Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2020 March 18

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 65.78.8.103 (talk) at 17:17, 19 March 2020 (→‎Template:TV Tropes: delete). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

< March 17 March 19 >

March 18

Milwaukee Mustangs navboxes

Both are unused templates with ambiguous titles, and have been replaced by templates with unambiguous titles. BlackcurrantTea (talk) 21:53, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template:History of Middle-earth navbox

All books in this template already appear in at least 2 templates - {{J. R. R. Tolkien}} and {{Middle-earth}}. There is no need for a 3rd one. Gonnym (talk) 20:49, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Ainur

Propose merging Template:Ainur with Template:Middle-earth.
Continuing on from the TfDs of Middle-earth Dwarves, Elves, and Races. 7 out of the 12 links are already in the template. For the same reasons given in the previous discussions, this will lead to better and easier navigation between related articles and less clutter of navigation templates. Gonnym (talk) 20:43, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose, reinstate earlier version including redirects to sections, [1] which was useful for navigation and overview. The edit summary said "removing redirects" but articles about possible Maiar were also removed without disclosure. By all means italicise the redirects in the template. – Fayenatic London 10:26, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Navigation templates aren't used for redirects, especially when all of them redirect to the same article. You really think 15 links to Vala (Middle-earth) is useful? Can you explain how exactly navigation would be helpful? Also, seeing as how you are referring to @Izno's edit and not mine, I completely agree with his and oppose any restoration. --Gonnym (talk) 10:49, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • WP:NAV more or less makes it clear that navboxes are for navigation between articles, not redirects and not non-articles. Navigating between redirects almost always inspires duplicating a table of contents somewhere and navigating between non-articles (as in, unlinked articles) is a flat contradiction. WP:NAVBOX, the actual guideline on the matter, has WP:BIDIRECTIONAL among others, so that usually knocks the same out. --Izno (talk) 13:32, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to an appropriate larger navbox. I think Template:Middle-earth may need to be split (probably along fictional/non-fictional lines) at some point unless deletions of fictional topics continue, but that's not a blocker for this discussion. --Izno (talk) 13:32, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox video game engine

Per this discussion at WPVG, this infobox seems to largely duplicate Template:Infobox software, and the new parameters it adds are not mission critical information to convey in an infobox format. Furthermore, forking this infobox off from the main software infobox makes it more challenging to maintain consistency between the two. Axem Titanium (talk) 15:33, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2019–20 coronavirus outbreak data/Europe medical cases

Propose merging Template:2019–20 coronavirus outbreak data/Europe medical cases with Template:2019–20_coronavirus_outbreak_data/International_medical_cases.
Incorrectly formatted merge proposed by another user: correcting nom. with no opinion UnitedStatesian (talk) 02:18, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment. People seem to be keeping the global table template more up-to-date than the Europe one, and have done a reasonable split of Europe into geographical sub-regions. However, including the Europe part in the Europe prose article would still be nice, even though it's horizontally quite large now. In fact, a reasonable case could be made for splitting the Europe template, because keeping it up-to-date is becoming heavy work as we seem to be entering an exponential growth phase in Europe (with the main exception being Poland, which is miraculously SARS-CoV-2-free, apart from suspected cases). An ideal solution would be if the "global" table included continental or sub-continental table components, in a way that continental or sub-continental tables could be used as templates without having to show the full global one. I suspect that this could be risky unless the method of doing this forces editors at any of the "sub" levels from making edits that mess up the structure of the combined super- or super-super-table. Boud (talk) 17:55, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment on comment I suspect such a template would indeed be easy to mess up and hard to maintain, and I don't even know how to start creating that without making the existing international template a lot more complicated... Renerpho (talk) 06:39, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Having a table for Europe that can be used in the article about cases in Europe is useful. Please help keep it up to date! Renerpho (talk) 06:36, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I see a case for splitting out the international template by continent because of the sheer amount of data included and the lack of readability. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 00:41, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Please revert to the Rate Comparisons with Syncing the start date from the first 500 or 100 cases. This metric offers much more insight for comparing the ongoing outbreak between the different regions than Syncing the start date till the first 100 or 500 cases which offers a truncated view not necessaily indicative of the further development of the initial outbreak. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.244.214.142 (talk) 11:44, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retire I think that changing the name - at least internally without a formal name change - to something like "in January and February 2020" and effectively freezing it as a resource to remain available for later studies for people (e.g. epidemiologists) who might find it useful. Boud (talk) 14:40, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 14:23, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template:TV Tropes

TV Tropes is not a valid external link, it's WP:ELNO. It's trivial, user-submitted and has no editorial oversight. I could've sworn I AfD'ed this a long time ago, but apparently not. Pinging @Masem, Lee Vilenski, Salvidrim!, Sergecross73, and Dissident93:. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 08:33, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: WT:VG and WT:TV have been notified.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 14:20, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Kingsif, StrayBolt has posted the links. It's used on tropes and plot devices like cliché, running gag and body swap, but also on model-actress Kathy Ireland, novel A Tree Grows in Brooklyn, fighting video game franchise Dead or Alive and other barely related articles, that just happen to have a TV Tropes entry on them. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 07:54, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep based on StrayBolt's analysis. Kingsif (talk) 12:39, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template:History of the Persian language

Propose merging Template:History of the Persian language with Template:Persian language.

The template is being nominated because:

  • It is redundant and is barely used in any articles.
  • It does not provide much content within the few articles that include it and yet occupies a lot of space.
  • There is a more properly designed template (Template:Persian language) that could replace it.

—Rye-96 (talk) 09:51, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox German railway vehicle

Propose merging Template:Infobox German railway vehicle with Template:Infobox locomotive.

The German template uses German-language parameter names; we normally allow this only for "shim" templates that must be substituted.

It also caters (mostly) for locomotives and (a few) rolling stock vehicles. The latter cases should be manually switched to {{Infobox train}}. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:13, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose unless the template is properly 'shimmed' so that it can be imported from German Wikipedia and automatically substituted as has been successfully done with other templates. In which case I'd be happy to support.Bermicourt (talk) 12:28, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as Bermicourt. This looks like a lot of pointless rote work for no advantage at all, other than the regular foolish consistency. Andy Dingley (talk) 12:41, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • This is not "foolish consistency". A regular user who opens the editing page to see an infobox full of German parameter names is going to close it immediately and not fix whatever they were going to fix. This is baseline accessibility. Axem Titanium (talk) 15:45, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per Bermicourt, on the understanding that it would be shimmed. No obvious reason to maintain a separate template for German locomotives only, and it's confusing for editors. Contra Andy Dingley, there are plenty of editors who enjoy pointless rote work; without it, I doubt the project would continue to exist. Mackensen (talk) 16:16, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose we've been here before, see Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2015 March 8#Template:Infobox German railway vehicle. {{Infobox German railway vehicle}} isn't just used for locos, it could be used for multiple-units, coaches or wagons. The idea is that an imported article starts off with {{Infobox German railway vehicle}}, and then is amended to use a more appropriate infobox. Those more appropriate infoboxes do include {{Infobox locomotive}}, but none of them are a straight drop-in replacement - manual assessment and adjustment is necessary. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:44, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, in principle provided that all existing parameters of the subject templates are preserved in the merged template. Would this not work, Redrose64? Doug Mehus T·C 22:25, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Redrose64. This template started life as a translation-fork of the Infobox used by de.wiki, but it has not been kept up-to-date with changes to de:Vorlage:Infobox Schienenfahrzeug. I realised this when I tried to sprinkle some TLC on this template by starting to add TemplateData. Yes, this template does have issues - the Monthly Error Report that is now available via TemplateData seems to marking any parameter with an umlaut in its name as invalid even if it isn't; if you do a translation via the translation tool, you will have to put in the infobox afterwards as a cut-and-paste, as the de.wiki infobox is linked on Wikidata to Template:Infobox train. Having said all that, if the proposer is prepared to put in the hard graft and manually migrate the 320 instances, I won't revert his changes; but since the original concept of this template is as a aid to translation, I would oppose the merger even if there was only a handful of transculsions. — Iain Bell (talk) 22:05, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • "it has not been kept up-to-date with changes to :de:Vorlage:Infobox Schienenfahrzeug" then that is even less reason to keep it; it's not even useful as a shim. This is the English-language Wikipedia; we have a long-standing practice of replacing templates that don't work in English. "if the proposer is prepared to put in the hard graft" such conditionals are irrelevant. We have a number of volunteers who work on template mergers. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:51, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per Pigsonthewing. This is English Wikipedia, we should not use German Wikipedia templates especially when they are out-of-date and not linked to the German template, so not even usefull for translating. WT79 The Engineer (talk) 22:38, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support In the previous discussion, I supported the merge with some comments there about translation and fitting content into other infoboxes as appropriate. The German template was then, and I'm guessing is still now, used for more than just locomotives. We have other infobox templates for rail vehicles that are not locomotives, so as long as the correct English-language infobox template is used, I still support this. Slambo (Speak) 03:32, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. No reason to have a German language infobox here. The fact that we have over 300 transclusions of this means whatever intent this template had of being temporary, has failed. Whoever translates a page from the German wiki can take a few more minutes to also find the correct infobox. We also have a /Holding cell to take care of this process if anyone feels that a straight 1:1 conversion can't take place. --Gonnym (talk) 11:05, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Looking for a few more opinions on if it should be (re?)converted into a translation fork/shim or if it's better to just do away with it and start over.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 01:11, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2020_March_18&oldid=946355653"