Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2011 January 20

< January 19	January 21 >

January 20

Template:Call

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

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

Couple of obscure templates that don't really seem to have a use. Only currently used one one persons test pages. WOSlinker (talk) 21:34, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Supreme Seat Templates

Template:Supreme Seat1 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Supreme Seat2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Supreme Seat3 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Supreme Seat4 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Supreme Seat5 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Supreme Seat6 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Supreme Seat7 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Supreme Seat8 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Supreme Seat9 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Supreme Seat10 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Supreme SeatC (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Set of unused templates with undetermined purpose. WOSlinker (talk) 21:16, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Marina Perez in Ad Campaigns

Template:Marina Perez in Ad Campaigns (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Is it really necessary to create a template just to list advertising credits that are already mentioned in the article? Mbinebri ^{talk ←} 21:04, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are right only for models who have A LOT yearly and can't all be mentioned in the articles.--Anen87 (talk) 21:09, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, since this template would not go onto the articles of the companies she was paid to promote, this navbox has no use. Even for a model with a great number of such credits, it would still be article content in template space. Reso lute 21:12, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:CSCOTW article

Template:CSCOTW article (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:CSCOTW current (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

The Computer science Collaboration of the Week doesn't seem to have been very well used. Initally created in Aug 2006 to one article and never changed. Suggest substituting into Wikipedia:WikiProject Computer science/Collaboration of the Week and then deleting. WOSlinker (talk) 20:15, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Southland Conference Sporting Venues

Template:Southland Conference Sporting Venues (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Grossly incomplete template that only accounts for football, despite its misnomer as a "Sports Venues" template. Also note that it doesn't link to any venues anyhow, only school articles. Unused on any mainspace articles and unedited since July 2010. Jrcla2 (talk) 19:14, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:1976 Southeastern football standings

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 Redirect. Doesn't really need discussing any further since obvious duplicate, Redirect will do. WOSlinker (talk) 20:20, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:1976 Southeastern football standings (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Duplicate of Template:1976 SEC football standings. Jweiss11 (talk) 18:19, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete as duplicate. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 18:20, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete as unused duplicate. cmadler (talk) 18:43, 20 January 2011 (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:Generations of jet fighter

Template:Generations of jet fighter (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This template attempts to assign jet fighter aircraft to their various "generations". It's a worthy effort, but, alas, one that I don't see of any encyclopediatic value. First, it's woefully incomplete, and there's no way that can change - unless we're going to list each and every single jet fighter ever built in it! Second, the "generations" classification is EXTREMELY controversial and prone to OR (there have been massive edit wars on Fighter aircraft over exactly this subject), and likely US-centric (since it's the U.S. government's definitons of 'generations' that are usually used). The template is only used on the '# generation jet fighter' articles and Category:Generations of jet fighter. And even as I write this, I notice multiple aircraft on the template that aren't fighters at all - but rather attack aircraft and even some trainers. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 17:27, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as nom says - it has really no encyclopedic value, fighter aircraft generations is the stuff of aircraft enthusiast and marketing people. Subject of many "Mine is bigger than yours" edit wars and on some aircraft articles the describing of which generation the aircraft is is not allowed by consensus due to the ongoing disagreements mainly caused by the use of the term for nationalistic boasting by bias media. As we have a good categorisation of aircraft by decade which works well so this doesnt add any value. MilborneOne (talk) 19:48, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - essentially all controversial WP:OR and probably amounts to POV-pushing as a result. - Ahunt (talk) 21:21, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The jet fighters under each generation provide a good sampling of the type of jet fighter. This is a valuable to end-users and provides a quick inter-wiki linking. Zabanio (talk) 21:53, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Per nom - redundant, OR, controversial. - BilCat (talk) 22:29, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Too much of this material is subject to conflicting interpretations. Article prose required for context and attribution. Binksternet (talk) 00:03, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom: fatally incomplete, OR, and conflicting POVs on what aircraft should be what generation, as well as the farcical nature of what the whole aircraft generation concept has become (a sales gimmick). bahamut0013^words _deeds 17:19, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Logan Thunder

Template:Logan Thunder (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Used in one article alone and would be better off as a list in the body of the article. Mattinbgn (talk) 03:24, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Latin America

Template:Latin America (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused. Redundant to {{Countries of South America}} and {{Countries of North America}}. Also, appears to be broken (links are unclickable). — This, that, and the other (talk) 09:36, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It does work if you put a parameter in. I think the idea was to work like {{South America topic}}, but since we have that, we don't need this. Redundant. Delete. Mhiji 13:10, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep we have a WP:WikiProject Latin America, and Latin America, so it seems like there should be a template for it as well. 65.93.14.29 (talk) 04:46, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - this was redundant to {{Latin America topic}} until November 2010, when I redirected that template to {{Latin America and the Caribbean topic}}. It does seem unused, and if we want a Latin America topic template it should really be {{Latin America topic}}. I'd suggest the best thing might be to follow {{South America}}, which redirects to {{Countries of South America}}, and make this a redirect to an equivalent as-yet-nonexistent {{Countries of Latin America}} (i.e. a simple listing, not a topic-like template that takes parameters). Rd232 ^talk 10:11, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 02:46, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Latin America is an arbitrary grouping of countries. Countries will either belong to North America (inc. Central America and the Caribbean) or South America. So this template is superfluous. For instance, take El Salvador; it already has {{North America topic}} and {{Central America topic}}. It definitely doesn't need another "Latin America topic" template. — This, that, and the other (talk) 03:30, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to {{Latin America topic}} 184.144.170.159 (talk) 06:02, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Notable Joluo

Template:Notable Joluo (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Indiscriminate. Tries to join hockey players with politicians with rap artists based on a supposedly, but often unsourced, shared ethnicity. Maybe valuable as a cited list, but certainly not as a navbox. Reso lute 01:30, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The navbox is similar to Template:VietnamCorr. The hockey players, politicians and rap artists all identify themselves as Luo. Thaths (talk) 17:21, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, that navbox is an entirely different concept, and WP:WAX is not a valid keep argument anyway. Comparing apples to apples: Would a template that lists "notable Americans" be useful? How about "notable Jews"? "Notable Inuit"? A shared ethnicity, if cited, is a good category, and a decent list, but a bad navbox. Reso lute 18:11, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Listify and delete - this should be a list, not a navbox at the end of every article included in the box. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 17:33, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]