, or plain wikitext). Or userfy it if the creator Anyeverybody wants it in their userspace. Evad37 [talk] 06:07, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. It's actually important that we eliminate these random redirects to pull quote templates, since they are a vector for ignoring MOS:QUOTE and abusing pull quote templates for block quotations in mainspace.  — SMcCandlish ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ʌ≼  04:30, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Say what? I'm not sure what you mean by 'a vector for abusing MOS:QUOTE'; however, it sounds as if you think that editors who don't follow the MOS are pathogens and the only way to 'control' them is to make it harder for people to find and use the template that they are (correct to your style standards or not) trying to find. That comes off as rather disrespectful (with a terrifying nod toward the Ministry of Truth) don't you think?
In any case, this redirect clearly seems common enough that it should go somewhere: perhaps to Template:Quote (which is, an 'easier to type and is more wiki-like than the equivalent HTML <blockquote>...</blockquote>'.) Although I personally feel that the current redirect, to what many people think of when they imagine a block quote, is appropriate. Crazynas t 07:42, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This team disbanded in 2012, which means a roster template is not needed anymore. MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 02:04, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is apparently in a foreign language. It's only used in a sandbox. I think it may be a test, but wasn't sure enough to speedy it on my own. —PC-XT+ 00:20, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete No English content, no information about why it should be; content appears to be a table for singers, so should not ever be written in Korean instead of English. English Wikipedia is not a dumping ground for non-English content -- 70.51.200.135 (talk) 01:41, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]