Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 June 15

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

June 15

[edit]

Template:2020 Tahiti Championship Table

[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; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:05, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Remains unused. The template says it's for the 2019 Championship, but the information is for the 2020 event. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:08, 15 June 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:2020 Thai League 3 Upper Region

[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; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:05, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. No mainspace for it exists. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:08, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 20:48, 16 June 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:2020 nine-pin bowling Single's World Championships events

[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. --Trialpears (talk) 19:56, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The template won't be used as the 2020 nine-pin bowling Single's World Championships was canceled due to the pandemic. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 19:44, 15 June 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:2020–21 Hero Indian Super League Points table

[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. --Trialpears (talk) 19:59, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

2020–21 Indian Super League season uses a different table but has updated information whereas this hasn't been updated since December 2020. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 19:44, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 17:15, 20 June 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:2020–21 Israeli Premier League regular season table

[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. --Trialpears (talk) 20:00, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

2020–21 Israeli Premier League uses a different table with the same information. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 19:44, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 20:48, 16 June 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:2020 China League Two tables

[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. --Trialpears (talk) 20:03, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

All unused as the first two templates contain no information and all three mainspaces for which the templates were created for use a different table for the standings. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 18:39, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 20:48, 16 June 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:2021–22 TFF First League table

[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 Template:2021–22 TFF First League table, but no consensus for Template:2021–22 Süper Lig table. No prejudice against speedy renomination although it is now in use. --Trialpears (talk) 20:10, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Both unused and contain no information. The first template does not have a mainspace article and the 2021–22 Süper Lig article uses a different table. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 18:30, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 20:47, 16 June 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:Get year

[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. --Trialpears (talk) 20:16, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, seems to just be {{#time:Y|...}} with an extra check for four-digit input. User:GKFXtalk 17:37, 15 June 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:Boxing at the 2020 Summer Olympics – List of Qualified NOCs

[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. WP:REFUND applies if someone thinks this will be useful in the future (the table is filled out). --Trialpears (talk) 20:19, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 14:49, 15 June 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:Cycling at the 2020 Summer Olympics – List of Qualified NOCs

[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. WP:REFUND applies if someone thinks this will be useful in the future (the table is filled out). --Trialpears (talk) 20:20, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Content merged with Cycling at the 2020 Summer Olympics – Qualification. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 14:44, 15 June 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).

EditNotices on DAB pages (batch 1)

[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. --Trialpears (talk) 20:37, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

These templates are doubly wrong. (1) Unlinked and redlinked entries are permitted on DAB pages per WP:DABMENTION and WP:DABRED. (2) References are forbidden on DAB pages per WP:DABREF. For analogous cases, see Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 January 16#Template:Editnotices/Page/Aslan (disambiguation), Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 January 28#Template:Editnotices/Page/Grace, Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 May 25#Template:Editnotices/Page/IA and Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 June 12#Template:Editnotices/Page/Manda, all of which resulted in deletion.

This is the first batch of a total of 70. The other 499 of these EditNotices are on name pages or lists, and unobjectionable (indeed, I would say a good idea; I'm all in favour of slowing down editors who might be thinking of adding vanity or other WP:NN entries).

Christina (listed above) is a DAB page which contains Christina (given name) and Christina (surname); EditNotices on those two (which lack them) might be appropriate, but the one on the DAB page is not.

David Clark (to be listed later) is an example of a {{hndis}} page which contains valid black- and redlinks.

Pietra (to be listed later) is an example of a DAB page which until today contained an invalid redlink (a leftover from a WP:AFD); sooner or later, they get caught.

I would like to thank WikiCleanerMan, who devised the search which made looking for and checking these notices easy.

Request to next passing admin - please add {{subst:Tfd}} to all these templates, which I am unable to do. Narky Blert (talk) 14:34, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, they are unused as they are not used on pages they were intended for and that is part of the reason they are being nominated based on my discussion with the nominator. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 17:42, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
They are in use. My argument is, that they should not be. Narky Blert (talk) 18:47, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I saw that while I was posting the TFD notices, and have pointed Alexf to the DAB-only list I assembled. Narky Blert (talk) 05:44, 16 June 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).

Templates created by Monkolitos

[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) Frietjes (talk) 14:12, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Both are not an actual template. Lekki/Ajah: Nigeria is a shorter version of Template:Lekki/Ajah (Nigeria), and the latter can be moved to draftspace. --Minorax (talk) 13:24, 15 June 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:HBO

[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 keep. There's a consensus that this is a suitable topic for a navbox, but concerns were brought up about the current version. Feel free to improve it as usual, but consider pinging the TfD participants as some of them are likely have opinions about it. --Trialpears (talk) 20:49, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused navigational template - and somewhat redundant to others that exist such as {{WarnerMedia Studios & Networks}} and {{HBONetwork Shows}}. Should either be used or deleted. Elli (talk | contribs) 14:46, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Response: The template was intended to mirror similar network-specific navigation templates in use such as those for ESPN and Nickelodeon. As for why it hasn’t been used is because, in the time since I created the template, User:Steven (Editor) removed it from all articles associated with Home Box Office, Inc. properties in three different occurrences before proposing it for deletion (despite usual protocol for proposed template deletions being that the template remains in the articles where it was applied until a deletion is deemed appropriate). Despite lacking a consensus during the first nomination, the user removed it from the applicable articles when I attempted to reinclude it early this year, only for the template to be pulled again preceding a second nomination. I inadvertently left it alone as a result, likely to avoid the situation turning into a neverending cycle of removals of the template for deletion nominations that would never reach a consensus, making it OK to reinclude the template and have it stay in the articles where applied long-term. TVTonightOKC (talk) 15:07, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Tvtonightokc: perhaps an RfC or some other method of resolution should be considered? Leaving this template unused is bad, it should either be used or deleted. I don't have an opinion on which option there is best. If this is kept at TfD, I'd consider that a rough consensus to allow it to be used (otherwise, there'd be no point to keeping it). Elli (talk | contribs) 15:15, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Elli, I previously nominated this for deletion, please see this TFD for info on what actually happened. Steven (Editor) (talk) 00:03, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep HBO is a major network. This is helpful for navigation. I'm surprised it's not used on related articles and it should be. Elli, consider withdrawing the TfD. I don't think we need an RfC for this. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:29, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • @WikiCleanerMan: my point is that we need to determine if there is consensus to use this template, as opposed to others. I don't particularly care, but I wanted to put it up for discussion. If it is, obviously, there isn't a reason to delete - but it currently isn't. Elli (talk | contribs) 22:53, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      There isn't? Right now, it's two to one in favor of keeping this. And your argument that it's redundant to the templates you cite doesn't make sense. Those templates are specific to a related topic, whereas nominating a template of a major American TV network doesn't help your case whether or not you "don't particularly care" about the final decision that could be made by the end of the TfD. Your nomination is kind of ridiculous mainly because you could have added this template to the articles linked in it instead of going through this process. Again, I think you should consider withdrawing this nomination and there is no need for an RfC for this because this matter could be resolved quickly. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:03, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep This is definitely very helpful for navigation. Sunrise In Brooklyn ✉ 21:38, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong delete It is an unnecessary template and was previously deleted as a duplicated template in early 2019. Please see this template talk discussion where I said the following to TVTonightOKC (user who recreated this template): "It is an unnecessary template and was previously deleted as a duplicated template in early 2019. What you should have done is start a discussion on recreating the HBO template, as what you effectively did was recreate a duplicated template with a few more articles, a few plain text names (should be avoided), an executives, defunct and former ventures, and a miscellaneous sections — you could have added this to the already existing HBO section of the WarnerMedia Studios & Networks template that it is part of, and there is the problem of having too many templates. The Defunct and former ventures section was problematic in that you had information that belongs in the article which would have references to support it, whereas this is a navbox for navigating. In addition, it has plain text names which should be avoided even though I kept these, but may have to be removed. There is not much value in keeping the HBO template "as is but placed within the WarnerMedia Studios & Networks template" — it's small that it works well as a section as you can see in the WarnerMedia Studios & Networks template". Please also see this previous TFD for more info on the background of this template, which resulted in no consensus as only me and TVTonightOKC participated in it. Steven (Editor) (talk) 00:14, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Steven (Editor), HBO is a major network. How could it not have a template of its own? The network templates you mention, BBC, ESPN, and Nickelodeon, the latter two are owned by a major parent company. ESPN is owned by Disney and Nickelodeon is owned by Viacom. HBO is owned by WarnerMeida. Your argument from the December 2020 TfD for this is because HBO is owned by a larger company that it's not deserving of its own navbox template. Template:WarnerMedia Studios & Networks is about all the entities WarnerMedia owns. It is not a similar template as HBO's. The HBO template needs to be reorganized. Time Warner bought HBO back in 1989 and it became official in March of this year to have WarnerMedia be its own independent company outside of AT&T's ownership which still owns WarnerMedia and has done so since 2016 when it was still called Time Warner. Your argument is not based on historical fact. And if WarnerMedia wasn't going to be released from AT&T would you argue for WarnerMedia Studios & Networks template to be deleted since AT&T owns it? I wouldn't because it's a specific template regarding a specific entity of a larger company. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 00:32, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 09:45, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep While the template as-is definitely needs cleanup (the executives section can go), I see little to no reason to delete this - HBO is a major network with plenty of attached channels, and this is useful for navigating these. Remagoxer (talk) 11:26, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. It's possible I'm misreading this discussion, but User:Steven (Editor) seems to be asserting this deletion was discussed previously but the linked TfD is closed as no consensus, no prejudice against further discussion. If there's duplication, I'm not seeing it at first glance. If I'm in error, I'd appreciate being pointed in the right direction. Deleting all uses of the template then claiming it's unused is, well, not the kindest practice. I agree that the template needs cleanup, but we all know what this process is NOT for. Considering HBO is one of the world's best respected cable networks, such a template belongs on Wikipedia for obvious navigation reasons. I'd be happy to be shown I'm wrong. BusterD (talk) 00:27, 17 June 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:Done-t

[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 redirect to Template:Done. --Trialpears (talk) 14:51, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is a redundant version of {{Done}} with a tick much larger than the text leading to unnecessary line height. MOS:ACCESS#Links also states that unicode characters should be avoided when being used as icons. The template should be redirected to {{Done}}. Terasail[✉] 16:50, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination. Got it. Thank you for clarifying. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:52, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • The template's documentation includes a rationale for its existence: It should be used in places like WP:Featured Article Candidates and WP:Peer Review where size may be limited, and so images should be avoided. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 02:45, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Sdkb: While that may be the rationale for the template. In practice it sees limited use on such pages, with most users just using {{Done}} or "Done:". It is just used as an alternate Done template with large line spacing. this shows that the 100 most recent transclusions of the template in the wikipedia namespace goes back to July 2017, indicating to me at least that there is a lack of use for that rationale. Terasail[✉] 11:11, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: with advertisement to the peer review and FAC projects, as it seems many (perhaps most) transclusions are used in those areas, as Sdkb mentions.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 09:39, 15 June 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:Canada roster 2021 IIHF World Championship

[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. --Trialpears (talk) 08:12, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WP:HOCKEY does not create navboxes for teams that win Cup/tournaments/championships. – Sabbatino (talk) 06:09, 15 June 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_June_15&oldid=1029959559"