Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 January 15

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< January 14 January 16 >

January 15[edit]

Template:WMF IP[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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 merge to Template:WMF IP. No prejudice against any decision or discussion that determines the target should be the other template. Primefac (talk) 02:14, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:WMF IP with Template:Private IP.
These templates basically serve the same purpose, in fact the template Template:Private IP was actually mostly copies from Template:WMF IP. The templates also link the same meta page in the "more info" link. P,TO 19104 (talk) (contribs) 22:31, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support They do actually serve a slightly different purpose. Template:WMF IP (the original) is used for IP addresses that face the Internet at large, also known as "WAN" or "external" IP addresses. These can show up when a person or automated tool (accidentally) makes edits through a Foundation data center internet connection. Even if a person or bot were to edit from within the Foundation network and the same data centre, these interactions still go through the "front door" and have a WAN source address. On the other hand, Template:Private IP describes an internal "LAN" or "private" IP address (such as User:127.0.0.1 and the various 10.x.x.x). It is not be possible, even by human mistake, to interact with the wiki in such a way that one's IP address appears as a LAN address. However, over the past ten years there have been one or two occasions where the wiki was misconfigured and interpreted IP information incorrectly. When we edit the wiki, we go through many servers over the Internet between our device and the Foundation web servers processing the edit. If the wiki software loses track of part of that chain, or looks at the wrong end of the end of the chain, it could think the edit came from itself, which manifests as the edit being assigned to 127.x or 10.x addresses.
    In a nut shell: Template:WMF IP generally refers to edits actually made from a Foundation server, usually due the editing user themselves doing so by mistake. Template:Private IP generally refers to normal external edits that where, due to a technical mistake on the wiki side, the source IP is lost and thus got wrongly attributed to a private LAN address.
    Both of these are very unlikely now, since these address sets are generally blocked by abuse filters and such. I support merging them, because the distinction is confusing and not useful to people, and for those technically interested, the distinction remains evident from the address itself. --Krinkle (talk) 23:27, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Question, Krinkle, should a merged template provide a parameter to provide a distinction between these two? e.g. a {{Private IP}} that has a |type= with values "internal" vs "WMF", which changes the display output of the template slightly. Or do you think the distinction is not even worth noting in that manner? ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 13:38, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • @ProcrastinatingReader I don't think the distinction is worth noting. I believe those who would know what to set it to, or want to read it, already do this based on the shape of the IP address alone. For the purpose of wiki admins and patrollers, I'm not aware of this being a factor into how they would or should respond. --Krinkle (talk) 23:53, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment if merged, it should use "WMF IP", and there should be a switch indicating the private address space IP -- 70.31.205.108 (talk) 14:28, 17 January 2021 (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:US-ryrm-sa[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the template's undeletion. (non-admin closure) ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 13:20, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, and duplicates obsolete text that has been removed from Template:RoutemapSeeAlso. Would have qualified for WP:SPEEDY under criteria T3. AlgaeGraphix (talk) 17:05, 15 January 2021 (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).

Bob Willis Trophy templates[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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 on 2021 January 29. Primefac (talk) 02:16, 29 January 2021 (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:Beethoven violin sonatas[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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) ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 13:25, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and deprecated in favor of {{Beethoven duo sonatas}} intforce (talk) 14:58, 15 January 2021 (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).

Rachael Heyhoe Flint Trophy templates[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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 on 2021 January 29. Primefac (talk) 02:25, 29 January 2021 (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:Schubert piano sonatas[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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) ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 13:36, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused duplicate of {{Schubert piano compositions}} intforce (talk) 14:44, 15 January 2021 (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).

Composition genre navboxes[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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 following replacement or removal as appropriate. Primefac (talk) 00:52, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Same reasoning as with the Rachmaninoff templates and Dvořák templates; I thought it best if we do this altogether. The individual genre templates are significantly older than the unified composer templates, and largely deprecated. Many pages transclude both templates, which is a significant duplication of content. intforce (talk) 14:30, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete all These are all a sub-section of the main template, eg {{Arnold symphonies}} contains just the symphonies listed also in {{Malcolm Arnold}}. The Arnold symphonies only contain the Arnold symphonies template, not the main Malcolm Arnold template. Firstly, who's to say that someone in a symphony article only want to navigate to other symphonies. Secondly, it's all overall complicated, the user expects a certain consistency and finding radically different templates about the same composer will simply confuse them. Nigej (talk) 17:56, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete with caveat – in general, Intforce, I'm supportive of deleting the ones you have put here but we need to be sure that the pages with removed templates will be substituted with their appropriate duplicates; e.g. an article like String Quartet No. 2 (Piston) won't be left with out the Walter Piston navbox. I don't know if you want to do this, or a bot can, but this is certainly something that should be addressed. Aza24 (talk) 23:24, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Should not be a problem, once the discussion is closed with consensus to delete, I can do a pass with AWB. intforce (talk) 11:06, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all as redundant. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:35, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • intforce I've just created {{Robert Simpson (composer)}}, if you want to add {{Robert Simpson symphonies}} to the nomination Aza24 (talk) 23:42, 18 January 2021 (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:Irish-railway-routemap[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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) ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 13:34, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Obsolete and unused; replaced by {{Railway-routemap}}. AlgaeGraphix (talk) 14:10, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@ZKang123: {{SMRT-routemap}} is not linked to or from any other files. AlgaeGraphix (talk) 02:04, 16 January 2021 (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).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2021_January_15&oldid=1213509149"