Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2015 March 11: Difference between revisions
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile app edit |
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile app edit |
||
Line 48: | Line 48: | ||
::thanks that looks like a good solution to me. All the best: ''[[User:Rich Farmbrough|Rich]] [[User talk:Rich Farmbrough|Farmbrough]]'', <small>22:31, 11 March 2015 (UTC).</small><br /> |
::thanks that looks like a good solution to me. All the best: ''[[User:Rich Farmbrough|Rich]] [[User talk:Rich Farmbrough|Farmbrough]]'', <small>22:31, 11 March 2015 (UTC).</small><br /> |
||
:::Should not really have a dedicated template, a standard rail info box should be used. The RDT as a template works just to separate the article text and the RDT coding. --[[User:Pencefn|Stewart]]<small><font color="maroon"><sup> '''([[User talk:Pencefn#top|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Pencefn|edits]])'''</sup></font></small> 18:26, 12 March 2015 (UTC) |
:::Should not really have a dedicated template, a standard rail info box should be used. This was created at a time when rail line templates where in an early stage of development. The RDT as a template works just to separate the article text and the RDT coding. --[[User:Pencefn|Stewart]]<small><font color="maroon"><sup> '''([[User talk:Pencefn#top|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Pencefn|edits]])'''</sup></font></small> 18:26, 12 March 2015 (UTC) |
||
Revision as of 18:31, 12 March 2015
March 11
- Template:Code example (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
4 uses; redundant to {{markup}} or {{markupv}}. Gadget850 talk 16:12, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
- delete, replaced here with no problems. the input syntax is basically the same as {{markup}}, although the output is nearly the same as {{markupv}}, so redirecting to one of the two might be useful. Frietjes (talk) 01:08, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
- Delete as redundant. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:11, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
As per Australian road routes table templates TFD, poorly designed template not used in mainspace. Issues include excessive spacing between rows, text formatting in contradiction to MOS:TEXT, image accessibility issues with route marker images, no provision to include notes. The template was previously used in List of major roads in Perth, Western Australia (link to old 2012 revision), but is unlikely to be used again in mainspace due to the previously mentioned issues, and is now only used on one userpage: User:MagpieShooter/GC Roads - these instances could be substituted prior to deletion, or the template could be userfied. (Note that User:MagpieShooter hasn't edited since 2011) - Evad37 [talk] 10:16, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
- Delete per precedent. --Rschen7754 04:59, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
No actor navboxes per MOS:FILM#Navigation Rob Sinden (talk) 10:04, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
- delete per nom. Frietjes (talk) 01:04, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
Not really a coherent group, and these shouldn't be encouraged, the same way we do not have cast navboxes. Rob Sinden (talk) 09:52, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
- Delete per Rob Sinden. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:44, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
- Delete per Rob Sinden. - adamstom97 (talk) 03:32, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
- See also Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2015 March 12#Template:Star Trek film crew --Rob Sinden (talk) 10:55, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
- Delete' per nom. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 14:34, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
Contains absolutely no links except to the article on the team. ...William 09:43, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
- Delete per nominator's rationale. Navboxes exist to provide readers with easy navigation among existing related stand-alone Wikipedia articles. We routinely delete navboxes where most of the "content" does not exist. The navbox fails this basic test. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 12:03, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
Infobox, only used on one page, can be substed there, allowing straightforward editing. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 03:12, 11 March 2015 (UTC).
- I moved the infobox part into the article, leaving the RDT in place. At en.wp, such diagrams are usually contained in a separate template; don't ask me why, but in 95% cases they are. Probably to keep the article wikicode clean from all that BS-code, or to keep the textual info separate from graphical... YLSS (talk) 09:32, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
- thanks that looks like a good solution to me. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 22:31, 11 March 2015 (UTC).
- thanks that looks like a good solution to me. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 22:31, 11 March 2015 (UTC).
- Should not really have a dedicated template, a standard rail info box should be used. This was created at a time when rail line templates where in an early stage of development. The RDT as a template works just to separate the article text and the RDT coding. --Stewart (talk | edits) 18:26, 12 March 2015 (UTC)