Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019 July 24

< July 23	July 25 >

July 24

Template:More specific links

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).

The result of the discussion was delete. kingboyk (talk) 05:51, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:More specific links (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused. I tagged an article with this and the associated maintenance categories are redlinks. MB 17:44, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Question Which article? (So we may verify this for ourselves.) –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 03:49, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It was Euphoria (Indian band), but it's no longer in the current version, so go back in the history to my edit or just try it in your sandbox. MB 22:21, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Unused and if used would be unnecessary clutter for readers (in contrast to citation needed, POV, COI and similar important tags). Since not even Category:All link specificity cleanup pages was ever created it seems like there's no interest in this template. -- Trialpears (talk) 18:54, 25 July 2019 (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).

Template:Social titles

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).

The result of the discussion was keep. kingboyk (talk) 05:55, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Social titles (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Personal names (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Template:Social titles with Template:Personal names.
Would it be convenient to keep this all together, as it seems managable as an overview? Other way, I guess, the titles section should be extracted from Template:Personal names into Template:Social titles, but I'm not sure that makes sense. PPEMES (talk) 15:05, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose – the "titles" section in Template:Personal names links to categories of titles, not to actual titles. That template is already very large, including links to all of the different possible titles (and including just social titles here but not including titles from other categories wouldn't make sense) would make it completely unmanageable. The template doesn't link to articles on individual names, despite being called "personal names", you have to drill down through the articles to get to William, Mary and John, so why would you have direct links to Dr, Mr and other titles, which are much less obviously connected to the topic?

I'm not convinced titles belong at all under "personal names", as they are titles not names, but merging in Template:Social titles certainly doesn't help. Moving the categories of titles currently under "personal names" to "social titles" would also make no sense; that template covers the specific titles that fall within that category, not general categories. Robminchin (talk) 15:29, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per Robminchin and very similar to my objection on the academic titles nomination below - the point of these is to make it easy for readers to navigate between the closely related articles. — xaosflux ^Talk 19:00, 25 July 2019 (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).

Template:Named academic degrees

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).

The result of the discussion was keep. kingboyk (talk) 05:49, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Named academic degrees (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Academic degrees (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Template:Named academic degrees with Template:Academic degrees.
Created Template:Named academic degrees from previously floating code in footer of Academic degrees. Think it should better be merged altogether, but taking the route here through templates for discussion first. PPEMES (talk) 11:53, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose the first navigational template is about "types" of credentials, the other one is about specific credentials. When readers are reading articles about types of credentials, having an easy way to see the classification and navigate to the specific other types easily is accomplished by the existing template, the second one is to cluttered and is going to be hard at best to maintain at all - as "named" credentials are constantly created, while "types" are rarely adjusted. — xaosflux ^Talk 13:41, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If so, would it be to much to request of you to at least wikify that template if it is not merged on by your opposition? PPEMES (talk) 13:58, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose – as xaosflux points out, one is a list of specific degrees and the other is a lost of categories. Putting them together would make for an unmanageable mess that was bad for navigation. Templates for categories of objects and templates for specific objects should generally be kept apart as they are used for different purposes. Robminchin (talk) 15:35, 24 July 2019 (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).

Template:Texas Charge roster

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).

The result of the discussion was relisted on 2019 August 1. kingboyk (talk) 05:55, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

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).

Template:Now FM radio stations

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).

The result of the discussion was delete. kingboyk (talk) 00:19, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Now FM radio stations (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

The stations aren't that closely related, don't all have the exact format (four are co-owned with each other, the other five have four different owners), and don't share programming. Raymie (t • c) 04:46, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete There is no article about a Now FM. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 03:50, 25 July 2019 (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).