Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2015 August 14

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion | Log

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 5.150.92.20 (talk) at 16:10, 16 August 2015 (→Template:Sharedipedu 1). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

< August 13 August 15 >

August 14

Template:Upcoming events

Unused. Last updated 2008. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:25, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:TVoter

Unused. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:30, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Spotlight-project

Unused. Project is defunct. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:22, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:SportWB

Redundant to {{Busy}}, {{Wikibreak}}, et al. (Presently unused.) Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:21, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Stable version

Lacks community adoption (only 45 transclusions); likely to become outdated. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:13, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Sharedipedu 1

Propose merging Template:Sharedipedu 1 with Template:Shared IP edu; or simply deleting for former.

Very similar (and similarly-named) templates. No apparent reason we need two. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:04, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Spoken Wikipedia In Progress

A random sample of transclusions of the first template show it remaining on article talk pages for between five and ten years. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:00, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Shoutbox sidebar

Non-standard interface, more than likely to confuse editors encountering it. Redundant in part to 'notifications'. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:55, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Please be neutral

Seemingly always used alongside {{Controversial}}, to which it is thus redundant. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:46, 14 August 2015 (UTC)i Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:46, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Visibility-WT-Upload

Single use, in an edit notice, where it should be Subst:. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:43, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Uw-spanonblock

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 speedy deleted WP:CSD#G7 at author's request. JohnCD (talk) 21:38, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:40, 14 August 2015 (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:Translation attribution

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.

Unused. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:39, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Moved It would have been better to contact me as the creator of the templateHmm, I have a similar template somewhere else. I've moved it to user space. Closing this discussion now. -- CFCF 🍌 (email) 10:01, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Trains FI

Only 8 transclusions. Non-functioning links. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:38, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - I created this template as part of the maintenance for Portal:Trains. Over the last ten years of editing the portal, especially now that the images used for the selected picture section are all hosted on Commons, this template's need has reduced significantly to where it is no longer used and is safe to delete without problems. Thank you for notifying me of this entry. Slambo (Speak) 18:46, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - G7, perhaps? All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 20:33, 14 August 2015 (UTC).[reply]

Template:Transwikied to Wiktionary

Propose merging Template:Transwikied to Wiktionary with Template:Transwiki to Wiktionary Finished.
Similar purposes. No apparent need for two templates. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:36, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Talk Spoken Wikipedia id-3

Single use. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:32, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Talk archive navigationB

Unused. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:23, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Horse breeds

Redundant to the list articles.Algircal (talk) 18:23, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep per WP:CLN; such redundancy is explicitly permissible, because the different forms of navigation are used differently by different people in different contexts for different reasons. However, some of the breed navboxes are in need of redlink cleanup, and a few might be deletion-worthy if they're mostly redlinks (I think one of the goat breeds ones was like this). They should probably be userspaced to whoever has most worked on them. I get the sense that many if not most of the are semi-active works in progress, and I know I've added entries to more than one of them myself, though not in the equine sphere.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  19:09, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Permission isn't the issue here. It is nevertheless redundant as it provides no navigational benefit.Algircal (talk) 19:46, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Cf. WP:USEFUL. The information is duplicated in the lists and does not add any benefit.Algircal (talk) 03:26, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This actually not at all standard since it adds no additional navigational benefit beyond the category system.Algircal (talk) 03:26, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy keep. Nominator has perhaps not been here long enough to have read the page cited as a rationale for deletion, WP:CLN, where the first paragraph, WP:NOTDUP, specifically states that it is "neither improper nor uncommon to simultaneously have a category, a list, and a navigation template which all cover the same topic. These redundant systems of organizing information are considered to be complementary, not inappropriately duplicative." That's the case here – the categories, lists and navboxes have different content (for example, the lists contain the references that would be inappropriate in a navbox) and serve different and complementary purposes; that of the navbox is to allow one-click navigation between groups of closely-associated articles and to indicate, in accordance with WP:REDLINK, which articles in the group still remain to be written.
Algircal, may I suggest that you take some time to become more familiar with our practices and guidelines before making further deletion nominations? And that if and when you do make such a nomination, you have the courtesy to notify the creator of the page and the relevant WikiProject(s)? Thank you. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:45, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I read that section you quote but note WP:NAVBOX 3rd last paragraph: "The article links in a navigation template should be grouped into clusters, by topic, or by era, etc. Alphabetical ordering does not provide any additional value to a category containing the same article links". These templates are are not providing any value beyond the list and category. Take for example Template:Horse breeds of France: The only information a reader can interpret from the navbox is a list of french extant and extinct breeds and provides no additional information beyond the other 2 systems, so, yes, in this case, the navbox can be argued as redundant to the other two systems. As User:Rich Farmbrough notes, TfD is a tricky department and many templates are deleted because they are redundant or duplicative. Maybe WP:NOTDUP is intended to explain that all these systems have overlap and textually are not duplicative. We discuss the utility of templates at TfD and these templates add no additional utility. Lastly, the example cited in Wikipedia:Templates for discussion#Listing a template cites Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2008 August 14#American films by decade, all of which were deleted because they duplicated the category system which categorized the films by country and by year. Even when it was decided to be merged into Template:American films, Template:American films was deleted too because every film made in United States would be added to the template. These templates are adding every breed with respect to the country of origin to navbox system adding no additional benefit to the list system.Algircal (talk) 15:07, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy keep: When these were created, it was with consensus after much discussion (and, full disclosure, I originally was kind of dubious, but I've come around to fully support their creation and usefulness). I have come to see them as a helpful tool and useful for those interested in the topic of breeds by nation. The navbox is actually more helpful than a category as it also lists breeds with alternative names and redlinks to those that are missing and need to be created. They have been around for several years now, and given that there is now only one or two editors working on these, they would, I suspect, but glad for help in creating more articles. Montanabw(talk) 19:21, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nope: look at the disclaimers at the top of the navboxes: "Many have complex or obscure histories, so inclusion here does not necessarily imply that a breed is predominantly or exclusively German". The navboxes indicate that they are not navigating articles but listing information that should be on a list; in other words, duplicating the list.Algircal (talk) 06:18, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Donkey breeds

Redundant to the list articles.Algircal (talk) 16:38, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Permission isn't the issue here. It is nevertheless redundant as it provides no navigational benefit.Algircal (talk) 19:47, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This actually not at all standard since it adds no additional navigational benefit beyond the category system.Algircal (talk) 03:27, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
See aboveAlgircal (talk) 15:08, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
See aboveAlgircal (talk) 06:18, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2015_August_14&oldid=676377323"