Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019 February 17: Difference between revisions

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Line 125: Line 125:
*****{{ping|Markussep}}, to store DATA use wikiDATA. Then you can even avoid copying the templates every year AND all Wikipedias would benefit. [[Special:Contributions/77.13.146.241|77.13.146.241]] ([[User talk:77.13.146.241|talk]]) 18:33, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
*****{{ping|Markussep}}, to store DATA use wikiDATA. Then you can even avoid copying the templates every year AND all Wikipedias would benefit. [[Special:Contributions/77.13.146.241|77.13.146.241]] ([[User talk:77.13.146.241|talk]]) 18:33, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
******Is there a way to update population data in Wikidata for a few hundred municipalities at once? [[User:Markussep|Markussep]] <sup>[[User talk:Markussep|Talk]]</sup> 20:14, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
******Is there a way to update population data in Wikidata for a few hundred municipalities at once? [[User:Markussep|Markussep]] <sup>[[User talk:Markussep|Talk]]</sup> 20:14, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
*******[[User:Markussep|Markussep]], https://tools.wmflabs.org/quickstatements/#/. [[Special:Contributions/77.11.1.236|77.11.1.236]] ([[User talk:77.11.1.236|talk]]) 23:04, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
***** Just so you're aware, infoboxes drawing data from Wikidata are controversial here. [[User:Pppery|&#123;&#123;3x&#124;p&#125;&#125;ery]] ([[User talk:Pppery|talk]]) 20:25, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
***** Just so you're aware, infoboxes drawing data from Wikidata are controversial here. [[User:Pppery|&#123;&#123;3x&#124;p&#125;&#125;ery]] ([[User talk:Pppery|talk]]) 20:25, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
* '''Delete''' unnecessarily complicated. [[User:Pppery|&#123;&#123;3x&#124;p&#125;&#125;ery]] ([[User talk:Pppery|talk]]) 15:27, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
* '''Delete''' unnecessarily complicated. [[User:Pppery|&#123;&#123;3x&#124;p&#125;&#125;ery]] ([[User talk:Pppery|talk]]) 15:27, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

Revision as of 23:04, 19 February 2019

< February 16 February 18 >

February 17

Template:Nutsection

Redundant to {{nutshell}}. As for the “This section” display, it can easily be replicated with the “title” parameter of that template. Only transcluded on 3 pages. Delete/redirect and replace remaining uses with {{Nutshell|(text)|title=This section}} PorkchopGMX (talk with me - what i've done) 23:09, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Replace/Delete - Unused in mainspace. Nigej (talk) 08:15, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox aircraft

The documentation says this infobox is deprecated. If it should be deleted, then it should be deleted and not be kept in this limbo state. Gonnym (talk) 09:57, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - As noted in the infobox documentation. "It is primarily intended to allow the infobox to display correctly in when view the history of older articles, and not for general use in articles." For those of us who occasionally have to troll through aircraft article histories for whatever reason, having a working infobox is useful. The current delete notice has broken the infobox, resulting in this mess in the history, which would be permanent if the infobox is deleted. - BilCat (talk) 10:25, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • Seems strange that out of the thousands of templates on Wikipedia, only this template needs this workaround. Why is it even helpful to see how the infobox looked at least 2.5 years ago (when the deprecation notice was added)? --Gonnym (talk) 10:35, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
      • It's been deprecated longer than that, probably since 2008. The old infobox is a relic, and was updated to use modules at about that time. Since we can't update the history, we kept tne infobox around. I realize it might not seem useful to you, but as long as one person finds it helpful to have a working infobox in the history, isn't that enough? - BilCat (talk) 10:51, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
        • No, not really. Templates are pieces of code, which means that for you, it might be a deprecated template used to view history when needed, but for others, it's a working piece of code used in Ambrosini SS.4, Mil V-5, Mil V-16, Mil Mi-30 and 88 other pages. --Gonnym (talk) 11:20, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Replace all remaining transclusions with Template:Infobox aircraft begin, and redirect there. Complete deprecation requires that all remaining transclusions be resolved, so let's just get that done already. Steel1943 (talk) 22:31, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 23:29, 10 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 00:26, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment As Infobox aircraft begin "acts to provide common formatting for other aircraft-related infoboxes." per the documentation. When the remaining transclusions are replaced with Infobox aircraft begin, would it not be possible for Infobox aircraft begin to be moved to Infobox aircraft and maybe use a bot to rename Infobox aircraft begin to Infobox aircraft? Just think its a bit weird having "begin" in the title. Steven (Editor) (talk) 02:57, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 21:25, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Permian–Triassic extinction event graphical timeline

One transclusion. Substitute and delete. Steel1943 (talk) 23:16, 10 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 21:25, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:List of cult films

Article text transcluded across multiple articles should use LST instead of templates. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 19:11, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Navbox subgroup

Replace with {{Navbox}} - this template was deprecated over 2 years ago in favor of {{Navbox|subgroup}} since it was less efficient, but still has too many pages still using it. Gonnym (talk) 17:49, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • keep, the efficiency problem has since been resolved. Frietjes (talk) 18:09, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:The Television Drama Academy Award Best Supporting Actor Award

award without article The Banner talk 14:59, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:The Television Drama Academy Award Best Actress Award

award without article The Banner talk 14:59, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:The Television Drama Academy Award Best Actor Award

award without article The Banner talk 14:58, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:East Central Minnesota

Navobox for a very loosely associated group of pages. Article on topic was recently deleted per AFD here[1]. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 14:17, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete, for the same reasons as the article it was based on was recently deleted for. Synthesis with no firm definition of what constitutes "East Central Minnesota". --Sable232 (talk) 17:37, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - per above Nigej (talk) 19:08, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Element color legend/metal–nonmetal range

Delete - The "Element color legend" template series has been deprecated for over 5 years in favor of {{Periodic table legend}}. They are all marked as deprecated and unused. Gonnym (talk) 12:00, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. None is used in mainspace. (I have created the replacement {{Periodic table legend}} back then, and deprecated these). -DePiep (talk) 12:10, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - per nom Nigej (talk) 19:10, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Being Human summary

Subst and delete - This template is always created in the "List of episode" article and then transcluded to the main TV series article. In this case, it should be placed in List of Being Human episodes and transcluded to Being Human (UK TV series). There is no reason for this to be different. Gonnym (talk) 10:58, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Subst and delete - Per nom. Standardise. Nigej (talk) 19:49, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:TOC-Xiaolin Showdown

Delete - unused template that I can't even tell if it was ever used in mainspace. Gonnym (talk) 10:54, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Seems to be an abandoned attempt relating to episodes of Xiaolin Showdown and dating back to 2005. Nigej (talk) 19:43, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Red vs. Blue characters

Subst and delete - this template is used only in Red vs. Blue and uses a standard table which a lot of other television shows use. No need for a template, when this code is always placed in the article itself. Gonnym (talk) 10:52, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Subst and delete - per nom Nigej (talk) 19:18, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Jodi Number One

Place information in relevant places and delete - The template is only used in one article, the "judges" and "presenters" section can be placed in the {{Infobox television}} template (which is setup for that) while the winners should be written in prose in the lead. No need for a template for that. Gonnym (talk) 10:50, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Replace and delete - sort of pseudo-infobox. Support suggestion: use real infobox where possible, add rest and delete. Nigej (talk) 19:24, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:HarveyBirdmanEP

Replace with {{Episode list}} and delete - This episode template creates a non-standard non-accessibility compliant episode "row". Uses of this template should be converted to the standard {{Episode list}} template. Gonnym (talk) 10:46, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Town AT

So far as I can tell, this wrapper only exists to facilitate the use of a large number of non-English parameters. I can't see any reason that every one of these transclusions cannot simply use a direct implementation of {{Infobox settlement}}. (WP:INFOCOL)

I also think it is worth noting that of the 2,411 transclusions, 2,328 of them contain unknown parameters. To be clear, the unknown parameters issue is NOT a reason alone for deleting the template! Not saying that it is, but I think it might be indicative of the larger issue. Use the standard template and you won't have so many unknown parameters. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 06:59, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Strong support for replace and delete. A template very suited to merge with the settlement infobox. --Tom (LT) (talk) 08:46, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support replacement and deletion - this infobox is a mess and is an endemic problem with these wrapper templates. --Gonnym (talk) 09:54, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: it has more than 2400 transclusions, I think that's enough to have a dedicated infobox wrapper template. Will the population subtemplates {{Infobox Town AT/key}} and Category:Austria subdivision population templates still work after substing? About the "unknown parameters", most of these are actually recognised by the infobox (e.g. "Höhe", "Fläche") so I don't know why they were listed as "unknown". Note that much of the content of the infoboxes was copied from German wikipedia. Markussep Talk 19:21, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • I assume the intent was to subst all of the population templates too. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 19:33, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Markussep: as part of the subst/replace process all necessary code would be converted over. From the front end perspective, nothing would change. The same information would be displayed. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 19:35, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
      • I hope you (Pppery) are wrong, that would mean that the populations would have to be updated manually every year. Up to now, we could copy the data from German wikipedia into templates like {{Metadata population AT-6}} Markussep Talk 20:02, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
        • @Markussep: that template is a whole different can of worms. Personally I think it is an absolutely disaster that should be removed. That being said, there is no reason it cannot still be used with a direct call to {{Infobox settlement}}. What you are talking about is a separate issue. To be clear, this specific TFD is NOT discussing removing the use of {{Metadata population AT-6}}. That would be discussed in a separate TFD. So if that is your only concern, that you need not worry about it. These pages can simply make a direct call to that template. If that doesn't make sense let me know and I can show you an example of what I'm talking about. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 21:22, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
        • I'm not so fond of how it is done here with {{Infobox Town AT/key}}, which looks up the municipality code, personally I prefer the way it is done at {{Infobox German location}}, where the code has to be given as an infobox parameter. Still I think these metadata templates are a nice way to store and reproduce population data in a controlled and verifiable way. Anyway, I guess you have a point if you want to replace wrappers that only serve a few dozen articles, but this is something else. I'm leaning towards keep. Markussep Talk 08:41, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete unnecessarily complicated. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 15:27, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. 77.13.146.241 (talk) 18:31, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Module:String

Propose merging Module:StringFunc and Module:String2 with Module:String.
No need for three separate lua modules containing string functions. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 02:08, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • As long as all current uses continue to work and proper documentation is added, I don't think this is an issue. A working sandbox with testcases should be created before any change happens. --Gonnym (talk) 12:57, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support - with caveat that the module protection is reduced to Template-protected (OR is it possible that a new Module-protected level can be created?) so previous creators can still editor and maintain their code. In RexxS's specific module, the last addition was specifically something that I asked for at Wikipedia talk:Lua, so without him being able to edit the module, I'd either not have that piece of code, or it would be in a new module, which brings us here again. --Gonnym (talk) 07:15, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Seems like a very sensible suggestion. The only reason I can't support with the current wording is that the three modules have different maintainers and different levels of protection:
    Module:String is fully-protected and is maintained by two or three admins;
    Module:String2 is template-protected and is maintained by me;
    Module:StringFunc is unprotected and has been maintained by Falconjh.
    If String2 and StringFunc are merged into the fully-protected module String, none of the template-editors will be able to maintain them, unless the protection level of the merged module is altered. --RexxS (talk) 13:17, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    The fact that none of the modules has been edited in two months suggests they don't need much maintenance. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 15:04, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    That's true: they don't need much maintenance. But when they do, it's not a good idea to prevent the editors who know them best from editing them. I assume that whoever performs the merger will clean up all of the #invokes that will break? --RexxS (talk) 16:20, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support makes it easier to find the functions you need (and to maybe add new ones). – BrandonXLF (t@lk) 20:49, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Module:Bots

Unnecessary Lua module, can be implemented in Wikitext using Module:String ({{#if:{{#invoke:String|match|{{{1}}}|MassMessage|ignore_errors=1}}|[[Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery]]}} {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 02:03, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

comment from creator Could we implement the potential alternative at {{Bots}} and see if it indeed works before deleting the module? --DannyS712 (talk) 07:05, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, at {{bots/sandbox}}, and it works. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 16:33, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Question How many #invoke:Bots will be broken and need fixing as a result of the deletion? --RexxS (talk) 16:24, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
one. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 16:33, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Move functionality to template and delete Should be easy to do (fwiw, search insource ignores all non-alphanumerics, so you can simplify your search). --RexxS (talk) 18:35, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Partido Argentina

Unneeded wrapper. Just use the standard {{Infobox settlement}}. The precedent has long been established (for example: Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2011_July_14#Template:Infobox_Argentinian_Department). Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 00:55, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:September 2008 image loss

Template used for a short period in 2008 and is unused. Should be deleted, as there is no reason to keep it for historical reasons (there isn't even a page on Wikipedia dedicated to this event, which shows how notable it was). Gonnym (talk) 00:43, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2019_February_17&oldid=884165618"