Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2023 February 5: Difference between revisions

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
No edit summary
Line 44: Line 44:
:<p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"><span style="color: #FF6600;">'''{{resize|91%|[[Wikipedia:Deletion process#Relisting discussions|Relisted]] to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}'''</span><br /><small>Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, [[User:Izno|Izno]] ([[User talk:Izno|talk]]) 20:12, 5 February 2023 (UTC)</small><!-- from Template:XfD relist --></p>
:<p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"><span style="color: #FF6600;">'''{{resize|91%|[[Wikipedia:Deletion process#Relisting discussions|Relisted]] to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}'''</span><br /><small>Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, [[User:Izno|Izno]] ([[User talk:Izno|talk]]) 20:12, 5 February 2023 (UTC)</small><!-- from Template:XfD relist --></p>
* ''"Delete both''' I am as usual opposed to the idea of giving unused content a second shot at life because it's in a template - if it were truly desired by the editors of the article(s) Useddennim suggested it could belong on it wouldn't have become unused. [[User:Pppery|* Pppery *]] [[User talk:Pppery|<sub style="color:#800000">it has begun...</sub>]] 03:08, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
* ''"Delete both''' I am as usual opposed to the idea of giving unused content a second shot at life because it's in a template - if it were truly desired by the editors of the article(s) Useddennim suggested it could belong on it wouldn't have become unused. [[User:Pppery|* Pppery *]] [[User talk:Pppery|<sub style="color:#800000">it has begun...</sub>]] 03:08, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
*:'''Comment''' on the general case of being unused, I find that statement untrue, as a zeaolous edit-warrior could just remove them without people noticing; which is how we end up with duplicate templates. Thus templates become used, but were useful, and should have been used.. This is not a keep opinion in this case. I just find the general statement to be rather a poor reason for deletion. -- [[Special:Contributions/64.229.90.199|64.229.90.199]] ([[User talk:64.229.90.199|talk]]) 06:39, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

==== [[Template:UGM Bus Route]] ====
==== [[Template:UGM Bus Route]] ====
* {{Tfd links|UGM Bus Route}}
* {{Tfd links|UGM Bus Route}}

Revision as of 06:39, 11 February 2023

< February 4 February 6 >

February 5

Template:Pp-reset

These three unused templates are redundant to {{pp}}. See the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Protection policy. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:46, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Redirect / Delete No point having duplicate templates to maintain especially when I am not aware of a single page which has been office protected (I am only aware of it through the policy page), so its not as if they are used often either. Terasail[✉️] 00:16, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    On second thought, I think these templates should be left as they are. The module which creates these appears to directly check which template is being called in order to serve the correct banner and since they are individually selected based on which template is transcluded it is probably best to keep things the way they are unless a better solution is provided (I am not the best with modules so I may have misunderstood the nuance of the module here though). Terasail[✉️] 00:30, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as module creator. You could say the same for all the protection templates implemented by Module:Protection banner; they are all essentially the same template, with different default arguments. So you can write {{pp-vandalism|office}}, and it will behave exactly the same as {{pp-office}}. This means that it doesn't make sense to nominate just {{pp-reset}}, {{pp-office}} and {{pp-office-dmca}} for being redundant to {{pp}}, as there are other protection templates that behave in exactly the same way. See here for the full list. I can see the argument that making people write {{pp|vandalism}} is cleaner than allowing them to write both {{pp|vandalism}} and {{pp-vandalism}}, but getting rid of the ability to write {{pp-vandalism}} etc. is going to require at least a few bots to be updated. This seems like a lot of hassle for little appreciable gain. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 10:09, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all I agree with Mr. Stradivarius on the general principle of pp-xx wrappers being useful, but not when they are unused. I would also support removing these from the module as well, for the same reason. In the extremely unlikely event that a page gets protected as an office action and a protection banner is needed, one can be created manually. 03:08, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Template:Khulna-Dhaka line

All three BothUseddenim (talk) 01:01, 2 February 2023 (UTC) unused. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:00, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Both could be added to Khulna railway station (although they should be cleaned up). Useddenim (talk) 01:04, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 22:24, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • "Delete both' I am as usual opposed to the idea of giving unused content a second shot at life because it's in a template - if it were truly desired by the editors of the article(s) Useddennim suggested it could belong on it wouldn't have become unused. * Pppery * it has begun... 03:08, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Fatehabad–Kaptai line

Unused with no articles for use. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:55, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Could go on List of railway lines in Bangladesh. Useddenim (talk) 01:36, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 21:55, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • "Delete both' I am as usual opposed to the idea of giving unused content a second shot at life because it's in a template - if it were truly desired by the editors of the article(s) Useddennim suggested it could belong on it wouldn't have become unused. * Pppery * it has begun... 03:08, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Edmonton–Drumheller train map

Unused. Just a route of the train stops in local communities instead of stations. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 19:57, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 20:12, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • "Delete both' I am as usual opposed to the idea of giving unused content a second shot at life because it's in a template - if it were truly desired by the editors of the article(s) Useddennim suggested it could belong on it wouldn't have become unused. * Pppery * it has begun... 03:08, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment on the general case of being unused, I find that statement untrue, as a zeaolous edit-warrior could just remove them without people noticing; which is how we end up with duplicate templates. Thus templates become used, but were useful, and should have been used.. This is not a keep opinion in this case. I just find the general statement to be rather a poor reason for deletion. -- 64.229.90.199 (talk) 06:39, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Template:UGM Bus Route

Unused. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 19:26, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I will attach it to UGM Wikipedia to explain the University Bus Route. It's not the same with Trans Jogja since it only serves the university. So Keep the template as valuable information and need many contributions to developing it. Thoriq85 (talk) 07:37, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 20:11, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Guerneville Branch

Unused. No links to route stations or a mainspace for use. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 18:43, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 20:11, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Bakersfield Subdivision

Unused with no articles for use. The mainspace article link is a redirect to this template. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 18:58, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 20:11, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Black Butte Subdivision

Unused. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 18:59, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

They are all linked from a respective template. Normally, rail templates are to be used on articles. It doesn't make sense why railway templates need to be linked from another rail template when if they if links to articles exist on respective templates. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 00:31, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 20:10, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Olive Subdivision

All unused. I added the River Subdivision to the main Metrolink article before realizing it was the wrong place. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 19:27, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 20:10, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Template:PNR Northrail

Unused. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 19:40, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 20:10, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2000 Summer Olympics men's football group A standings

unused after being merged with the parent article with attribution. Frietjes (talk) 17:19, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2006 Winter Olympics men's ice hockey group A standings

unused after being merged with the parent article with attribution. Frietjes (talk) 17:19, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2006 Winter Olympics women's ice hockey group A standings

unused after being merged with the parent article with attribution. Frietjes (talk) 17:19, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Template:PLAAF Civilian cadre badges

Single-article content with no template parameters. Subst and delete. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:37, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Template:San Gabriel Subdivision

Unused. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:50, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 14:06, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Downlink selected page

Similar to the two discussions below this banner contributes to banner blindness while contributing very little other than advertising the newsletter. To see the problem in action you can look at basically any page where this template is used such as Talk:International Space Station where there are ten other banners that are more important than this one. --Trialpears (talk) 00:59, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Indonesian selected picture

I thought all of these were deleted, but apparently not. We don't really do selected X banners for portals any more because the banners were deemed to contribute to banner blindness while having very little value with their main use being to advertise the portal. This template is also only used once. --Trialpears (talk) 00:53, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Template:NI selected image

I thought all of these were deleted, but apparently not. We don't really do selected X banners for portals any more because the banners were deemed to contribute to banner blindness while having very little value with their main use being to advertise the portal. This template is also only used once. --Trialpears (talk) 00:53, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2023_February_5&oldid=1138721721"