Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2011 October 17: Difference between revisions
ASCIIn2Bme (talk | contribs) |
|||
Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
*'''Comment''' this is part of a set of three templates, [[Template:Start U.S. Senator]] and [[Template:U.S. Senator row]]. Deleting this one on its own would be bad. [[Special:Contributions/70.24.251.158|70.24.251.158]] ([[User talk:70.24.251.158|talk]]) 04:51, 18 October 2011 (UTC) |
*'''Comment''' this is part of a set of three templates, [[Template:Start U.S. Senator]] and [[Template:U.S. Senator row]]. Deleting this one on its own would be bad. [[Special:Contributions/70.24.251.158|70.24.251.158]] ([[User talk:70.24.251.158|talk]]) 04:51, 18 October 2011 (UTC) |
||
*: I agree, so I added it to the list above. [[User:Frietjes|Frietjes]] ([[User talk:Frietjes|talk]]) 16:58, 18 October 2011 (UTC) |
*: I agree, so I added it to the list above. [[User:Frietjes|Frietjes]] ([[User talk:Frietjes|talk]]) 16:58, 18 October 2011 (UTC) |
||
*'''Comment''' I've asked the relevant wikiprojects about this, since after looking at the lists currently used in (a few) senator list articles, they could use templates instead of bare table code. [[Special:Contributions/70.24.251.158|70.24.251.158]] ([[User talk:70.24.251.158|talk]]) 05:09, 20 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
==== [[Template:Datu Lakandula frigate]] ==== |
==== [[Template:Datu Lakandula frigate]] ==== |
Revision as of 05:09, 20 October 2011
October 17
- Template:Start United Kingdom Supreme Court composition (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:End United Kingdom Supreme Court composition (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
a standard navbox works just fine, this one is not used. 198.102.153.2 (talk) 23:20, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
- Template:Start U.S. Senator (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:U.S. Senator row (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:End U.S. Senator (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
don't need it. 198.102.153.2 (talk) 23:18, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
- Comment this is part of a set of three templates, Template:Start U.S. Senator and Template:U.S. Senator row. Deleting this one on its own would be bad. 70.24.251.158 (talk) 04:51, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
- I agree, so I added it to the list above. Frietjes (talk) 16:58, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
- Comment I've asked the relevant wikiprojects about this, since after looking at the lists currently used in (a few) senator list articles, they could use templates instead of bare table code. 70.24.251.158 (talk) 05:09, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
NENAN 198.102.153.2 (talk) 23:01, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
Delete This is a "go nowhere" template. Only one ship was in that particular class and no other ships will ever qualify for inclusion. Brad (talk) 19:50, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
the only Courtice Cougars that I can find is Courtice Secondary School. 198.102.153.2 (talk) 22:43, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
repeat of Crawley#Climate. 198.102.153.2 (talk) 22:35, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
unused 198.102.153.2 (talk) 22:31, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
- Delete better as a category;unused;no clear definitionCurb Chain (talk) 04:40, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
unused 198.102.153.2 (talk) 22:30, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
- Delete better as a category;unused;no clear definitionCurb Chain (talk) 04:40, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
unused subpage. Frietjes (talk) 21:11, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
we already have this table in the Demographics section of Zamboanga City. Frietjes (talk) 20:18, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
An unused Zodiac date computation template. Frietjes (talk) 20:03, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
unused and not needed. 198.102.153.2 (talk) 17:39, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
"Templates should not do the work of article content in the main article namespace; instead, place the text directly into the article." Cybercobra (talk) 09:25, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
- Comment The rationale given above is problematic: the main purpose of the template is to standardize the text in question, to make it easier to make changes across all the "List of important publications" articles at one time. Thus it is being used to "place recurring messages (such as those to denote stubs, disambiguation pages, etc.) into articles in a consistent manner". Yes, the content of the template is highly specialized and not as general as stubs or disambiguation messages, but the spirit is the same. Full disclosure: I created the template and edited some of the articles it's used on (I mean, beyond just adding the template to them), but this was over 5 years ago, so I have no particular attachment to them. Still, I wonder if a more elegant solution is being considered in place of the template? - dcljr (talk) 09:49, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
- Keep in part for the reasons given above. Also, this is not the time to discuss this. Several of these lists have recently been proposed for deletion, and there is considerable discussion about inclusion criteria. Removing it now is not helpful, but it may be removed after those discussions have progressed. --Bduke (Discussion) 00:52, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
- I see two such nominations that also mention the other similar articles. - dcljr (talk) 01:00, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
- Bduke, I think it is perfectly relevant to discuss this template now. The discussions have no reason not to be concurrent.Curb Chain (talk) 23:23, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
- Maybe, but it seems to me that the content of this template might affect whether it is deleted or not and I was expecting that there might be discussion on inclusion criteria now the AfDs have all been closed as keep. I would like to see that discussion. In response to other points, it could go on the talk page, but my experience is that people add items to these lists which are totally inappropriate without reading the talk page. Its presence has probably cut that down, so I think it has been helpfull. --Bduke (Discussion) 08:38, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
- However, there has been a tendency for people to simply parrot "Breakthrough / Topic Creator /Influence" as their statement of importance. RockMagnetist (talk) 23:02, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
- Maybe, but it seems to me that the content of this template might affect whether it is deleted or not and I was expecting that there might be discussion on inclusion criteria now the AfDs have all been closed as keep. I would like to see that discussion. In response to other points, it could go on the talk page, but my experience is that people add items to these lists which are totally inappropriate without reading the talk page. Its presence has probably cut that down, so I think it has been helpfull. --Bduke (Discussion) 08:38, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
- Comment Cybercobra, are you aware of the history of this template? It was created because there were frequent AfDs for the articles it is used in. It was an attempt to standardize the criteria for inclusion in these lists so they would satisfy the notability criteria. My impression is that it helped. RockMagnetist (talk) 23:18, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
- Comment Perhaps the same end could be pursued using a template like {{Stand-alone list}} on the Talk pages. RockMagnetist (talk) 23:44, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
- Comment Is the text in this template really "content"? It's more like a preamble or meta-content. RockMagnetist (talk) 23:26, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
- Weak keep. I don't see how this template fundamentally differs from an infobox in purpose. It may be more appropriate to have different text in each list, but I'm not convinced that uniform wording is inappropriate either. Have mörser, will travel (talk) 01:30, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
"Article cv#" templates
- Template:UndecidedSCOTUS (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Only used once in an article, and states something that is obvious. This template does nothing to promote improvement of the article or denote anything of much use. /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 01:15, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
- Delete Looks to me it can be replaced with Template:Current.Curb Chain (talk) 08:21, 17 October 2011 (UTC)