Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2015 October 5

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

October 5

[edit]
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. I have implemented Bilorv's suggestion. (non-admin closure) BethNaught (talk) 19:20, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not enough links to provide useful navigation between WP:EXISTING articles. Rob Sinden (talk) 14:24, 5 October 2015 (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).
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. (non-admin closure) BethNaught (talk) 06:56, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Subject is too broad for a navbox, making it unwieldy. Doesn't just list open-source video games, but also incorporates other open-source software like libraries, game engines, frameworks and software development kits. There's the article Open-source video game, List of open-source video games and Category:Open-source video games. See for instance TuxKart: offering a link to Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory or Newton Game Dynamics just because they're open-sourced is not necessary. Soetermans. T / C 12:30, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it would be problematic, just unnecessary. Listing a video game genre that happens to be open-sourced doesn't meet WP:NAVBOX, IMHO, because I don't think that's a "single, coherent subject" or that the articles would refer to each other. --Soetermans. T / C 13:05, 8 October 2015 (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).
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. (non-admin closure) BethNaught (talk) 06:53, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Series has two entries, but series itself does not have an article. Not needed in a navbox. Soetermans. T / C 10:47, 5 October 2015 (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).
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. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:31, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Two redirects, one wiktionary link. Nothing that could be listed in a category or in main article trickjump. Soetermans. T / C 10:39, 5 October 2015 (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).
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. unconnected games. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:38, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NAVBOX; articles listed might be "designed" for children, but do not refer to each other and if, needed, are better suited for a category. By same logic, we could have a "First-person shooters for women" or "Casual games for teenagers". Soetermans. T / C 10:38, 5 October 2015 (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).
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. (non-admin closure) BethNaught (talk) 07:05, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NAVBOX; what these franchises have in common is that they are Japanese role-playing games. It's also unnecessary: there's List of Japanese role-playing game franchises and Category:Japanese role-playing games. Soetermans. T / C 10:27, 5 October 2015 (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).