Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2016 May 19

< May 18	May 20 >

May 19

Template:HTC Roshei Yeshiva

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 as unopposed. WP:REFUND applies. (non-admin closure) ~ Rob^Talk 15:17, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:HTC Roshei Yeshiva (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Vast majority of the names in this template are not notable. FuriouslySerene (talk) 19:19, 19 May 2016 (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).

Template:American Experience episodes

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 relisted here. (non-admin closure) ~ Rob^Talk 17:35, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:American Experience episodes (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:American Experience (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Template:American Experience episodes with Template:American Experience.
Navbox {{American Experience episodes}} is incredibly difficult to navigate with the hidden seasons, especially as most of the articles are redlinks. Would propose a merge to {{American Experience}}, showing only "notable" (i.e. episodes with existing articles) episodes in the result. I've already removed the narrators, directors, etc, from the target given the long standing consensus not to include cast and crew in navboxes. -- Rob Sinden (talk) 15:36, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep

I've restored the content to {{American Experience}} due to a failure to seek consensus for an enormous edit. And secondly, the template was nearly deleted in it's entirety by Robsinden by his edit time stamped 11:29, 19 May 2016. Posting "Longstanding consensus not to have cast and crew in navboxes" for the edit summary with no link to the "Longstanding consensus" discussion does not establish the truthfulness for this claim.

showing only "notable" (i.e. episodes with existing articles) episodes in the result

Red links are permitted per Wikipedia:NAVBOX and Wikipedia:EXISTING. Wikipedia:NAVBOX states,

"Each link should clearly be identifiable as such to our readers. In general text colors should be consistent with Wikipedia text color defaults, so links should be blue; dead links should be red; and red and blue should not be used for other (non-link) text. However, specific navbox guidelines for color of text and background other than the defaults are available."

And Wikipedia:EXISTING states,

"Red links should normally be avoided unless they are very likely to be developed into articles. Red links can be retained in navigation templates that represent a well-defined and complete set of data (geographic divisions, annual events, filmographies, etc.), where deleting red links would leave an incomplete and misleading result. Even then, editors are encouraged to write the article first."

The purpose of those templates is to link the films to the series. This template is no different than Template:The Simpsons episodes. If you are opposed to the redlinks, than please create content. I have stated the above policies Wikipedia:NAVBOX and Wikipedia:EXISTING to Robsinden recently at the following talk pages with diffs:

Actually, WP:NAVBOX is a guideline, and WP:EXISTING is an essay, neither are policies. You're cherry-picking though by quoting the bit which says what colour links are to be if they are included, when actually the pertinent part of WP:NAVBOX is "a grouping of links used in multiple related articles to facilitate navigation between those articles". Although not specifically precluded, redlinks do not point to articles. A sea of redlinks hinders the reader from finding the articles they want to find. And with the switch function of this navbox, they are only finding a couple of active links each time, which is frustrating for anyone.

As far as consensus regarding cast and crew go, see Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2015 March 16#Template:James Bond film crew and related discussions. The other entries (TV network, theme song, etc) were just too tangential for inclusion. The fact is, as it stands {{American Experience episodes}} is unusable. You have to select the seasons one by one, only to find the majority of links are redlinks. This works with {{The Simpsons episodes}} where nearly every episode has a blue link, but this is not the case here. By combining the two navboxes and only including links with target articles, you help the reader navigate to existing articles, rather than a complicated navigation system that hinders the reader finding the articles. --Rob Sinden (talk) 07:54, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Robsinden:

You're cherry-picking though by quoting the bit

What do you call it when you do it? Everything in that Wikipedia policy is pertinent. Not only the parts you like at the exclusion of the parts you dislike.

As far as consensus regarding cast and crew go

That is a link to Template:James Bond film crew. A template dedicated solely to the film crew of James Bond. That is not a comparable comparison to this template. Nor does it reflect a consensus discussion. It's a nomination you started with two supporting deletes. You're going to need something more substantial to prove this claim.

How about I create a list article for directors and narrators? My examples are List of directors of The Simpsons and List of The Simpsons writers.

other entries (TV network, theme song, etc) were just too tangential for inclusion

The creator, executive producers, theme music composers, and related articles are too tangential for inclusion? Was there a discussion that appointed you to determine which articles are pertinent or redundant to a template? No editor makes that determination by themselves.

redlinks

I've addressed this issue numerous times as stated above. Ignoring this aspect of the policy is a personal choice.

Mitchumch (talk) 17:26, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, by all means, create a list of directors and narrators. I don't know if they would pass notability guidelines though... --Rob Sinden (talk) 09:01, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, the directors are all listed at List of American Experience episodes. That's sufficient. --Rob Sinden (talk) 09:08, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As far as the theme song goes, this would be suitable for inclusion if it was composed for the TV series, as it is intrinsically linked to the show. However, take a look at Time Has Come Today#In other media and see how many other TV series it has been used in. And it is against standard practice to link the TV network, you can look at any other TV series navbox for this (although it might be appropriate to include the show in {{PBSTV}}). --Rob Sinden (talk) 09:07, 23 May 2016 (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).

Template:Location map USA relief

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. The USA maps were Luafied some time ago. Izkala (talk) 19:06, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Location map USA relief (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

redundant to |relief=1 with {{Location map}}. Frietjes (talk) 15:31, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Frietjes: Given lack of participation here, could you show the redundancy by converting both of the existing mainspace transclusions? If that's successful, I'll close as delete (as unopposed). ~ Rob^Talk 15:24, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rob, all meaningful transclusions were converted weeks ago. anything left can be easily corrected by just adding |relief=1 and using the standard USA map. Frietjes (talk) 12:34, 29 May 2016 (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).

Template:Sean B. Carroll

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 as per this discussion with consideration to the long-standing consensus that three links is not sufficient for a navbox. (non-admin closure) ~ Rob^Talk 17:31, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Sean B. Carroll (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only one active link. Not enough to provide useful navigation. Rob Sinden (talk) 11:35, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

All links now active, wouldn't it be more helpful being constructive than destructive. Bassplr19 (talk) 12:45, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you've added redirects to the author's page, which doesn't improve its navigation function. --Rob Sinden (talk) 13:25, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, there are now two active links. Still not enough to warrant a navbox. --Rob Sinden (talk) 13:28, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No, there will need to be rather more to justify a template. Carroll is already in Template:genarch, where Endless Forms Most Beautiful (book) can also go (in parentheses after his name) in a partial merge; the other book titles will have to wait for articles and perhaps a different template. Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:09, 19 May 2016 (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).