Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 December 31

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< December 30 January 1 >

December 31[edit]

Template:Five Great Revolutionary Operas[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. ✗plicit 23:41, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Navbox with only two links on the English Wikipedia with three links to the Korean Wikipedia. Basic navigation is not met. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:25, 31 December 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:Hexafluorides[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 2022 January 8. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 16:11, 8 January 2022 (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:Saint Lucian general election, 2021[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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 16:05, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Empty table which won't ever be used as 2021 Saint Lucian general election uses a different table. Gonnym (talk) 19:52, 31 December 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:Roman Catholic Ecclesiastical Province of Rouen[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. ✗plicit 23:35, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused as the articles already use Template:Catholic Church in France instead. Gonnym (talk) 19:45, 31 December 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:Rodalies-Barcelona[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. ✗plicit 23:34, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused rail template. Gonnym (talk) 19:43, 31 December 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:Progression rainbow/project[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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 16:03, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Progression rainbow was changed to use a module making these obsolete. Gonnym (talk) 19:27, 31 December 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:Progress line 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. ✗plicit 23:35, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused progress templates. the '1' and '2' versions are used in the creator's user page which hasn't been edited since 2009. Gonnym (talk) 19:23, 31 December 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:Inorganic bromides[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:Bromides. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 16:12, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Inorganic bromides with Template:Bromides.
Looks like these are just different ways of presenting the same content. Not sure which one should be preferred, but transcluding both on every page listed is certainly redundant. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 17:17, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support the periodic table presentation is better. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:10, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support having a template explicitly listing the different oxidation states makes sense for templates like Template:Chromium compounds, when the element often has different oxidation states, but since bromides are explicitly oxidation state -1, listing the oxidation state of the cation is not really adding any new information. The periodic table template organizes things in a more useful way. 〈 Forbes72 | Talk 〉 19:46, 2 January 2022 (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:Posnq[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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 16:11, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This template and the corresponding Lua function is unused because it solves a problem which doesn't exist. It aims to be a find function which can handle leading and trailing spaces (trimmed from named parameters) by quoting the search string, but the standard find function already can handle trailing and leading spaces:

so there is no need for a separate one. User:GKFXtalk 15:33, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

NB that I'm not aware of a procedure for nominating a single Lua function for deletion, so I've posted on the talk page. User:GKFXtalk 15:38, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. (although it's used in a few talk page demonstrations) * Pppery * it has begun... 01:36, 1 January 2022 (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:Strpad[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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 16:02, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused wrapper for {{padleft}} and {{padright}}; magic words should be used directly. User:GKFXtalk 15:24, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. * Pppery * it has begun... 01:36, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment however, it doesn't just do padleft and padright, it does centering if you choose |4=center -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 17:00, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Centring like that is a feature commonly used in terminal UIs (e.g. with printf), but on the web you centre with CSS. User:GKFXtalk 08:05, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Transwiki to Templates.Wikia -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 17:00, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as unused and best to remain so Nigej (talk) 11:26, 7 January 2022 (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:Transport segregation table for HAZMAT class 1 materials[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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 16:24, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A simple table which is only used at HAZMAT Class 1 Explosives. The table should be subst there and the template deleted. Gonnym (talk) 14:36, 31 December 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:Multi-column TOC/base.css[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 Withdrawn. Gonnym (talk) 08:10, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The above are all CSS sub pages of Template:Multi-column TOC, however some are unused while others aren't even connected in the template. Whatever isn't needed should be deleted, while the rest should be merged into a single .css page which would then use classes to identify the required value instead of pages. Gonnym (talk) 14:26, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • I note that this template has the feature styles the table of contents wherever it is, and does not determine the position of the table of contents. Is there some way of preserving that feature while merging the CSS pages? * Pppery * it has begun... 01:36, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • You are right, since it requires the ToC to be in any spot, this is isn't as simple as I thought. Withdrawing for the time being. --Gonnym (talk) 08:10, 1 January 2022 (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:Trimc[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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 16:01, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to no longer be used; redundant to {{replace}}, anyway. User:GKFXtalk 14:24, 31 December 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:MiddleEarth-char-stub[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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 16:27, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Middle-earth project no longer faces the creation of dozens of stub articles for Tolkien characters, indeed I can't think of any in the past few years, so the template is now no longer needed. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:52, 31 December 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:Nb10[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. There is a consensus that the output/result of this template can be achieved in better ways, and is thus unnecessary. Whether extant uses are removed outright or replaced by those "other ways" is, from what I am reading of the discussion, somewhat context-dependent (i.e. I am not seeing a significant consensus for "replace and delete" vs "remove and delete"). Primefac (talk) 20:08, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Used in various dubious layout hacks, 119 transclusions. Trying to achieve good cross-platform layout with loads of &nbsp;s is doomed to failure. An editor familiar with CSS and what templates are available should replace it in each case with a more appropriate technique, and it should then be deleted. I've done a bit of this already (since there is an existing consensus that e.g. table-based columns are bad) and based on what I've seen the below is typical of usage.

  • Making old-style column layouts (which use HTML tables) look a bit nicer (see WP:Autowidening tables)—these should be converted to modern column layout e.g. {{div col}}. There is plenty of residual use where the columns are gone or already converted to {{div col}}, in which case just remove {{nb10}}.
  • Making table columns (as in tables which look like tables, not just columns) wider for no reason - these uses should be removed as they may look OK on desktop but are take up valuable space on mobile
  • Centring or aligning content; e.g. put text-align:center on table cells instead.

User:GKFXtalk 13:17, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - Useful, and used (113 transclusions). There are always multiple ways to skin a cat, and this is one that some people have chosen to use. Nominator's Wikipedia experience is limited (8,327 edits in 10 years) so they may not understand that we generally don't prescribe what method must be used when there are a number of methods available. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:35, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    There are indeed multiple ways to skin a cat, but not all of them give the same quality of results. To elaborate on "cross-platform" above: my concern, backed up by having gone through a significant number of the transclusions, is that almost all layouts based on large numbers of nbsps are optimized for desktops, and sometimes even only really work for the original editor's specific screen width. I picked one of the transclusions at random, Jasper–Prince Rupert train, as an example. It uses nb10 to try to display some items in a big table in the bottom-right of their cell. This works great if your browser window is about 1500, or about 2000px wide. For smaller resolutions (or for about 1700–1800px wide), the cell content wraps differently and the distinction is lost. If the content had used some other means of presentation, the distinction would be clear regardless of platform. Over half of readers are on mobile where this sort of thing is even less likely to work.
    To be clear, I'm not nominating all the nbsp templates for deletion, a few nbsps are fine here and there, I'm nominating one which is thoroughly abused and is generally too long a space to insert and still have articles work cross-platform. It will remain possible to use {{spaces|10}} if someone wants to. User:GKFXtalk 23:07, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    "It will remain possible" is probably something to look into, I have some doubts that you should ever need 10 spaces especially given what's said in the nomination about such space (at least in the mainspace; maybe arbitrary use outside mainspace would be fine). Izno (talk) 04:18, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. * Pppery * it has begun... 01:36, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Replace all instances of {{nb10}}, {{nb5}}, {{nb4}} , {{ns}} , {{ns|#integer#}} with {{spaces|10}} , {{spaces|5}} , {{spaces|4}} , {{spaces|3}} , {{spaces|#integer#}} respectively. If they require further cleanup for CSS conversion, tag it with a cleanup notice -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 17:07, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    If nb10 gets deleted, I would expect to remove all instances of nb5 on the same page at the same time, since they most likely would be being used for the same purpose. However, I do think there are plenty of legitimate reasons to want a small space, like nb4 or nb5, so I wouldn’t mess with those templates beyond that. As for {{ns}}, it’s mostly used for making columns slightly wider in tennis statistic tables, which is not a particularly useful thing to do, so I’d lean towards just removing those. User:GKFXtalk 17:17, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nominator. Exactly what I'd like to see. --Izno (talk) 04:17, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete, the optimal padding is going to depend on the screen size, browser, etc. we really need to eliminate hacks that depend on a particular screen size, with a particular browser. Frietjes (talk) 19:56, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above. A very undesirable way of achieving anything. Either use a better solution or don't bother. Nigej (talk) 11:21, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question: If this is deleted, does that mean that any usage of {{ns|#integer#}} >= 10 and {{spaces|#integer#}} >= 10 should be removed as well? Gonnym (talk) 11:52, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think usage like that should be removed, and I think you could find and remove them with insource: in search in AWB. User:GKFXtalk 17:36, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If this discussion finds that they should be removed then I'll add tracking categories to both to make finding them easier. Gonnym (talk) 22:37, 7 January 2022 (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:Percent-done[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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 15:52, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Used in only two user talk pages. {{Percentage}} and adding the word "done" does the same. Gonnym (talk) 12:58, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Subst and delete per nom. User:GKFXtalk 13:21, 31 December 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:Percentage override[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. ✗plicit 13:28, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused template. Gonnym (talk) 12:52, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination. User:GKFXtalk 13:18, 31 December 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:Percentage/core[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. ✗plicit 13:27, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused sub page of Template:Percentage. Gonnym (talk) 12:51, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination. User:GKFXtalk 13:19, 31 December 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:List of New York City Subway stations/complete[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. ✗plicit 12:00, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused as a different tables exists at New York City Subway stations#Complete lists of stations, New York City Subway stations#Station complexes, and New York City Subway stations#Top stations by ridership. Gonnym (talk) 11:54, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Unused duplicates. Nigej (talk) 13:51, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Epicgenius (talk) 16:14, 31 December 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:Romanian politics/party colours[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. ✗plicit 12:15, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The above Romania political party color templates all have very few transclusions left. All transclusions can be replaced with either {{Party color cell}} or {{Party color}}. Gonnym (talk) 11:36, 31 December 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:Currency/old[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 except no consensus for Template:Currency/new. The latter is best discussed at WP:RFD if desired. ✗plicit 11:25, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The above templates are all unused sub pages of Template:Currency which has been converted in 2016 to a module, making these templates obsolete. A few extra notes:

The rest are all just used in each other's templates. Gonnym (talk) 09:16, 31 December 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:Reflist/Safari testcase2[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. Izno (talk) 05:21, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The template is not in use and should be deleted.\ Q28 (talk) 04:23, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is a testcases page so doesn’t need to be transcluded to be used. However, a page created in 2010 to test a browser bug seems quite likely to be obsolete. Does anyone have a Mac with Safari that can be checked to see if the bug still exists? User:GKFXtalk 09:54, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It's from 2010, is it meant to test Webkit, iOS Safari, OSX Safari or Windows Safari? -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 20:30, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 04:25, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I can confirm that the bug does not appear on iOS. User:GKFXtalk 10:05, 31 December 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_December_31&oldid=1064519240"