Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2020 April 16

April 16

Template:Dark Side of the Ring

• Template:Dark Side of the Ring (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Docummentary or TV series navigational boxes should not just contain links to articles of subjects simply covered by/depicted in it. If we did it that way articles like George Washington and Adolph Hitler would have hundreds of them stacked at the bottom. Navboxes like these should contain links to articles about episodes, not just treat people or events like episodes. ★Trekker (talk) 22:02, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

• Keep Hmmm. I get your reasoning. This is the first template I've ever created. Since templates and categories aren't viewable on mobile, they seem kind of pointless anyway. I see you've single-handedly created thousands of categories and templates that no one will ever see. I will defer to your infinite wisdom on this subject. TheNewMinistry (talk) 00:55, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
  • @TheNewMinistry: Templates and categories are absolutely not pointless whatsoever, they exist primarily for navigation. And Wikipedia is not centred around mobiles. Mobile versions of websites are simply an inferior format to ones because they're smaller, thus not everything can be fit in them.★Trekker (talk) 12:25, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
• Since it looks like none of the episodes are notable in their own right (only the subjects are), delete for now. Ideally, show navboxes link only the existing articles on episodes, but in this case they don't exist. The seasons' main claim to fame so far is just that they "[feature] notable figures such as Scott Hall, Tony Atlas [...] and more." I couldn't find any in-depth sourcing for them either. Even if this could gain population later, Wikipedia isn't a crystal ball and we can just restore it if there turns out to be a number of notable episodes (something which I do sadly doubt). –ToxiBoi! ^(contribs) 03:31, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
  • Yes, Bruiser Brody may be notable, but we don't go around writing navboxes for every single thing he's had involvement with. –ToxiBoi! ^(contribs) 03:37, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Template:Christian denominations in the English-speaking world

• Template:Christian denominations in the English-speaking world (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Noteworthy intersection of embedded templates? Doubtly. Seemingly not used neither in List of Christian denominations nor in English-speaking world. PPEMES (talk) 19:23, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

• Keep - No reasoning is given by PPEMES for removing this useful and used navigation box. tahc ^chat 13:52, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Template:Other uses2

• Template:Other uses2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This template, and correspondingly {{distinguish-otheruses2}}, which is separately up for deletion, both function only as conveniences for users who understand them well: they save writing a few characters: {{other uses|Foo (disambiguation)}} and {{other uses2|Foo}} are completely equivalent, and {{other uses}} and {{other uses2}} are equivalent. While I won't argue that it offers some trivial amount of convenience, in the broader scope of hatnote templates, the variety of hatnote templates is daunting for new users, so this template is a net negative in usability by contributing to the confusion of newbies, for minimal gain. We should delete it, replacing it with equivalent calls to {{other uses}}, to improve the series of templates by paring them down. {{Nihiltres |talk |edits}} 18:47, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

• Yeah, things would definitely be easier if this template weren't used. If you see a hatnote with the code {{Other uses|Foo (disambiguation)}} you immediately know what it's about. {{Other uses2|Foo}} is rather more opaque – you wouldn't normally parse it unless you specifically know the template. I'm OK with deletion, but I'm wondering about its use simply as a typing aid – it's got about 2,400 transclusions, so presumably quite a few people out there are using it. If we don't want to make things inconvenient for them, we could set up the template so that it gets automatically substed as {{other uses}} – that way we gain the simplicity (no uses of the template lying around) but keep the convenience (people still able to use it). – Uanfala (talk) 20:28, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
• Keep. Unlike {{distinguish-otheruses2}}, which is a combination of two hatnote templates that are better understood separately, this template is a useful and widely used standardization. --Bsherr (talk) 22:16, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
• Delete Insufficient complexity of markup to warrant a template, as I discovered in Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2018 September 23#Module:Other uses2 * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:54, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Template:Uw-bizlist

• Template:Uw-bizlist (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This template was originally created to refer those attempting to use Wikipedia to promote a business to Wikia's Yellowikis instead. When that website became defunct, the referral there was removed from the template. Now it's just inferior to the multilevel UW template series uw-advertX. Bsherr (talk) 15:05, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

• Delete and then redirect? PPEMES (talk) 16:18, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

  I thought about that, but we try to avoid redirecting to any one multilevel template because we want users to specifically consider which level is appropriate. --Bsherr (talk) 16:27, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

• Weak redirect to {{Uw-advert3}} or deprecate and dab to the "advert" or "spam", per MarginalCost user warning series. The template in question is completely unused (outside of the navbox and docs). Also, I think directing a user to "alternative outlets" (which, mind you, the link is broken and the page outdated) on what has to be their third warning is a little late. –ToxiBoi! ^(contribs) 23:53, 16 April 2020; edited 04:27, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
  • It may appear unused, but that's because user warning templates are commonly subst'd. The actual text appears on about 3,000 user talk pages. MarginalCost (talk) 22:05, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
    • @MarginalCost: Thanks for pointing that out (that's a big thing I didn't catch for some reason), but after reviewing the page you sent (and sorting by editing date) I still think my rationale stands, considering most of these subsitutions were added last year. It would also appear that usage of this template slowed after this edit in May 2019. –ToxiBoi! ^(contribs) 04:27, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
• Delete per Bsherr. No sensible single-level warning level template to redirect to; uw-advertX or uw-spamX would be logical successor. MarginalCost (talk) 22:05, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Template:Uw-infobox

• Template:Uw-infobox (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This new UW template is intended to be specific to infoboxes, which would not of itself be a problem except that it sacrifices specificity as to the actual conduct at issue. Is it a test edit? Deliberate introduction of an error? An unsourced addition? We have specific multilevel templates for all of these issues already, and identifying the edit as being in an infobox just isn't useful to identifying or explaining those problems. Bsherr (talk) 14:47, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

• Comment I created the template specifically for cases when a user changes a fact or figure in an infobox, but not the corresponding fact or figure in the rest of the article; I am familiar with the other user warning templates but in these cases find it hard to discern whether or not it is indeed a test edit, vandalism or deliberate introduction of an error, and "unsourced addition" may confuse users when they merely changed facts that weren't sourced in the first place. Passengerpigeon (talk) 22:17, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

  I see what you are trying to accomplish, and it's great that your instinct is to assume good faith if it's unclear that the edit is vandalism or a test. But because a user who, in good faith, adds content to an article that is factually inaccurate but in the belief that it is accurate is trying to contribute to and improve Wikipedia, not vandalize it, we don't have user warnings for accidental misinformation. Rather, per Wikipedia:Vandalism#Misinformation, accidental, If you believe inaccurate information has been added to an article in good faith, remove it once you are certain it is inaccurate, or discuss its factuality with the user who has added it. On the other hand, because we have a Wikipedia:Verifiability policy (as opposed to a Wikipedia:Accuracy policy), it would be perfectly acceptable to warn a user about an unsourced change even if the original information is unsourced. --Bsherr (talk) 00:16, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Template:Internet slang variants

• Template:Internet slang variants (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Internet slang (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Template:Internet slang variants with Template:Internet slang.
The {{Internet slang variants}} is redundant with the {{Internet slang}}. --Soumyabrata ^{stay at home} _{wash your hands} ^{to protect from coronavirus} 14:26, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

• Merge per nom. PPEMES (talk) 16:17, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Template:Footer Nine Muses

• Template:Footer Nine Muses (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Greek mythology (deities) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Template:Footer Nine Muses with Template:Greek mythology (deities).
Same issue as right below. PPEMES (talk) 10:26, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Template:Greek myth (primordial)

• Template:Greek myth (primordial) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Greek myth (primordial-cthonic) sidebar (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Template:Greek myth (primordial) with Template:Greek myth (primordial-cthonic) sidebar.
Duplicate redundancy. PPEMES (talk) 09:42, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

• Merge per nom. The destination template already has the content. --Gonnym (talk) 10:05, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Template:Greek myth (titan-concept)

• Template:Greek myth (titan-concept) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Greek myth (Titan) sidebar (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Template:Greek myth (titan-concept) with Template:Greek myth (Titan) sidebar.
Surely a subtopic to be included. PPEMES (talk) 09:38, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

• Merge per nom. Half the template is the same, so there is no reason to have to decide which to use. They are both serve the same scope of "titans". --Gonnym (talk) 10:05, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Template:Greek myth (Olympian)

• Template:Greek myth (Olympian) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Greek mythology (deities) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Template:Greek myth (Olympian) with Template:Greek mythology (deities).
While admittedly the destination template is large, as such is there any clear reason for standalone template with this content? PPEMES (talk) 09:15, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

• Merge per nom. While the destination is large, it already has the same links. If it is deemed to large, then the solution is splitting the template, not having duplicate smaller copies. I also see that {{Greek religion}} is another template that has most (all?) of these links, and a page like Aphrodite has all 3 templates. --Gonnym (talk) 10:05, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Template:Christology

• Template:Christology (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Jesus (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Template:Christology with Template:Jesus.
Significantly related. If destination template would then be considered too large (although sections are collapsed), then the merged contents coud replace the section called "Jesus in Islam", which anyone seems a bit out of propoortion for this template? PPEMES (talk) 09:11, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

• Keep. I think there are some issues here. On the merits, I'm concerned that Christology is more relevant to Christianity, which has its own sidebar Template:Christianity sidebar, than to Template:Jesus, of which Jesus in Christanity is only one group, and is already large. On the implementation, making Christology its own group on equal level with Jesus in Christianity misrepresents the subordinate relationship between the topics; worse, removing Jesus in Islam decreases the coverage of the template, and that topic seems to be selected arbitrarily. As of now, the merged solution seems worse than the two separate templates. --Bsherr (talk) 16:21, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Template:Keisha

• Template:Keisha (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused navbox with no useful navigation. The article for the main subject has been deleted. Half of the links don't even mention the subject. The remaining links are to lists containing the subject. • Gene93k (talk) 05:02, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

• Delete. Agree with nom's rationale. Links in template are not notably associated with main article. --Tom (LT) (talk) 08:16, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
• Delete. The substantive links contravene WP:FILMNAV. --Bsherr (talk) 17:01, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Template:Family of Zeus and Hera

• Template:Family of Zeus and Hera (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Looks like a sandbox start at a chart, but never finished (~18 months ago) and creator is no longer active. Not used on any page. Agricolae (talk) 04:35, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

• Comment. Not sure, per WP:NOTFINISHED. Numerous similar templates in Category:Greek mythology templates and the rest of Category:Family tree templates. Could it be instead have contents merged from for instance non-wikified in-article template of Hera#Genealogy? PPEMES (talk) 09:23, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
• Delete. WP:NOTFINISHED should not be applied to templates, which other users may use, not knowing if the code is completed or not and often without the knowledge on how to fix it (unlike adding a sentence to an article). If anyone wants the template, ask to have it userfy to your userspace, otherwise delete and refund if later asked for it. I'll note that Zeus#Genealogy of the Olympians already has a tree. --Gonnym (talk) 10:09, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

What about merging both Zeus#Genealogy of the Olympians and Hera#Genealogy with Template:Family of Zeus and Hera, and then keep it? This way, the merged template would not be unique at all (see my above comment). If this template is to be deleted, then this should be in a consistent nomination with numerous other equivalent templates? PPEMES (talk) 10:19, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Template:The Blazing star barnstar

• Template:The Blazing star barnstar (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Created in 2015, it's supposed to be a barnstar awarded to those who significaly improve pages related to Plants. It's quite obvious though that's not a barnstar. Just a picture slapped in a template and labeled "barnstar". WP:PLANTS does not even use it. Fails WP:B2G. Also, I created Template:The Plantae Barnstar in February which is the official barnstar of WP:PLANTS. Jerm (talk) 03:49, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

• Delete per nom Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ _Talk 04:38, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
• Delete or Userify. Not sure of a specific guideline to cite, but this template seems to be the personal creation of a particular editor, so I think it could be userified back to their user space in the event they'd like to use it again. Delete as a second-best option to this. --Tom (LT) (talk) 08:16, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
• Merge - in essence delete and redirect - to Template:The Plantae Barnstar. PPEMES (talk) 09:16, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Template:Rugbyleaguedeccat

• Template:Rugbyleaguedeccat (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

unused category navigation template. All uses just replaced by me with the generic {{Navseasoncats with centuries below decade}}, via Template:YYY0s in rugby league category header. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 00:02, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

• Delete. Thank you for your help. PPEMES (talk) 09:30, 16 April 2020 (UTC)