Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2024 October 2

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< October 1
October 3 >

October 2

[edit]
[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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. ✗plicit 23:41, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions. The only discussion link I have found is this one, which happened shortly before this template's creation in January 2024. The template does not appear to have been adopted anywhere, so it may not be useful, or there may be a better way to generate these links. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:58, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:PCL

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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. ✗plicit 23:41, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions of this licensing template. The discussion at commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Template:PD-PCL may explain why it is no longer used. It appears to have been replaced by more appropriate licensing templates on the pages that transcluded it. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:54, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Books of the Bible

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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. ✗plicit 23:41, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(This is a nomination for merger into article space and replacement, not deletion per se, but that didn't fit into the form I'm filling out.)

I really like the links and groupings on this template. Unfortunately, over two-thirds of readers can't see it (or any template using {{navbox}}) on articles because they are using the mobile version of the site. If you go to https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Books_of_the_Bible and make your browser window narrow like a phone screen, you can see the layout of this template would force horizontal scrolling if displayed on articles, which is a horrible user experience.

I would like to replace this template with a mobile-friendly way of presenting the same information. We could simply make a narrow-screen-friendly version with exactly the same content using responsive web design principles, and I'm happy to implement that if there's consensus to do so. Four things make me think that might not be the best solution. 1: It will result in a lot of vertical scrolling. (That might be OK at the end of the page if there are no other navigational elements after this one.) 2: It would be a lot more likely to be read out loud by screen readers, which is probably not a great experience. 3: This template is rendered collapsed by default on the desktop site, which is probably an indication that it's too long to expose to readers. 4: One of the rationales for not showing navboxes on mobile is that it extends page load time noticeably, for content most readers aren't going to use.

Since we already require at least one click for our desktop users to see this nav system, one way to keep one-click access to it for them and for the first time give mobile users one-click access to it is to merge the contents of the template to Outline of Bible-related topics#Books. Notionally what this does is move the long vertical list of links to a separate page load, to a page which already happens to exist and is accessible from other places. We could then put a "see also" link to that page at the bottom of articles on specific books of the Bible. I would also make sure the main articles Bible and Biblical canon are linked from per-book articles and have links (mostly in the article bodies) to all the appropriate targets listed here (which they already mostly do). All per-book articles also already have a forward/backward book-to-book nav mechanism at the bottom of the page. This does show up on mobile and would be a good alternative to a "See also" link.

If we want to try to "tempt" users to click through to other articles more strongly than a single link would probably do, we could also take the items in the left column (OT, deuterocanon, apocrypha, NT, subdivisions, development, manuscripts, related) and make them into a much shorter list of standard links. That would be fairly easy to scroll through, would impact page load time a lot less, and wouldn't have to be rendered as collapsed by default. This could be a standard part of the "See also" section of per-book articles, or we could make a mobile-friendly nav template. -- Beland (talk) 18:50, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • I tend to disagree. The current article has plenty of links to the related and main articles: that mobile phone users cannot see Books of the Bible does not look like a major pain point for them. Would putting the information from the Navbox into the article just be a repetition? I tend to think that no changes should be made, and that the Navbox should stay, unless a better case can be made. Also, I expect we don't want the article to have off-topic material on the non-detero-canonicals (e.g. the protocanonicals) Rick Jelliffe (talk) 03:09, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Are you in fact requesting that the mobile version needs to be fixed regarding templates? The Banner talk 00:42, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Perfectly acceptable navbox, WP:POINTy nomination. --woodensuperman 14:01, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have seen the commentary on the relevant Phabricator task. I haven't said it there, but since you've now nominated a template: You will need more consensus than TFD can provide to go on the mission to neuter navboxes to only a dozen links each. (I am not necessarily a person who [dis]agrees with the venture.) I doubt you can get it. I'm happy to discuss other ideas onwiki or off after the close of this TFD.
    As regards the issue about responsiveness, I have been working on Template:Navbox/div every now and then the past few years, with a recent flurry due to some ill-considered sweeping by an external user. It still needs some work but I'd be happy to work with someone on it (integration with the relevant module or a sandbox version of the same, checking against every one of the pathological test cases, and so on). Izno (talk) 17:53, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Automatic archive navigator editsection

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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. Izno (talk) 17:17, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Used by a single user and duplicates Template:Archive. Replace with template (as its actually used only once and transcluded the other times) and delete template. Gonnym (talk) 14:11, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It does not "duplicate" Template:Archive -- it does something that's impossible to do using that template.
From the first sentence of the documentation page (?):
Template:Automatic archive navigator editsection is the exact same thing as Template:Automatic archive navigator but without emitting __NONEWSECTIONLINK__ and __NOEDITSECTION__ into the wikitext, so you can still edit sections.
From the name of the template itself, where it seems pretty difficult to miss (??):
Automatic archive navigator editsection
I cannot tell from the nomination whether you're proposing to edit my talk page archives to break them by replacing this with a different template, or whether you're proposing to delete the template and then forcing me to manually copy all of the code to implement an archive navigator template between all of my talk archives. I would prefer if neither of these are done.
I do not personally care whether this is in the template namespace or in my userspace; I made it a template so that other people could benefit from my having written it. If this bothers you, please feel free to move it to my userspace (so long as you are willing to fix the talk page archives so they transclude it from the new title), but please do not break all of my talk page archives. jp×g🗯️ 14:41, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't believe we need endless templates that do the same or quite similar things. It seems the community also does not believe in that as the various archive templates are being merged and deleted. I also don't believe there is anything special about your talk pages that is unique to them. However, if you feel the need to use special code, then this should be in your user space. If it's in the template space then expect community consensus to say how your userspace looks like. Gonnym (talk) 01:19, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I do not personally care whether this is in the template namespace or in my userspace; I made it a template so that other people could benefit from my having written it. If this bothers you, please feel free to move it to my userspace (so long as you are willing to fix the talk page archives so they transclude it from the new title). jp×g🗯️ 15:47, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:EUCommissionercountEuropeanParty

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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. ✗plicit 14:34, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and deprecated template. Gonnym (talk) 13:39, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:French Syndicate of Cinema Critics Awards

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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. ✗plicit 14:34, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and mostly blanked template. Gonnym (talk) 13:38, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Attached KML/U.S. Route 70 Bypass (Goldsboro, North Carolina)

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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. ✗plicit 14:33, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused as U.S. Route 70 Bypass (Goldsboro, North Carolina) was merged into Interstate 42. Gonnym (talk) 13:35, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Latest preview software release/JuK

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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. ✗plicit 12:38, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused software release version templates. Gonnym (talk) 11:13, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Weather box 2

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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. ✗plicit 12:37, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused duplicate of Template:Weather box Gonnym (talk) 10:33, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Blas de Lezo class cruisers

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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. ✗plicit 12:37, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Navigation template without articles to navigate to. Gonnym (talk) 08:35, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Tlitn

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 withdrawn. There is NPASR if someone is so motivated. Primefac (talk) 15:34, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused but also something that probably should not exist. The language templates produce proper italics. If a specific template isn't producing the correct style, it should be fixed at the source. Gonnym (talk) 09:57, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies all for not using this upon creation: luckily, I've just gotten around to it. Just like {{langr}}, there are myriad situations where one should set |italics=unset on this template—many proper names that are functionally non-English are an easy class of examples: e.g. {{tlitn|zh|Gwoyeu Romatzyh}}, so a shortcut is well-justified in my view. Sorry again for getting around to it so late. Remsense ‥ 论 16:38, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is that style of not using italics for names supported by the MoS? If so, can you point to it? Gonnym (talk) 09:35, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, see the bit near the bottom of Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Spelling and romanization. Remsense ‥ 论 08:17, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thanks. Regarding the actual code, why does this template not follow the documentation and use {{Transliteration}} with |italic=unset? Gonnym (talk) 08:49, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, good question. I think it's because I quickly bodged it by copying from {{langn}}, where it makes sense to specifically cancel out the bolding or italicization that might be present in certain display situations like infobox headings and the like. I'll fix it to save a template call. Remsense ‥ 论 08:57, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK, withdraw nomination. Seems the MoS supports this settings. Gonnym (talk) 09:49, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for taking so long in getting back to you—wasn't getting the notifications. Remsense ‥ 论 09:55, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:24, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 07:26, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2024_October_2&oldid=1250464824"