Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2013 September 4

September 4

Template:Premier league table 2007/08

Template:Premier league table 2007/08 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused template Brayan Jaimes (talk) 23:13, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

• delete Frietjes (talk) 23:06, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Template:Fb c13 qr

Template:Fb c13 qr (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused template Brayan Jaimes (talk) 23:06, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

• delete Frietjes (talk) 23:06, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Template:Call of Duty chronology

Template:Call of Duty chronology (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Per a Video Games WikiProject discussion concerning chronology templates; this template lists games in a semi-chronological fashion, which is unnecessary to put in a template for articles (probably WP:OR), because chronology isn't important for the series' as a whole, with several story arcs listed, which in turn don't have anything to do with each other. Template is redundant then, with an infobox on the bottom with every CoD article, which of course lists the games. Soetermans. T / C 20:00, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

• Delete ~ It's pretty clear that this is redundant. --Izno (talk) 01:11, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
• Delete per the redundancies the nominee suggested. The template provides the same information as Template:Call of Duty series, albeit in a more confusing way. CR4ZE (talk) 04:05, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
• Delete. Hi. It is a template-based method of disseminating unreferenced contents. The WP:OR probability is strong here. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 12:16, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
• Keep. This template is useful for putting the different games in the series in context in an easy-to-read format. They shed light on the fictional chronology of the different games so the reader can get a better sense of where they fit in. Most people do not scroll to the bottom of the page to read the navigation box at the bottom, and the nav boxes are usually so massive anyways that it's near-impossible to find meaningful information in a timely manner. I support small templates with clearly defined purposes and actual navigational utility to the reader - all of which this template is. Some additional sourcing would help and would greatly reduce WP:SYN concerns. CaseyPenk (talk) 17:20, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
• Keep per CaseyPenk. Also disagree with it being OR. CRRaysHead90 | ^{Get Some!} 06:17, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
• Keep I strongly agree with CaseyPenk's argument. Seeking info on CoD series, the 'fictional chronology' table on wiki really helped me make sense of the CoD series' chronology, and was a 'quick help' for my buying preference.

Template:LDSpresidingbishopric

Template:LDSpresidingbishopric (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:LDSpresidingbishop (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Template:LDSpresidingbishopric with Template:LDSpresidingbishop.
I think that Template:LDSpresidingbishop and Template:LDSpresidingbishopric should be merged. After all the Presiding Bishop is part of the Presiding Bishopric so the page is actually incomplete. It would look like this.

--ARTEST4ECHO (^talk/_contribs) 19:43, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

• Support. I don't think there is any reason to keep these separate, and one template can easily accommodate both. This is how things are typically done with the templates for presidencies of other LDS Church auxiliaries and bodies. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 19:54, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
• Support merging - no reason for 2 templates for this functionality --Trödel 05:59, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
• Comment I have done the coding work needed to make this merge happen. It can be found at User:ARTEST4ECHO/template2. Once this discussion is closed, I am more then willing to do the work (i.e. copy and paste) to merge the two templates. --ARTEST4ECHO (^talk/_contribs) 13:56, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
  • I have also included the appropriate documentation needed here.--ARTEST4ECHO (^talk/_contribs) 14:22, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
• Support Good consolidation, thanks Artest4echo for doing the legwork upfront. —Eustress ^talk 14:13, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Thanks, this seems to be a pretty self evident merge, but I don't want to be accused to not doing this the right way.--ARTEST4ECHO (^talk/_contribs) 14:22, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Template:Maxthon

Template:Maxthon (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This navbox win the "Most Pointless Navbox" award. It is nothing but a collection of indiscriminate links, some of them are external. Besides, it is only used (and only usable) on one article, so no need for template at all. Two links in it that you might be interested in keeping are already used repeatedly in Maxthon article. Codename Lisa (talk) 16:43, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Creator here, feel free to delete. I was just imitating templates I'd seen other places, I don't know much about their criteria. Zanglazor (talk) 16:56, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

• delete, or speedy delete per author approval. Frietjes (talk) 18:02, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Template:Grand Theft Auto chronology

Template:Grand Theft Auto chronology (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Per a Video Games WikiProject discussion concerning chronology templates; this template lists games in a semi-chronological fashion, which I guess is probably WP:OR, because chronology isn't important for the series' continuity, which it barely has at all. Three "eras" are listed, which in turn don't have much to do with each other either (except for the occasional cameo of a character), which are incorrect to begin with: HD games are also in 3D, while China Town isn't in high-definition. Template is redundant then, with an infobox on the bottom of every GTA article, which of course lists the games. Soetermans. T / C 16:02, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

• delete, if this is important, then put it in the main article, but no need to duplicate the navigation already provided by the navbox. Frietjes (talk) 18:04, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
• Delete per the redundancies the nominee suggested. The template provides the same information as Template:Grand Theft Auto, albeit in a more confusing way. CR4ZE (talk) 04:03, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
• Comment: The eras are actually called "2D", "3D" and "HD" eras officially by Rockstar Games themselves, despite the redundancies. --Rhain1999 (talk) 06:11, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
• Delete as the template does little to add to the content of the article, and anyway is made essentially redundant by the larger GTA template. Astonmartini (?) 06:23, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
• Delete. Hi. This template disseminates unreferenced info. The WP:OR problem is a very big issue here. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 12:19, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
• Keep. This template is useful for putting the different games in the series in context in an easy-to-read format. They shed light on the fictional chronology of the different games so the reader can get a better sense of where they fit in. Most people do not scroll to the bottom of the page to read the navigation box at the bottom, and the nav boxes are usually so massive anyways that it's near-impossible to find meaningful information in a timely manner. I support small templates with clearly defined purposes and actual navigational utility to the reader - all of which this template is. Some additional sourcing would help and would greatly reduce WP:SYN concerns. CaseyPenk (talk) 17:20, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

• Hi, Casey. There comes your sock-puppet below. (Joking! But all the same, damaging...) "Most people do not scroll to the bottom"? No, people just press End key to hop to the bottom because most of the times there is a navbox there. They don't scroll and don't see this box in the middle, so all the more reason to delete this. ;)

But joking aside, if you think there are any sources, you find them and add them. Only then, we can have a discussion in which keeping is a choice. Even then, merging is another choice. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 21:36, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

• Keep. ^ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.30.10.44 (talk) 18:46, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

• Strong Keep. The infobox at the bottom only breaks down the games based on their types (Main series, Handhelds, Expansions etc.), while Rockstar Games officially breaks Grand Theft Auto franchise into three distinct universes. The 2D Universe encompass the original top down, 2D games in the franchise and have their own chronology. Beginning with Grand Theft Auto III, the primary games became more open-world 3D, which Rockstar recognizes as the 3D Universe. There are is a 2D game, Grand Theft Auto Advance in there, but it is set in the same universe as Grand Theft Auto III, and that's why its part of the 3D universe. All games in this universe have an interwoven storyline involving the Forelli family, and the Leone family, which goes a lot further than a few cameos and tie up all the games in this universe together. While each game has its own plotline, there is a significant overarching storyline which can only be explained with a chronological context starting with Vice City Stories and continuing with Vice City, San Andreas, Liberty City Stories, and culminating with Grand Theft Auto III. Finally, the HD Universe began with the HD consoles like the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 and of course the games are 3D in this generation as well, but they are clearly different from the 3D Universe. Up till now, the only major console games released for this generation are Grand Theft Auto IV and its two parallel episodes, which have a complex interwoven storyline. While both episodes were originally released as expansions for the Xbox 360 version of the game, they were bundled together as a standalone release for the PC and PlayStation 3, and the Xbox 360. It remains to be seen how deeply, if at all, Grand Theft Auto V will be integrated to the storyline of IV, but according to Rockstar's statements, it does exist in the same HD Universe and chronology. The bottom template fails to communicate this relationship between the games and how they are grouped together between each generation. The timeline in the 3D Universe is also important to convey the overall narrative of the games. It appears that the OP may not have a clear grasp of the subject matter, hence the need for this discussion.  UzEE  14:25, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Deprecated South African templates

Template:Infobox South African subplace (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Infobox South African town (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Metadata South Africa subplaces (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Metadata South Africa/Joburg regions (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Metadata South Africa/mainplace/area (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Metadata South Africa/mainplace/district (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Metadata South Africa/mainplace/langs (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Metadata South Africa/mainplace/muni (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Metadata South Africa/mainplace/name (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Metadata South Africa/mainplace/population (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Metadata South Africa/mainplace/province (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Metadata South Africa/mainplace/race (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Metadata ZA area mainplace-1 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Metadata ZA area mainplace-2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Metadata ZA area mainplace-3 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Metadata ZA area mainplace-4 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Metadata ZA area mainplace-5 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Metadata ZA area mainplace-6 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Metadata ZA area mainplace-7 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Metadata ZA area mainplace-8 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Metadata ZA area mainplace-9 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Metadata ZA lang mainplace-1 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Metadata ZA lang mainplace-2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Metadata ZA lang mainplace-3 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Metadata ZA lang mainplace-4 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Metadata ZA lang mainplace-5 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Metadata ZA lang mainplace-6 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Metadata ZA lang mainplace-7 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Metadata ZA lang mainplace-8 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Metadata ZA lang mainplace-9 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Metadata ZA race mainplace-1 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Metadata ZA race mainplace-2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Metadata ZA race mainplace-3 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Metadata ZA race mainplace-4 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Metadata ZA race mainplace-5 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Metadata ZA race mainplace-6 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Metadata ZA race mainplace-7 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Metadata ZA race mainplace-8 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Metadata ZA race mainplace-9 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Metadata population ZA-1/doc (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Metadata ZA population mainplace-1 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Metadata ZA population mainplace-2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Metadata ZA population mainplace-3 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Metadata ZA population mainplace-4 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Metadata ZA population mainplace-6 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Metadata ZA population mainplace-7 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Metadata ZA population mainplace-8 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Metadata ZA population mainplace-9 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Several hundred edits later, all articles about South African towns are using the new Template:Infobox South African town 2011 and relative metadata templates. The templates above are now orphaned and serve no further purpose. I'm also nominating Template:Infobox South African town (currently a redirect) so that we can move the new template to that name. eh bien mon prince (talk) 14:54, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Delete all, with thanks to User:Underlying lk for his work in replacing them with the new template. - htonl (talk) 15:39, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

history merge {{Infobox South African town}} with {{Infobox South African town 2011}}, and delete the rest. Frietjes (talk) 16:15, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Template:Cue sports bios

Template:Cue sports bios (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

No criteria of inclusion. NickSt (talk) 12:49, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

• delete, better covered by a category. Frietjes (talk) 18:01, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
• Keep I don't profess to understand either basis given for deletion, at least in the specific context. Maybe you can both explain better what you intend? But let me analyze the best I can make out by the words used. Navigation templates provide a facility to navigate between multiple related articles to help our readers who, if interested in the topic they are reading, may well be interested in related topics. Generally, navigation templates do not have stated "criteria for inclusion" because it is implicit in what they are, e.g., a navigation template on a film director lists that director's films. Here, this template's criteria might easily have just been discerned from its name as "biography articles in the cue sports arena". That's certainly "criteria", but in this case, the template actually states [further] criteria. It says in part (if you read it): This template is intended for relatively well developed and well written articles which are verified by citation to reliable sources..."

  For context here, though, quite unlike what you might think this would be analogous to—say a template listing articles on "football bios", or even those of a particular team's members, where there might be hundreds or thousands of articles—the number of cue sports biographies on Wikipedia is sharply delimited, and most not listed in this template are unsourced or poorly sourced stubs. I say this because I think a valid basis for deletion of templates one might think are akin to this one, are on the basis of being indiscriminate in ambit, and I also thought the nom's text might be a shorthand to flag that, even if not spelled out. Anyway, in sum, "No criteria of inclusion" appears simply false.

  Turning to the category basis immediately above, I can't imagine how this could be "'better' covered by a category". In the first place, although categories are displayed in articles and are thus in theory available to both readers and behind the scenes editors like you and me, in practice we know that most readers do not notice categories; many don't even know that they exist with the category links inconspicuously located at the bottom of the page and appearing outside the confines of the article proper, just as they ignore most of our technical interface. Simply stated, navboxes are easier to navigate and easier to notice than categories for everyone, and far fewer readers will get the same benefit even where a navbox's information is actually redundant with a category.

  But even if the above was not the case, i.e., readers were just as likely to see and use a category as a navbox, this template is not remotely redundant with the categories in which its constituent articles belong. This can be seen from the fact that the majority of the 19 article within it are good articles (and one featured), whereas the approximately 200 articles in the main categories to which the articles belong are far, far from that, and thus most of those articles would not meet this template's "criteria". Moreover, you would have to cross-navigate at least 5 categories to find an intersection between all the articles listed in this navbox, e.g., American pool players, American carom billiards players, Austrian pool players etc., so it is not possible for the content to be duplicative of any category. I hope we can agree that there is quite a difference between wading through 200 articles in multiple categories most of which are pablum, verses being presented with 19 culled, well written articles. So the second stated basis appears, likewise, false on its face.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:01, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

• Potentially thousands inclusions. I could add many items. No similar templates for other sports. "Well written articles" is a subjective criteria unused in Wikipedia for navboxes. "Relatively well developed" is a description for hundreds such articles. It's an only one navbox where inclusion depends on editor's work. WP:NAVBOX: Navigation templates are particularly useful for a small, well-defined group of articles. NickSt (talk) 09:42, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

• Sure, that might be true at some potential point in the far distant future when those articles have been written and refined, but we are dealing with the facts on the ground. Over ten years about 200 articles have been written, total, and mostly poorly-sourced stubs in this area, which is not easily comparable to other sports. We can and do deal with realities as they arise. That is, at this point and likely for a very long time, this template will remain (non-potentially but actually) not subject to hundreds of additions and serves its navigation purpose perfectly. As for the criteria, this is a writing project and we make those types of judgement calls every day in numerous contexts and can here, through consensus, if a dispute arises about inclusion, which has yet to occur in 5 years.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:39, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Template:American football roster/Plater

Template:American football roster/Plater (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused template with coding errors to begin with. Seems like a trial and error creation left for dead. Jrcla2 (talk) 12:28, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

• speedy delete as a test. Frietjes (talk) 18:02, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Arabic script alphabets

Template:Khowar alphabet (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Pashto alphabet (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Persian alphabet (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Urdu alphabet (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Little used sidebars, mostly redundant to one another. Can be better handled by an adapted {{Arabic alphabet}} with lists like in {{Infobox Cyrillic letter}} (if necessary); however, there's already a giant sidebar that's up for merging in Semitic letter articles (e.g. see Taw), and I don't think we should add more. — Lfdder (talk) 11:26, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose (for the present): The letters aren’t simply redundant, actually... There are additional letters, not found in Arabic in all of the languages listed above. E.g. Persian adds 4 more, Urdu adds 9, Pashto adds 11, etc. But the suggestion would be O.K., if the {{Arabic alphabet}} is tweaked first to accomodate all of these and the templates are deleted next. If the templates are deleted first and no-one bothers to add them to Arabic, these alphabets would have no templates...—Шαмıq ☪ _тαʟκ✍ @ 14:22, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
  • I said 'mostly', not 'simply'. — Lfdder (talk) 15:51, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
    • My reservations here.—Шαмıq ☪ _тαʟκ✍ @ 20:28, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
• Keep/Merge when the merger happens, they will become redirects or intermediate transclusions. The merger should it happen, should also provide a parameter to choose the rendering type (all letters, Arabic, Persian, Urdu, Pashto) -- 70.24.244.158 (talk) 04:48, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Rather dubious use case, but I've already done this at {{Arabic script sidebar}}. — Lfdder (talk) 08:39, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Template:User Ot-af

Template:User Ot-af (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused and uneeded template. No encyclopedic value that would justify it being kept Kumioko (talk) 01:03, 4 September 2013 (UTC

• Delete or Userfy to User:Danielk2/User Ot-af . Inappropriate in Template: space. Technical 13 (talk) 09:55, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
• speedy close as wrong venue, userboxes are discussed at WP:MFD per "what not to discuss here instructions here". Frietjes (talk) 16:17, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Comment These are templates and they need to be treated as such. I already submitted them to CFD because I felt they fell into the Special categorization criteria like stubs. I'm not going to do the music forums game. They are templates, they belong here. Kumioko (talk) 17:47, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

I said MFD, not CFD, see Wikipedia:Templates for discussion#What not to propose for discussion here. Frietjes (talk) 18:06, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Either way, I wasted enough time on these three useless templates. If you guys want to keep them, then fine and you can close this as keep and mark them as such, otherwise we need to delete them and move on. This Templates are only templates if they fall under certain criteria otherwise they might be categories, redirects, miscelaneous, etc. is ridiculous. If its a template, we should be treating it as a template. And as far as I can tell all three of these start with template. Kumioko (talk) 18:14, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Template:User Pinhead

Template:User Pinhead (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused template. No longer needed. Kumioko (talk) 01:01, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

• Delete or Userfy to User:Joeyramoney/User Pinhead. Inappropriate in Template: space. Technical 13 (talk) 09:55, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
• speedy close as wrong venue, userboxes are discussed at WP:MFD per "what not to discuss here instructions here". Frietjes (talk) 16:17, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Comment These are templates and they need to be treated as such. I already submitted them to CFD because I felt they fell into the Special categorization criteria like stubs. I'm not going to do the music forums game. They are templates, they belong here. Kumioko (talk) 17:48, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

I said MFD, not CFD, see Wikipedia:Templates for discussion#What not to propose for discussion here. Frietjes (talk) 18:06, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Either way, I wasted enough time on these three useless templates. If you guys want to keep them, then fine and you can close this as keep and mark them as such, otherwise we need to delete them and move on. This Templates are only templates if they fall under certain criteria otherwise they might be categories, redirects, miscelaneous, etc. is ridiculous. If its a template, we should be treating it as a template. And as far as I can tell all three of these start with template. Kumioko (talk) 18:14, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Template:User NATO

Template:User NATO (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused template. Not needed and in addition Albania isn't part of NATO Kumioko (talk) 00:51, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

• Delete this inplausible, useless template. Technical 13 (talk) 00:56, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
• Delete Albania isn't in NATO, and this template has no indication it isn't for NATO, and not Albania. -- 70.24.244.158 (talk) 07:35, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
• speedy close as wrong venue, userboxes are discussed at WP:MFD per "what not to discuss here instructions here". Frietjes (talk) 16:17, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Comment These are templates and they need to be treated as such. I already submitted them to CFD because I felt they fell into the Special categorization criteria like stubs. I'm not going to do the music forums game. They are templates, they belong here. Kumioko (talk) 17:47, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

I said MFD, not CFD, see Wikipedia:Templates for discussion#What not to propose for discussion here. Frietjes (talk) 18:06, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Either way, I wasted enough time on these three useless templates. If you guys want to keep them, then fine and you can close this as keep and mark them as such, otherwise we need to delete them and move on. This Templates are only templates if they fall under certain criteria otherwise they might be categories, redirects, miscelaneous, etc. is ridiculous. If its a template, we should be treating it as a template. And as far as I can tell all three of these start with template. Kumioko (talk) 18:14, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Comment Frietjes, can you convert this into an MfD? -- 70.24.244.158 (talk) 04:52, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

• Comment Kumioko, you may need to refresh your memory on the Member states of NATO. Albania and Croatia joined NATO in 2009. Dimadick (talk) 09:26, 5 September 2013 (UTC)