Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2014 October 20: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 20:27, 23 October 2014

< October 19	October 21 >

October 20

Template:Adamantium

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

Non-notable band without its own article. One member who went on to play in more notable bands and a split album with questionable notability itself are the only directly-related articles. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 23:32, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

delete Frietjes (talk) 15:14, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Can't believe this doesn't meet CSD. { $\mathbb {JPG}$ } 13:05, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nominator....William 00:52, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Paraplain

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

As advised here, before its function incorporated by {{para}}. Sardanaphalus (talk) 17:08, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Quote templates

Template:QuoteSidebar

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

Redundant to other quote templates, with one of which the mere 11 transclusions should be replaced, in order to simplify the options available and reduce the maintenance workload. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:46, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Merge sidebar option to one of the other templates, then replace and delete. I'd prefer to keep {{Quote}} itself lean. It's used many, many times. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼ 20:44, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Imagequote

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

Redundant; labelled as "less efficient than {{imagequote2}}." (which itself is nominated for deletion). Has only 24 transclusions. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:42, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Replace with {{imagequote2}} and delete, then move that template to this template's name. Disposition of that second template is independent of this one; this one is clearly redundant with and obsoleted by the other, so should be eliminated, even if the other is eventually deleted. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼ 20:47, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Google books quote

Template:Google books quote (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to {{Cite book}}, with which the mere 109 transclusions should be replaced. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:22, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete after replacing with {{Cite book|quote=...|...}} — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼ 20:08, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
delete, but replace like this. note the 'text=' parameter is used for highlighting the passage in the book within google books. Frietjes (talk) 20:37, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Good catch. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼ 20:43, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Dab quotes

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. 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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was deleted, G7. 28bytes (talk) 13:42, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Dab quotes (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:18, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Gbq

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

Little-used (14 transclusions; none in article-space) wrapper of {{Bq}}, as nominated below. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:38, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: This is part of the glossary templates Andy's nominated en masse here. Of course it has few transclusions, as it was only created a couple of days ago and hasn't been deployed yet in most places where it would be used (which will be a slow process of finding and reviewing all of the template-structured glossary list articles, which right now are not well-categorized (another fix-it in progress). Even if {{bq}} were deleted, this one would need to simply be modified to call another block quotation template with CSS to align it properly inside description (a.k.a. definition or association) lists (those created with underlying <dl><dt>...</dt><dd>...</dd></dl> markup). Ultimately all of the glossary-related formatting should be handled at MediaWiki:Common.css, but there's no hurry. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼ 18:40, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Bq

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

Fork of {{Quote}}, to which it is redundant (and much less used). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:15, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: It appears to have 599 transclusions. What does the OP propose to do with these? Will {{quote}} be modified to support the additional features of {{bq}}? – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:40, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Convert them to {{Quote}}, which, with 48,797 transclusions, is clearly the community's preferred solution. Note that Category:Template bq using class param and Category:Template bq using id param are empty, and Category:Template bq using title param has but one entry, suggesting that the additional features are neither used nor needed. Though Category:Template bq using style param had 24 entries, only 12 (now removed) were in articles and some of the applicable values, such as style=blue are invalid, and thus have no effect, and others, such as style=font-size:86% may be harmful. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:33, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Others" are not harmful. It's a stylistic choice for blockquotes called for in the Chicago Manual of Style. You've made these changes without discussion, so please revert yourself. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 18:44, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've replaced your reverts of my reverts with manual workarounds to avoid this sort of template fanaticism. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 22:43, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
So you've unilaterally replaced a template with one with a completely different style, after complaining that my replacements, which used the same style, were undiscussed style changes. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 07:40, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Invalid values should be corrected; it's not an argument for deletion or merger. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼ 18:49, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps not, but it does demonstrate that there's no need for them. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:56, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't demonstrate that at all; the obvious intent was style=color:Blue;. Whether there's a case for using blue in that bit of content is matter for discussion on that page's talk page. The other example is also an argument for using a better font-size value, not a TfD matter. Anyway, my !vote on this is "merge to {{quote}} and redirect", below. I'm simply trying to point out that you sometimes include complaints about content, about template uses in particular cases, that aren't relevant here. They're a form of argument to emotion – look how terrible this is! the sky is falling! – and are not helpful. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼ 20:16, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Update: apart from a couple of user pages, all those categories are now empty. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:49, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support redirect per WP:CHEAP. "bq" is much easier to type ("uo" or "ou"? yeah you just wasted a couple milliseconds when you could have just typed "bq") and its harmless. Int21h (talk) 19:27, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think that there should be only one template resolving to <blockquote> but it should have an option to add predefined classes, language, etc., but not styles or titles or id, through a wrapper for consistent and accessible styling. The HTML5 proposed recommendation (this version) states:

There is no formal method for indicating the markup in a blockquote is from a quoted source. It is suggested that if the footer or cite elements are included and these elements are also being used within a blockquote to identify citations, the elements from the quoted source could be annotated with metadata to identify their origin, for example by using the class attribute (a defined extensibility mechanism). (w3.org)

Here are two examples of how to use it from that proposed recommendation are:

<blockquote>
  <p>My favorite book is <cite class="from-source">At Swim-Two-Birds</cite></p>
  <footer>- <cite>Mike[tm]Smith</cite></footer>
</blockquote>

and

<figure>
 <blockquote>
  <p>The truth may be puzzling. It may take some work to grapple with.
  It may be counterintuitive. It may contradict deeply held
  prejudices. It may not be consonant with what we desperately want to
  be true. But our preferences do not determine what's true. We have a
  method, and that method helps us to reach not absolute truth, only
  asymptotic approaches to the truth — never there, just closer
  and closer, always finding vast new oceans of undiscovered
  possibilities. Cleverly designed experiments are the key.</p>
 </blockquote>
 <figcaption><cite>Carl Sagan</cite>, in "<cite>Wonder and Skepticism</cite>", from
 the <cite>Skeptical Enquirer</cite> Volume 19, Issue 1 (January-February
 1995)</figcaption>
</figure>

My point is that neither {{Bq}} nor {{Quote}} are rendered in a way that completely support the more current standards. {{quote|phrase|person|source}} has the basics but does not have a language parameter which would help screen reader accessibility with pronunciation or a class parameter which would help with semantics (however they would be used – for example identifying the text as a question or as an answer). —BoBoMisiu (talk) 21:48, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You're not wrong, but the issues are separate. Also, {{Lang}} can be used inside {{Quote}}. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:52, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, inside the element but not in a simple way as a Wikipedia template parameter that would be used as lang="xxyyzz" attribute of the HTML <blockquote> element. —BoBoMisiu (talk) 22:34, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If we routinely made quotations completely in a foreign language, then it would not be difficult to add a lang parameter to {{quote}}. But language markup is principally applied to an an inline element, rather than a block, so having the flexibility to use {{lang}} for short extracts within a large quote is no disadvantage. I'd be inclined to update quote to provide the useful commonly-used features and redirect bq to it. --RexxS (talk) 11:37, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to {{Quote}} then redirect; it's not a simple redirect case. The {{Bq}} template was written expressly to ease conversion and merging of block quotation templates (that's why it supports as many parameter names of the other templates as possible). See its documentation for the details. These features should be merged into {{Quote}} until the templates they aid transition away from no longer exist, then those extra parameter names removed (optionally). — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼ 18:49, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Block quote

Template:Block quote (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Claims to be "an alias of {{Quote}}" but is actually an unnecessary wrapper for it. I suggest we SUBST: all instances, then delete it. See example substitution. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:12, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note that 3001 articles use this template. To subst them all or convert to {{Quote}} would require a significant amount of work or a bot, which could possibly break the syntax and/or quote. KonveyorBelt 22:03, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- There is no reason to suppose that that number would case a replacement to "break the syntax and/or quote" - we've often replaced more numerous template instances. The number is also trivial compared to the ~48,000 instances of {{Quote}}; which shows a clear community prefence for the latter. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:12, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  - Questionable reasoning; we have many templates that are alternatives to more commonly used ones, because "one size" often does not fit all. The very fact that they're alternatives, for particular cases, to more general templates automatically means they'll be used less frequently. You're proceeding from the false basis that we can only tolerate one template for any given general category of output, and this simply isn't true. That said, I'm a big fan of merging such templates (it's why I wrote {{bq}} and what became {{Compact ToC}}, with the express intent that they lead to mergers that reduce the profusion of certain kinds of alternative templates by instead building in parameters for case-by-case customization. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼ 18:55, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    - No, I'm not proceeding from any such basis. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:48, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      - I conservatively estimate I could subst: about 10 templates a minute manually. If all had to be done manually (for which I see no reason, a bot could be perfectly capable, but that aside), that would mean about 5 manhours. Nothing to cause major alarm or upheaval IMO. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Martijn Hoekstra (talk • contribs) 10:28, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note that putting this up for discussion just defaced all 3001 of those articles and will waste people's time wondering why far in excess of the value of the discussion. The maximum benefit of the change is so gargantuously trivial that it's not even worth the time for you to read my comment on it, or my vote, which is to retain.Kurt (talk) 03:34, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Retain due to the large amount of work in substituting uses and the minimal benefit of it. Also suggest this gets closed sharpish, to avoid disruption to the articles using it. GoldenRing (talk) 06:35, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- The "amount of work" is not a reason for retention. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:12, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Follow keeping 202.160.16.131 (talk) 07:33, 21 October 2014 (UTC) (and close this real quick)[reply]
- Note that .131 has !voted again, below. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:39, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Retain per Kurt – word for word, particularly the bit about "just defaced all 3001 of those articles and will waste people's time wondering why …" JG66 (talk) 10:37, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Retain – this seems trivial because after I looked at the "example substitution," I can't tell the difference. Why all this extra work and what's the pay-off? - Christian Roess (talk) 12:19, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Not being able to tell the difference is evidence of the redundancy. Thank you for confirming. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:12, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It's redundant to a better-designed template, which is a commonly successful argument at TfD. Writing a script to replace all instances of {{blockquote}} with {{quote}} is not particularly difficult on a technical level and would not break the syntax. The TfD notification is hardly "defacement".—S Marshall T/C 13:07, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- ITYM {{block quote}} (note space). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:12, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  - I do indeed. Thank you for quibbling that point.—S Marshall T/C 12:05, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete reduntant template with a strange syntax (must add extra content that doesn't appear on the page.) Samuel J. Howard (talk) 16:04, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per Samuel and Kurt (ironically). Why don't we remove the template now so we can get rid of the TfD ad sooner? Timothy G. ^{from CA} (talk) 20:49, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Kurt said that removing this template would deface 3001 articles 202.160.16.131 (talk) 07:29, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  - No, he did not - and no, it would not. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:37, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. A cursory examination of both suggests that it was forked from an earlier version of {{quote}} with less functionality. As it stands, I cannot conceive of anything that can be done with {{block quote}} that can't be done with {{quote}} and additional parameters. I think that, in the majority of cases, the amount of time it takes to adapt syntax to fit this is almost certainly longer than the amount of time it takes to add some indentation to a {{quote}} transclusion. Jacob Gotts (talk) 21:44, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Go look at Lou Gehrig#"The Luckiest Man on the Face of the Earth" speech. Gah. - Dravecky (talk) 21:46, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- yes, do. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:43, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Retain gives value to improtant quotes without giving it too much attentioin--Misconceptions2 (talk) 04:07, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- @Misconceptions2: Please explain how {{Quote}} does not give the same value? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:34, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  - I am talking about the "<blockquote>" tag, is this not what discussion is about?--Misconceptions2 (talk) 13:42, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    - No; this is about a template called "Block quote" (with a space), not the HTML element. There are links to the templatea at the top of this section. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:48, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as obsolete and redundant —PC-XT+ 06:20, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Every trivial TfD is way off. Keep - 3001 articles would be ruined if you do this 202.160.16.131 (talk) 07:29, 22 October 2014 (UTC) 3001 ARTICLES![reply]

What nonsense, .131 How would replacing:

Lorem ipsum

with

Lorem ipsum

ruin any article? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:33, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think the anon means the thousands of TfD notices appearing all over articles, a concern also raised by JG66. With templates like this, it's generally best to noinclude the TfD notice, and if it's a really widely used one, "advertise" the TfD some other way, e.g. at Village pump. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼ 20:55, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete There is no reason to not use parameters for special cases. As per usual, if difficulty in replacing templates were an overriding concerning, most (no) templates would ever be replaced. Int21h (talk) 08:56, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I saw it on the Trotsky article and followed a link here. Having read about {{Quote}}, I do not see what the issue is with getting rid of it. Just a ditto to what Andy Mabbett says. If no bot is available to perform the task, I am happy to be a member of any team that goes through replacing the {{Block quote}}s manually before they are terminated. --YeOldeGentleman (talk) 10:02, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and Revert Template Now Adding ugly spam to thousands of pages is unnecessary. Revert back to the no-message template ASAP; then continue review, and if consensus is reached that it's worth deleting, develop appropriate bot and change without notification. 80.229.231.194 (talk) 13:56, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to {{Quote}}; it just needs parameters to output similar display as an option. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼ 18:55, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete to reduce complexity. Identical templates that forward to another template are quite useless. I also completely and strongly reject and condemn any argument along the lines of "keep, because right now there is a TfD notice transcluded into article space". Keeping this template would do exactly nothing to fix that. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 09:22, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Reach consensus speedily and Move bot-worthy discussions out of user space per Kurt. You are currently defacing 3001 articles. Vandalism on this scale should be discouraged. Doug (talk) 19:52, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per the "redundant to a better-designed template" argument. Since no valid argument ("it's too hard" and "X articles use it" are beyond weak) has been advanced to keep this, there may be snow in the forecast, allowing the work to begin now. Tarc (talk) 20:07, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- My reading of this straw poll is that the Delete has it. In addition, the majority of those voting in favour of Retain appear to be voting this way solely on the incorrect assumption that it would lead to speedy resolution, for example Kurt. Propose Speedy closure to limit impact on userspace. Propose Eliminate TfD templates in userspace in order to avoid ignorant drive-by voting such as mine. Doug (talk) 20:27, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Quote2col

Template:Quote2col (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to other quote templates, with one of which the mere 12 artcile-space transclusions should be replaced. Uses table markup, with poor accessibility, for layout instead of proper quotation markup. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:55, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What is the replacement? -- Gadget850^talk 11:07, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Any of a number of options, for example see this edit. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:21, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  - Update Scout Promise then delete. -- Gadget850^talk 11:51, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Gadget850. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼ 18:56, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Multilingual quote

Template:Multilingual quote (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to other quote templates, with one of which the mere 33 transclusions should be replaced. Uses table markup, with poor accessibility, for layout instead of proper quotation markup. (Many of the non-English quotations are unnecessary and may be removed.) Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:42, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete after replacing with {{Quote}} and proper language markup. Nom's objection to specific content on specific articles has nothing to do with TfD. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼ 19:01, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 155: / Line 155: @@
 *'''Reach consensus speedily''' and '''Move bot-worthy discussions out of user space''' per [[User:Kfitzner|Kurt]]. You are currently defacing 3001 articles. Vandalism on this scale should be discouraged. [[User:Dhatfield|Doug]] ([[User talk:Dhatfield|talk]]) 19:52, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
 *'''Delete''' per the "redundant to a better-designed template" argument.  Since no valid argument ("it's too hard" and "X articles use it" are beyond weak) has been advanced to keep this, there may be [[WP:SNOW|snow]] in the forecast, allowing the work to begin now. [[User:Tarc|Tarc]] ([[User talk:Tarc|talk]]) 20:07, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
+**My reading of this straw poll is that the '''Delete''' has it. In addition, the majority of those voting in favour of Retain appear to be voting this way solely on the incorrect assumption that it would lead to speedy resolution, for example [[User:Kfitzner|Kurt]]. Propose '''Speedy closure''' to limit impact on userspace.  Propose '''Eliminate TfD templates in userspace''' in order to avoid ignorant drive-by voting such as mine. [[User:Dhatfield|Doug]] ([[User talk:Dhatfield|talk]]) 20:27, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
 ==== [[Template:Quote2col]] ====