Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2020 April 16

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by ToxiBoi (talk | contribs) at 03:37, 17 April 2020 (→‎Template:Dark Side of the Ring: cmt). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

< April 15 April 17 >

April 16

Template:Dark Side of the Ring

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)[reply]

  • 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)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
    • 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)[reply]

Template:Christian denominations in the English-speaking world

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)[reply]

Template:Other uses2

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)[reply]

  • 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)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]

Template:Uw-bizlist

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)[reply]

  • Delete and then redirect? PPEMES (talk) 16:18, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    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)[reply]
  • Weak redirect to {{Uw-advert3}} or deprecate and dab to the "advert" 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 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Uw-infobox

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)[reply]

  • 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)[reply]
    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)[reply]

Template:Internet slang variants

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)[reply]

Template:Footer Nine Muses

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

Template:Greek myth (primordial)

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

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

Template:Greek myth (titan-concept)

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)[reply]

  • 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)[reply]

Template:Greek myth (Olympian)

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)[reply]

  • 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)[reply]

Template:Christology

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)[reply]

Template:Keisha

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)[reply]

  • 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)[reply]
  • Delete. The substantive links contravene WP:FILMNAV. --Bsherr (talk) 17:01, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Family of Zeus and Hera

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Template:The Blazing star barnstar

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)[reply]

  • Delete per nom Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ Talk 04:38, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
  • Merge - in essence delete and redirect - to Template:The Plantae Barnstar. PPEMES (talk) 09:16, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Rugbyleaguedeccat

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)[reply]

  • Delete. Thank you for your help. PPEMES (talk) 09:30, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2020_April_16&oldid=951430090"