Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Wikipedia:MBR)
"WP:TFD" redirects here. For the page used for TimedText or talk page deletion discussions, see Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion.
This page is about discussion of templates. For a list of templates used for discussion, see Wikipedia:List of discussion templates.
Find this page confusing? Just use this link to ask for help on your talk page; a volunteer will visit you there shortly!
XFD backlog
V Aug Sep Oct Nov Total
CfD 0 0 0 0 0
TfD 0 0 7 0 7
MfD 0 0 1 0 1
FfD 0 0 1 0 1
RfD 0 0 43 0 43
AfD 0 0 1 0 1
Deletion discussions
Articles
Templates and modules
Files
Categories
Redirects
Miscellany
Speedy deletion
Proposed deletion

On this page, the deletion or merging of templates and modules, except as noted below, is discussed.

How to use this page

[edit]

What not to propose for discussion here

[edit]
Shortcut

The majority of deletion and merger proposals concerning pages in the template namespace and module namespace should be listed on this page. However, there are a few exceptions:

Stub templates
Stub templates and categories should be listed at Categories for discussion, as these templates are merely containers for their categories, unless the stub template does not come with a category and is being nominated by itself.
Userboxes
Userboxes should be listed at Miscellany for deletion, regardless of the namespace in which they reside.
Speedy deletion candidates
If the template clearly satisfies a criterion for speedy deletion, tag it with a speedy deletion template. For example, if you wrote the template and request its deletion, tag it with {{Db-author}}.
Policy or guideline templates
Templates that are associated with particular Wikipedia policies or guidelines, such as the speedy deletion templates, cannot be listed at TfD separately. They should be discussed on the talk page of the relevant guideline.
Template redirects
List at Redirects for discussion.
Moving and renaming
Use Wikipedia:Requested moves.

Reasons to delete a template

[edit]
Shortcut
  1. The template violates some part of the template namespace guidelines, and can't be altered to be in compliance.
  2. The template is redundant to a better-designed template.
  3. The template is not used, either directly or by template substitution (the latter cannot be concluded from the absence of backlinks), and has no likelihood of being used.
  4. The template violates a policy such as Neutral point of view or Civility and it can't be fixed through normal editing.

Templates should not be nominated if the issue can be fixed by normal editing. Instead, you should edit the template to fix its problems. If the template is complex and you don't know how to fix it, WikiProject Templates may be able to help.

Templates for which none of these apply may be deleted by consensus here. If a template is being misused, consider clarifying its documentation to indicate the correct use, or informing those that misuse it, rather than nominating it for deletion. Initiate a discussion on the template talk page if the correct use itself is under debate.

Listing a template

[edit]
Shortcuts

To list a template for deletion or merging, follow this three-step process. The use of Twinkle (explained below) is strongly recommended, as it automates and simplifies these steps. Note that the "Template:" prefix should not be included anywhere when carrying out these steps (unless otherwise specified).

Step Instructions
I: Tag the template. Add one of the following codes to the top of the template page:

Note:

  • If the template nominated is inline, do not add a newline between the TfD notice and the code of the template.
  • If the template to be nominated for deletion is protected, make a request for the TfD tag to be added, by posting on the template's talk page and using the {{editprotected}} template to catch the attention of administrators or Template editors.
  • For templates designed to be substituted, add <noinclude>...</noinclude> around the TfD notice to prevent it from being substituted alongside the template.
  • Do not mark the edit as minor.
  • Use an edit summary like
    Nominated for deletion; see [[Wikipedia:Templates for discussion#Template:name of template]]
    or
    Nominated for merging; see [[Wikipedia:Templates for discussion#Template:name of template]].
  • Before saving your edit, preview your edit to ensure the Tfd message is displayed properly.

Multiple templates: If you are nominating multiple related templates, choose a meaningful title for the discussion (like "American films by decade templates"). Tag every template with {{subst:Tfd|heading=discussion title}} or {{subst:Tfm|name of other template|heading=discussion title}} instead of the versions given above, replacing discussion title with the title you chose (but still not changing the PAGENAME code).

Related categories: If including template-populated tracking categories in the TfD nomination, add {{Catfd|template name}} to the top of any categories that would be deleted as a result of the TfD, this time replacing template name with the name of the template being nominated. (If you instead chose a meaningful title for a multiple nomination, use {{Catfd|header=title of nomination}} instead.)

TemplateStyles pages: The above templates will not work on TemplateStyles pages. Instead, add a CSS comment to the top of the page:

/* This template is being discussed in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy. Help reach a consensus at its entry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2024_November_5#Template:template_name.css */
II: List the template at TfD. Follow this link to edit today's TfD log.

Add this text to the top of the list:

  • For deletion: {{subst:Tfd2|template name|text=Why you think the template should be deleted. ~~~~}}
  • For merging: {{subst:Tfm2|template name|other template's name|text=Why you think the templates should be merged. ~~~~}}

If the template has had previous TfDs, you can add {{Oldtfdlist|previous TfD without brackets|result of previous TfD}} directly after the |text= before the why (or alternatively, after the }} of the Tfd2/Catfd2).

Use an edit summary such as
Adding [[Template:template name]].

Multiple templates: If this is a deletion proposal involving multiple templates, use the following:

{{subst:Tfd2|template name 1|template name 2 ...|title=meaningful discussion title|text=Why you think the templates should be deleted. ~~~~}}

You can add up to 50 template names (separated by vertical bar characters | ). Make sure to include the same meaningful discussion title that you chose before in Step 1.

If this is a merger proposal involving more than two templates, use the following:

{{subst:Tfm2|template name 1|template name 2 ...|with=main template (optional)|title=meaningful discussion title|text=Why you think the templates should be merged. ~~~~}}

You can add up to 50 template names (separated by vertical bar characters | ), plus one more in |with=. |with= does not need to be used, but should be the template that you want the other templates to be merged into. Make sure to include the same meaningful discussion title that you chose before in Step 1.

Related categories: If this is a deletion proposal involving a template and a category populated solely by templates, add this code in the |text= field of the Tfd2 template but before the text of your rationale:

{{subst:Catfd2|category name}}
III: Notify users. Please notify the creator of the template nominated (as well as the creator of the target template, if proposing a merger). It is helpful to also notify the main contributors of the template that you are nominating. To find them, look in the page history or talk page of the template. Then, add one of the following:

to the talk pages of the template creator (and the creator of the other template for a merger) and the talk pages of the main contributors. It is also helpful to make any interested WikiProjects aware of the discussion. To do that, make sure the template's talk page is tagged with the banners of any relevant WikiProjects; please consider notifying any of them that do not use Article alerts. Deletion sorting lists are a possible way of doing that.

Multiple templates: There is no template for notifying an editor about a multiple-template nomination: please write a personal message in these cases.

Consider adding any templates you nominate for TfD to your watchlist. This will help ensure that the TfD tag is not removed.

After nominating: Notify interested projects and editors

[edit]

While it is sufficient to list a template for discussion at TfD (see above), nominators and others sometimes want to attract more attention from and participation by informed editors. All such efforts must comply with Wikipedia's guideline against biased canvassing.

To encourage participation by less experienced editors, please avoid Wikipedia-specific abbreviations in the messages you leave about the discussion, link to any relevant policies or guidelines, and link to the TfD discussion page itself. If you are recommending that a template be speedily deleted, please give the criterion that it meets.

[edit]

WikiProjects are groups of editors that are interested in a particular subject or type of editing. If the article is within the scope of one or more WikiProjects, they may welcome a brief, neutral note on their project's talk page(s) about the TfD. You can use {{subst:Tfd notice}} for this.

Tagging the nominated template's talk page with a relevant Wikiproject's banner will result in the template being listed in that project's Article Alerts automatically, if they subscribe to the system. For instance, tagging a template with {{WikiProject Physics}} will list the discussion in Wikipedia:WikiProject Physics/Article alerts.

Notifying substantial contributors to the template

[edit]

While not required, it is generally considered courteous to notify the good-faith creator and any main contributors of the template and its talkpage that you are nominating for discussion. To find the creator and main contributors, look in the page history or talk page.

At this point, you've done all you need to do as nominator. Sometime after seven days have passed, someone else will either close the discussion or, where needed, "relist" it for another seven days of discussion. (That "someone" may not be you, the nominator.)

Once you have submitted a template here, no further action is necessary on your part. If the nomination is successful it will be added to the Holding Cell until the change is implemented. There is no requirement for nominators to be part of the implementation process, but they are allowed to if they so wish.

Also, consider adding any templates you nominate to your watchlist. This will help ensure that your nomination tag is not mistakenly or deliberately removed.

Twinkle

[edit]

Twinkle is a convenient tool that can perform many of the posting and notification functions automatically, with fewer errors and missed steps than manual editing. Twinkle does not notify WikiProjects, although many of them have automatic alerts. It is helpful to notify any interested WikiProjects that don't receive alerts, but this has to be done manually.

Discussion

[edit]

Anyone can join the discussion, but please understand the deletion policy and explain your reasoning.

People will sometimes also recommend subst or subst and delete and similar. This means the template text should be "merged" into the articles that use it. Depending on the content, the template page may then be deleted; if preserving the edit history for attribution is desirable, it may be history-merged with the target article or moved to mainspace and redirected.

Templates are rarely orphaned—that is, removed from pages that transclude them—before the discussion is closed. A list of open discussions eligible for closure can be found at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Old unclosed discussions.

Closing discussion

[edit]

Administrators should read the closing instructions before closing a nomination. Note that WP:XFDcloser semi-automates this process and ensures all of the appropriate steps are taken.

Current discussions

[edit]

November 5

[edit]

Template:Starmalls

[edit]

Navbox with just a single link to the subject. DB1729talk 14:46, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:UKR-1991

[edit]

No transclusions or incoming links. Created in 2021. People have probably replaced it with the more standard {{flag|Ukraine|1991}} where it was used. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:25, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:TA98

[edit]

Unused other than in two very old talk pages. Subst there and delete template. Gonnym (talk) 12:33, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WikiProject Glass

[edit]

Propose merging Template:WikiProject Glass with Template:WikiProject Physics.
{{WikiProject Glass}} is not a WikiProject, but a taskforce of {{WikiProject Physics}} @ Wikipedia:WikiProject Physics/Taskforces/Glass. Taskforce-ify {{WikiProject Glass}} into {{WikiProject Physics}}, then replace all ~1900 transclusions with {{WikiProject Physics|glass=yes|...}}.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  01:24, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support, but I would recommended leaving it a wrapper template as that makes it easier to find when assessing. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:34, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I personally would support complete deletion. I found that the wrappers are more trouble than they are worth. Editors adding these with, or without tools, do not even care they are adding duplicate templates so we will end up with both the Glass wrapper (which would be subst by a bot) and the Physics one. Gonnym (talk) 08:58, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


November 4

[edit]

Template:User Lombardy/boxes

[edit]

No transclusions or incoming links. Note that this is not a userbox, and it is unrelated to its parent page, so I am sending it to TFD. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:56, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:BLP

[edit]

Propose merging Template:BLP with Template:WikiProject banner shell.
Propose merging Template:BLP others with Template:WikiProject banner shell.

These templates are not used outside of the banner shell, so it might be simpler if that template produced these messages instead of calling separate templates. This will not affect the display or functionality of the templates — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:21, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Pages with authority control identifiers

[edit]

No longer used — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:16, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Trafalgar class submarine armament

[edit]

Unused other than in one example. Subst there and delete template. Gonnym (talk) 15:47, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Astute class sensors

[edit]

Unused other than in an abandoned user sandbox. Subst there and delete templates as previous usages in article space has been replaced. Gonnym (talk) 15:45, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Lang-pun

[edit]

This language template has been depreciated, both {{Lang-pa}} and {{Lang-pan}} are being replaced with {{Langx}}. Absolutiva (talk) 14:59, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The disambiguation page is no longer useful or needed. Gonnym (talk) 15:49, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Lang-crh3

[edit]

This template {{Lang-crh}} was deleted by replacing with {{Langx}}. Absolutiva (talk) 14:57, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not against eventually getting rid of this, but this currently isn't suitable for langx. This might be converted in the next phase, after the current replacement of templates is finished. Gonnym (talk) 15:51, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Talkfact

[edit]

Propose merging Template:Talkfact with Template:Fake citation needed.
These templates are duplicates. {{talkfact}} just has |nice=yes to change the wording, and {{fake citation needed}} has namespace detection. The merge target follows WP:TPN's "standard English spelling, spacing, and capitalization", and the source can be a shortcut. 174.94.28.189 (talk) 06:36, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Move {{Talkfact}} to {{Talk fact}} which is where it should have been. The two templates display similarly but have different functions. I, for example, want to be able to find all the documentation, by using "what links here" on {{Fake citation needed}}. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 19:19, 4 November 2024 (UTC).[reply]
"What links here" indents redirects so that function would remain after any merger. Furthermore, at Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Fake_citation_needed&limit=500, the majority of transclusions are outside templatespace (documentation) and apparently inside discussions. 174.94.28.189 (talk) 00:35, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Slough House

[edit]

I don't want to be bitey with this newly created navbox, but it contains just one link in its body that goes to an article other than the main article for the navbox. It is not yet useful for navigation. I have no objection to its recreation when there are articles to navigate among. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:29, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey!! Currently drafting up pages for all the books and will have them up over the next week. GossieGoodTimes (talk) 04:40, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Create the articles first, then the navboxes. The fact that books exist, does not mean the article will pass WP:GNG. Gonnym (talk) 08:46, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As Gonnym said, create the articles first. Navboxes exist to navigate between articles that exist, so there's no value in the navbox existing before the articles do — there's no guarantee that every book in the series will automatically qualify for its own standalone article as a separate topic from the series as a whole, and no guarantee that you'll get every article in place promptly, so you need to ensure that good, keepable articles about every book exist first, and then create the navbox to link them together second, not vice versa. Bearcat (talk) 13:48, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough! Thank you for your guidance GossieGoodTimes (talk) 01:01, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Countdown2

[edit]

No transclusions, documentation, or categories. Created in April 2024. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:00, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's a work in progress still. I don't think simply being unused is a valid justification for deletion. If the template has no prospective use then yeah. Awesome Aasim 20:22, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Actually now that this is mostly finished I don't think there is a good reason for deletion. The template is dependent on another module Module:Countdown2 for functionality. I created it because the first countdown module is a bit complicated. This one you can spit in any date and it will give the appropriate countdown (or hide it) for that module. Awesome Aasim 01:30, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:37, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 01:57, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:R tagged automatically

[edit]

No transclusions or documentation. There are two incoming links from discussions; one says that the template is a draft, and the other says that it does not appear to be finished. The category that is intended to be used by this template does not exist. It appears to be an abandoned experiment. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:47, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Jonesey95, essentially, the idea was that Rcat shell could automatically detect and place rcats such as protection level etc. Implementing this would means removing them from the rcat shell, leaving it empty - therefore, I made this template to be placed when there are no manual rcats. It would also be useful for tracking rcats that don't have any helpful rcats that describe its purpose. Unfortunately, discussion stalled so I never went ahead with creating the associated category. — Qwerfjkltalk 17:50, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:48, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 01:53, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:UK general election opinion polling

[edit]

Redundant sidebar-type template as the navbox Template:Opinion polling for United Kingdom elections is better served for navigation to articles about polls for UK elections. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:50, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's quite useful in many cases like Opinion polling for the next United Kingdom general election. Better to just remove it from the articles where it isn't useful rather than as a blanket policy. Chessrat (talk, contributions) 18:46, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, though even then I can't think of a time I've run into it outside of UK polling articles anyway. Pretty useful navigational template Bejakyo (talk) 20:42, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 01:39, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:UK general election navigation

[edit]

Obtrusive template which does not help to navigate articles on national UK elections. Better left to templates. Nothing more than a sidebar taking up space. For instance, on the 1802 United Kingdom general election article it appears next to the election infobox but in the middle in the top part of the article. And it appears like that for many articles. Navigation for election articles is best left for templates like navboxes. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:46, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've not had this issue, and would disagree with it's removal Bejakyo (talk) 20:43, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly this is screwing up the layout of election pages way more for me, sorry. Liverals (talk) 21:46, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is a tiny box that does what navboxes already do. Not having any issue with it personally doesn't mean it should remain. Navboxes are far better than this template for transcluding election article links. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:07, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 01:39, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aware that as an IP I don't have a !vote here, but my 2¢ in case it helps: I find these types of navigation aids useful. I'd like more of them in more places covering more subjects! When you're idly browsing the 'pedia, which I do more often than is healthy, this type of thing is great to have in an article.
But... this one is indeed intrusive. It gets in the way on a number of articles and isn't usefully responsive (a problem we have with a number of templates here). Where it appears is a bit random because of that, which negates much of its usefulness.
Perhaps there's a third way between keep and delete? Could it be combined into the infobox that appears in each article? Or 'docked' somewhere (I have no idea what I mean by this, I admit)? And I know the infobox has "<-- last election | next election -->" navigation, but the previous two and the next two is really useful, honestly! 81.2.123.64 (talk) 17:32, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Megachurches

[edit]

This is in the realm of unwieldy, as evidenced by the inaccessible hacks used for the megachurches listed in the United States section. Moreover, these probably don't have a whole ton of correlation to each other, failing items 1, 2, 3, and 5 at WP:NAVBOX. We have a category already as alternative for this kind of list as well as a variety of "list of largest churches". Izno (talk) 00:57, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


November 3

[edit]

Template:Latest preview software release/eMule

[edit]

Unused and now blanked template. Gonnym (talk) 17:37, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WikiProject Dravidian people

[edit]

WP:WikiProject Dravidian people redirects to WP:WikiProject Anthropology.
Replace current 25 transclusions with {{WikiProject Anthropology}}, then delete.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  15:58, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Replace and delete per nom. Good job on finding these. Gonnym (talk) 16:16, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WikiProject Baronage of Scotland

[edit]

Delete or userify - WikiProject links to user space @ User:Daniel Plumber/sandbox/WikiProject Baronage of Scotland. 63 transclusions.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  15:44, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. There isn't a project by that name, and I hope there never will. We have too many defunct small projects and I doubt this would get the support needed to be created. Gonnym (talk) 16:19, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I just tagged Category:WikiProject Baronage of Scotland articles for a CFD discussion for the similar reasons, that there isn't really a full-fledged WikiProject here, just a user page proposal. Liz Read! Talk! 02:56, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:London Skolars squad

[edit]

No longer needed. Club no longer plays in the professional leagues, and it's unlikely enough of the current team are notable enough to justify keeping this navbox. J Mo 101 (talk) 15:33, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Almost all of the links mention the players aren't in the squad and the two that don't seem to be outdated. Gonnym (talk) 16:39, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WikiProject Women's Premier League (cricket)

[edit]

Delete per Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Women's Premier League (cricket).   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  15:25, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per MfD. Gonnym (talk) 16:20, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Table/Sandbox2

[edit]

Not a sandbox, but a broken test page, that hasn't been used in 6 years. Subpages aren't a place to collect garbage for infinity. Sadly this isn't for some a clear G6. Gonnym (talk) 13:43, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


November 2

[edit]

Template:People from Bydgoszcz

[edit]

This template seems to broad to be useful. We don't have a "famous people from Cleveland", do we. Allan Nonymous (talk) 18:21, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – this is much more appropriate for a list/category than a navbox. I can only find one other similar template: {{People from Yadgir district}}. {{People from Colorado}} looks similar but is actually a navbox for lists of Coloradans. jlwoodwa (talk) 21:52, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:New Zealand Labour Party electoral history

[edit]

Unused and no information can be displayed for use as it uses graphs and graphs are not working for the time. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 00:56, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Graphs are not coming back anytime soon. Gonnym (talk) 09:31, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Note this is not transcluded because it was commented out by GlowstoneUnknown. (findable via searching insource:"New Zealand Labour Party electoral history"; also can use WP:WikiBlame on New Zealand Labour Party)

Personally I think deleting templates solely on the basis of Graphs being indefinitely broken is somewhat counterproductive because it deletes the data that has been collated and organized; unless the graph contents are themselves objectionable, uploading new images that reproduce the graph contents would be better. (Of course: easier said than done, and I personally don't have the time to create an image right now.) Retro (talk | contribs) 18:33, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:48, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Public records laws in the United States

[edit]

Unused with no mainspace article. Nothing connects other than the similarities of these laws. No real unifying topic presented. All articles are under Category:Freedom of information legislation in the United States. But no main article exists for this category so a navbox isn't necessary or needed. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 00:54, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe the title should be changed to "Freedom of information laws in the United States"? Gonnym (talk) 09:35, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:47, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


November 1

[edit]

Module:ATA

[edit]

Unused module. Gonnym (talk) 14:17, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Tfd links/catfd

[edit]

Unused sub-template; probably from the pre-Lua version. Gonnym (talk) 09:26, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:NYC meetup announcements

[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 speedy delete. czar 12:18, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused template proposal from 2016, that didn't seem to get support. Gonnym (talk) 09:25, 1 November 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:India Women ODI cricket records by opponent

[edit]

Unused as India women's national cricket team uses different tables. Gonnym (talk) 09:20, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Global Hunger Index table row

[edit]

Unused after a restructuring of the article here. Gonnym (talk) 09:15, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:GM early engine timeline

[edit]

Unused General Motors timeline. Gonnym (talk) 09:13, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


October 31

[edit]

Template:Global epidemiology by condition

[edit]

This seems to be an arbitrarily constructed list of some diseases and things, in violation of WP:NAV-RELATED. I can't figure out what brings these topics together. The template creator hasn't edited in over a decade, and my query at the talk page went unanswered. Suggest deletion, as I'm not sure how this can be turned into a reasonable navbox. Ajpolino (talk) 20:59, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 00:03, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment It seems that this is just a list of every "Epidemiology of" article on Wikipedia. The only exceptions are risky sexual behaviour and stroke, which are links to an "Epidemiology" section in their respective articles rather than a standalone "Epidemiology of" article, and teenage pregnancy which is instead "Prevalence of", but it follows the same format as the other articles. Are there any "Epidemiology of" articles that are arbitrarily excluded? If not, this seems like a completely coherent list. --Un assiolo (talk) 17:47, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:37, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:ELPA Best Newcomer

[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 speedy delete. Author requested deletion of the navboxes and they have been deleted. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:27, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused navboxes that don't have an article for the award (or even for the group giving out the award). If these are notable awards, the award page should be created before these are added, if these aren't notable, then these navboxes are clutter. Gonnym (talk) 13:43, 31 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:Politburo of the Communist Party of Cuba category/core

[edit]

Unused category template. Gonnym (talk) 09:48, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Secretariat of the Communist Party of Cuba ordinal category

[edit]

Unused category template. Gonnym (talk) 09:48, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Secretariat of the Communist Party of Cuba category/core

[edit]

Unused category template without a parent template. Gonnym (talk) 09:47, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Religious vows

[edit]

Unused and broken infobox. Gonnym (talk) 09:45, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Religions by country table World

[edit]

Unused as Religions by country uses a different table. Gonnym (talk) 09:44, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:ROC Officer Ranks

[edit]

Unused as Royal Observer Corps#Rank structure uses a different table. Gonnym (talk) 09:42, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]


October 30

[edit]

Template:GLMEPs

[edit]

I could not find much about this supposed alliance, so I suppose it no longer exists. I am unsure about what navigational purpose this template fulfills. Tristan Surtel (talk) 20:32, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Films directed by Judith Ehrlich

[edit]

Only two films. WP:NENAN --woodensuperman 14:42, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Ontario Libertarian Leaders

[edit]

Navigational template with only one blue link. There is nothing to navigate. ✗plicit 11:54, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]


October 29

[edit]

Template:FanDuel Sports Networks

[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 14:21, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate of Template:Bally Sports Esolo5002 (talk) 13:38, 29 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:AfC submission/onhold/sandbox

[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 speedy delete. This is, as far as I can tell, a valid G8 since {{AFC submission/onhold}} was deleted. If someone wants to restore either the template or the sandbox, let me know and I'll sort everything out. Primefac (talk) 17:16, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This appears to be a sandbox of a template subpage that never existed, which would normally be speedy-deleteable, but when I looked at its history, it appeared to be a legitimate experiment of some sort. I don't see any transclusions or incoming links, but I decided to err on the side of caution and send it to TFD instead of CSD. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:37, 29 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.

Old discussions

[edit]

October 28

Template:UEFA fifth level leagues

[edit]

I find this template somewhat odd, and a rather deep level trying to connect all these leagues, which have very different make up. This template just feels like a template for the sake of making a template! I see no true value for it, so am suggesting it for deletion. Govvy (talk) 22:11, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep It's a valid navigational tool if you're interested in lower level leagues. I don't understand the deletion rationale.
SportingFlyer T·C 22:19, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment, I am not sure whether regional-level leagues would qualify for the UEFA system of leagues. There is the grassroot program, but UEFA does not really go in depth informing about regional-level leagues of its members. On the other hand, if someone wanted to compare and navigate from one country to another even simply out of curiosity, it could really be a good tool, in my opinion. (I, personally, do not find it very useful.) Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 01:45, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I think that is semantic, I read this as "fifth-level leagues for UEFA-affiliated nations." I don't know what the "UEFA system of leagues" is, and I find this useful. SportingFlyer T·C 18:25, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Archive number

[edit]

This template was meant to be used with {{Archive-nav}}, as stated in its documentation. That template has now been deleted and its functionality merged into {{Archive}}, which does not need this helper template. There are a handful of transclusions left in userspace where the template has been used to do something else (like the banner at User talk:Little Mountain 5/Archive 2), but these can all be substituted or copied to the userspace header. Rjjiii (talk) 18:04, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. – 🌻 Hilst (talk | contribs) 00:15, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Leftovers from completed merge. Gonnym (talk) 11:54, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

October 27

Template:Text to image

[edit]

Using plaintext is more accessible than using images, because it is easily readable by screen readers. Plaintext is also easier to copy/paste and is more readable wikitext. Delete after converting its sole use to plaintext. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 16:48, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The plain text should probably be wrapped with either {{lang}} or a sub template of {{script}}. Gonnym (talk) 17:11, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with that. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 21:35, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the screen reader/accessibility reason is surely nonsensical because no screen reader would be able to read Old Persian script, and the Latin transliteration is included too in plain text anyway. So I fail to see how this suggestion would help. Chessrat (talk, contributions) 17:52, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Per MOS:LANG you are meant to put Old Persian text in {{lang|peo|text}}. Gonnym (talk) 12:15, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

October 26

Template:Shindo

[edit]

No transclusions, documentation, categories, or incoming links. Created in April 2024. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:34, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Object as the creator. This is a template that largely exposes the Shindo module in a manner that can be used by casual users. We can use it as a placeholder to redirect users to more appropriate templates. Awesome Aasim 15:59, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What's the purpose of this specific template? If it's only use is documentation, it does not belong there. Gonnym (talk) 18:28, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If a new scale is added to the module, but that scale's template cannot exist for some reason because the template already exists, then this can be used instead to invoke that seismic intensity scale. Awesome Aasim 19:37, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at the templates like Template:JMA and Template:CWA I actually think those should be deleted. {{Shindo|JMA|1}} works and that is much better than needing to create a new template for each scale when there is no real reason for it. So I support the opposite, replace the various scales with this. Gonnym (talk) 20:25, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Awesome Aasim, thank you for adding basic documentation and a category. This template appears to do most of what {{CSIS}} and similar templates do. Would you be open to a merge to single template? It looks like someone might have to add a few features/parameters to {{Shindo}} to make the merge easy to perform. If you think a merge is possible, I'll be happy to add relevant templates to this TFD. A complete list of those templates would be helpful. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:08, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am terrible at documenting my code, sorry. I make the individual scales invocable for ease of template creation. I have no objections to a merge, but be aware that a lot of the work I did for the module was to ensure backwards compatibility with the previous template code.
I do think there are some useful areas like templatestyles and the like to make the coloring more uniform and dark mode compatible, which currently this module isn't. But that will require a bit of testing, and I do not want to break a thousand pages to attempt to make dark mode work. Awesome Aasim 22:32, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 17:31, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:10, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

October 25

Template:COVID-19 pandemic data/Argentina medical cases and similar data templates

[edit]

These COVID data template pages have no transclusions and are all or mostly:

  • out of date,
  • probably in violation of WP:NOTDATABASE, and
  • a lot less useful than they may have been in the past, since COVID is not as interesting to people as it once was.

These templates appear to contain what is normally article content, and they are linked from the "Data" section of {{COVID-19 pandemic}}, which appears to violate our guideline on linking from article space to other namespaces (In articles, do not link to pages outside the article namespace) when that navbox template is transcluded in article space.

I asked at the COVID WikiProject page about these templates, and at least one editor (Crossroads) suggested deletion rather than moving them into article space. So here's a TFD nomination. Please discuss. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:22, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete all. WP:NOTDATABASE, no transclusions. It is well known that we over-created COVID-19 articles, and that after the recent-ness of the event wore off, that we'd have to mass delete things from the COVID-19 topic area. This is a low hanging fruit example that should be non-controversial since there's no transclusions. –Novem Linguae (talk) 00:10, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    COVID killed more americans in 2023 than flu had killed in a hundred years. if the #1 deadliest respiratory disease season in a hundred years counts as being "over-created", what could possibly count as properly created? there's literally no higher rank than #1. i'm obviously going to maintain this resource either way, just tell me how much higher than #1 we have to get until its inclusion isn't controversial. doesn't it seem fair for you to type it out now, so when we get there you can't argue any more? Kinerd518 (talk) 00:22, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I know that we are all volunteers, but how does your claim that you will "maintain this resource" square with the state of {{COVID-19 pandemic data/United States daily deaths}}, which hasn't been edited in over a year and contains data only from 1 Jan 2023 through 12 May 2023? [Edited to add: I see that the untranscluded {{COVID-19 pandemic data/United States daily deaths post emergency}} picks up where the former untranscluded template leaves off; if you want to advocate for conversion of one or more of those to articles, please do so.] No blame for you at all, but one way or another, it appears that this template is no longer used. The same appears to be true of most or all of the templates above. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:40, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    referenced below, but for completeness' sake: i can't speak to most of the templates above, just the very specific one that is still included in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_pandemic_in_the_United_States which is to say, the deadliest pandemic in the history of the most important and newsworthy country in the entire world. if there are a lot of other articles besides those very specific ones i cited that don't matter, i mean, who cares? go crazy, go wild, delete all of them if it makes you happy, and i mean that sincerely, just don't throw out the globally relevant baby with the Marin County Medical Cases Chart bathwater. how is this even a conversation? Kinerd518 (talk) 02:43, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    the most important and newsworthy country in the entire world. Not sure most editors on wikipedia would agree with such a pro imperialism take. –Novem Linguae (talk) 05:02, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The reason these charts ended up here in the first place is because they were thought to have no transclusions. But I do see that one there, in a bar graph form; it is the same one in the code. I wonder why that ended up here, then. Crossroads -talk- 05:20, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Perhaps there is some confusion about similar template names. I am looking at transclusions for Template:COVID-19 pandemic data/United States daily deaths post emergency, which is different from {{COVID-19 pandemic data/United States deaths chart post emergency}}. The latter is transcluded; the former is not. At the time of nomination, all of the above templates had zero transclusions. If any of them are transcluded when this TFD is closed, I recommend either keeping them until a later discussion or, as appropriate, copying them into articles, since they are article content. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:37, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The transclusion of the former was in the latter, in a spoiler tag describing the source of its data. I state this for the record, not because I believe for a second it's actually relevant to your decision on the matter. I have recreated the template in Commons Data space and updated the link, because I refuse to let the ongoing deaths of our most vulnerable and desperate neighbors be erased, and I refuse to participate any longer in what has clearly been a bad faith pretense at discussion from the start. You will be in my prayers, and may God have mercy on us all. Kinerd518 (talk) 22:10, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
i have been updating https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:COVID-19_pandemic_data/United_States_daily_deaths_post_emergency every day for over a year. editor @Crossroads declares that the sources are no longer updating case counts; i can't speak to that either way, because this source is explicitly about deaths and not cases. @Crossroads is too bored to distinguish between cases and deaths, and nevertheless wants to declare their almost certainty that the counts are outdated
why? Kinerd518 (talk) 00:17, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No need to personalize things with statements like Crossroads is too bored to distinguish between cases and deaths. –Novem Linguae (talk) 00:39, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Kinerd518: That template is being updated, but it is not transcluded anywhere. If it is article content, it should live in article space. If it is WikiProject content, it should live in Project space. Unused templates do not belong in Template space. What should be done with templates that are still seen as relevant? – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:43, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
in fact, the template is very visibly transcluded in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_pandemic_in_the_United_States
please let me know if you have any other questions Kinerd518 (talk) 02:23, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
excuse me, but @Crossroads brought up how they were bored by the updating of information on the deadliest pandemic in US history. if it wasn't personalized when they said it, it cannot be personalized when i said it
and, more importantly, you didn't address how they declared how this information was "outdated", when i provided absolute proof how it was updated daily. don't you wonder why you decided to argue about the first point, even though i was absolutely right about that, and ignored the second point, when i was absolutely right about that too?
and don't you don't you wonder benefits from your choice of argument? Kinerd518 (talk) 02:21, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fair. I didn't see them call it boring, but I see the quote now. –Novem Linguae (talk) 05:10, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I apologize for being a bit flippant. The premise in the talk page on the Covid Wikiproject was that none of these were transcluded, which a spot check seemed to confirm. Since that is apparently not true of all of them, I suppose those could be exempted and I will amend my comment below, but I do maintain that this is excessive detail and isn't really an accurate picture of what the virus is doing at this point. Crossroads -talk- 05:24, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've adjusted it to say "most" since the premise of this is based on them not being transcluded, but at least one above apparently was. In any case, I maintain that ones with no transclusions should be deleted. I also don't think we should be keeping track of these numbers at this level of ostensibly fine-grained detail at all per above, but since that's out of the original intended scope of the nomination, it makes more sense to let that be (I'm not supporting keeping it either though). Crossroads -talk- 05:34, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Crossroads: Indeed, recent figures are not nearly as interesting as historical figures. The design of Module:Medical cases chart unfortunately biases the presentation quite heavily toward the last two weeks, which is going to be increasingly inappropriate for any COVID-19 chart, but this doesn’t detract from the educational value of seeing the initial surge or the subsequent waves. If these charts were instead static, rarely updated SVGs, I don’t think anyone would even be invoking WP:NOTDATABASE.
So I think this points to a way forward: move the data in these templates into the Data: namespace on Commons, which is a database, then see about a migration away from Module:Medical cases chart to a line graph template that would once again be suitable for inclusion in an article. The second part isn’t urgent, as long as the data is in Commons for safekeeping.
 – Minh Nguyễn 💬 14:33, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. If these fail WP:NOTDATABASE, then these should be deleted. If they don't then these are article content and should either be added directly into articles or converted to articles. In any case, these should not exist as templates to store content. To Kinerd518 or other maintainers, if you want to continue to add data, then Wikidata would probably be the correct place for this. Gonnym (talk) 08:28, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Gonnym: Wikidata doesn’t handle time series data very well, not at the scale of thousands of statements. Tabular data on Commons is the way to go, especially since the upcoming charting functionality will depend on it. Minh Nguyễn 💬 14:25, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for clearing that up. So if commons accepts such data, that is the place this should be handled. Gonnym (talk) 14:40, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

October 9

Template:Redshirt

[edit]

This template is used less than 250 times in {{Infobox college football player}} and in-article tables, where it does not align with the bullet points at MOS:APPROPRIATEICONS. You can see an example of its typical use at Quinn Ewers. This usage could be easily replaced with the word "redshirt". Ed [talk] [OMT] 21:28, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is a good solution 136.58.84.30 (talk) 21:34, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Leave the redshirt icon. Not sure about the reference to only being used 250 times. Perhaps I'm missing something. I see it all the time. 2601:5CF:4200:67A0:3725:A2C8:5E0C:E182 (talk) 00:54, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is used 236 times per [2]. Thetreesarespeakingtome (talk) 02:42, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It looks fine. I think the redshirt icon should stay too. 66.215.49.212 (talk) 19:55, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think the icon is a simple way to represent the concept and should stay as well.
Now that the 1-year transfer sit-out is over (and once the entire COVID class with extra eligibility leaves), it will be a helpful and straightforward designation. 2601:280:5D02:37B0:8D7F:AED0:5BD8:1C10 (talk) 05:41, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. I think it should be left because it is simple and understandable and adds a splash of color needed on a grey page. 146.200.77.147 (talk) 07:23, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure about the reference to only being used 250 times. Perhaps I'm missing something. I see it all the time. This is addressed below between myself and Bagumba, where it was discovered that File:Redshirt.svg is used 14,554 times. So it turns out this template accounts for less than 2% of the usages of the redshirt icon appearing on English Wikipedia. Left guide (talk) 08:00, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It looks fine. It is only used around 250 times because after graduating/going professional it’s no longer used on their page. I’d imagine it was used on 1000+ pages over last 5 years — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.133.66.120 (talk) 09:10, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 13:14, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think the icon looks good, and is a concise way to show a redshirt player. As someone else mentioned, the reason it’s only used 250 times because it doesn’t apply after they finish their college career, but hundreds of new redshirts happen every year.
Perhaps a solution would be to make the icon clickable, and direct visitors to a page explaining the redshirt process. 67.245.18.115 (talk) 13:12, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Clickable doesn't solve the accessibility problem, nor does it satisfy MOS:ICONS#Do not distort icons. Ed [talk] [OMT] 21:35, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
He is actively starting this year and is no longer considered a red-shirt. This should be removed from his page. 2607:9B00:5612:2D00:2F9A:3193:9B87:CAF5 (talk) 01:17, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
He absolutely still is a Redshirt Senior playing or not and Redshirt status is relevant for followers of college football. 107.220.89.156 (talk) 01:53, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Whether or not the template remains in place, the information should be communicated using text for greater accessibility, both to those who browse without the benefit of images and those not familiar with the term in the context of U.S. college sports. (I know the image is linked to the appropriate page, but there's no visual indication of this, and it's not a typical use of links for images on English Wikipedia.) Using an icon could be an additional way to convey the info in the infobox. isaacl (talk) 16:05, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above. Its use is consistent and useful. --Bobak (talk) 15:41, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 14:23, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Chapter disambiguation pages

[edit]

Since this navbox template is intended to link disambiguation pages and to be transcluded in the article namespace, there's an issue with this template because it will have to violate at least one of the following two guidelines at any given time: WP:BRINT and WP:INTDABLINK. At the present time, the template violates WP:BRINT since there are piped links to redirects instead of linking directly to some of the respective disambiguation pages in order to meet WP:INTDABLINK, but in the process violates WP:BRINT since direct links to pages should be used (so that the viewed page appears as unclickable bold in the navbox when currently viewing that page.) In order to fix this issue, the only resolution I see is to delete this template and replace their transclusions on each page with respective {{Intitle}}, {{Lookfrom}}, or similar templates. Steel1943 (talk) 20:12, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Upon further review, the current setup of the template also violates WP:INTDABLINK since the links to the disambiguation page redirects are piped, but not in hatnotes; If the link is not in a hatnote, then the redirect is supposed to be linked to directly without link piping. Steel1943 (talk) 20:34, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think this is a somewhat reductive reading. The template is a navigation template, it's not performing a disambiguation function itself. Therefore:
Keep. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 22:14, 28 September 2024 (UTC).[reply]
PS I fixed the BRINT issue. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 22:20, 28 September 2024 (UTC).[reply]
Okay, but your edit introduced additional/different WP:INTDABLINK issues since you directly linked to disambiguation page titles that do not include "(disambiguation)" in them, and since this navbox is transcluded on pages in the article namespace. Again, this proves that it is impossible for this navbox to not have any WP:BRINT or WP:INTDABLINK issues, and I would not be surprised if an editor who watches WP:DPL or WP:TDD reverts your edit. Steel1943 (talk) 22:35, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sure enough, the edit was reverted by The Banner: [3]. Steel1943 (talk) 14:38, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. If the issues are with WP:BRINT and WP:INTDABLINK then just fix it. The template is useful in offering navigation between related pages, which otherwise requires additional wasted editorial time. I see no real argument here other than WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Gonnym (talk) 09:45, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"If the issues are with WP:BRINT and WP:INTDABLINK then just fix it." My argument here is that they can't be fixed. Fixing one breaks the other. In fact, I don't recall ever seeing a navbox on a disambiguation page until I ran across this template, and this problem probably explains why. Steel1943 (talk) 14:16, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The template isn't what's broken, it's the bot that is malfunctioning. The bot should be fixed. Or, the links that work perfectly fine with "(disambiguation)" at the end, can continue doing so. I fail to see how that was an issue. Gonnym (talk) 19:21, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
...Maybe WP:BRINT??? Steel1943 (talk) 19:38, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete What purpose does this template serve? I can see no meaningful use of this template. The Banner talk 18:27, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Navbox can help you see what purpose a navigation template serves. Gonnym (talk) 19:23, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I know that. But this is a template to "navigate" among a certain type of disambiguation pages. Not based on content, but on the type of links. The Banner talk 19:27, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think there is a reasonable likelihood that someone wanting to look at one chapter disambiguation page might want to look at others. I'm not 100% convinced by navboxes, but given that we have them, this is not a bad use case. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 10:05, 30 September 2024 (UTC).[reply]
It sounds like an otherstuff-argument, but the next step will be an navigation template for all surname-disambiguation pages? The Banner talk 11:54, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's a good point right there: This navigation template should probably be replaced with a category my originally-proposed "from title" search templates. Steel1943 (talk) 13:13, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Updated stance per comments after the relist convincing me a category is not the way to go. Steel1943 (talk) 20:53, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The template is clearly a useful navigation template, and none of the TFD reasons appear to apply. If there are problems with the content of the template, they should be fixed (the link to Chapter Eight stands out as different). If two guidelines are in conflict with each other, deleting this useful template will not fix that problem. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:05, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I really don't think we should be encouraging navboxes of disambiguation pages. You could sell me on succession boxes for this specific case, or the suggested intitle etc as in the OP. Izno (talk) 17:35, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There's some good discussion here, but at the moment there is not yet a consensus as to what to do.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 13:00, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Completed discussions

[edit]

A list of completed discussions that still require action taken on the template(s) — for example, a merge between two infoboxes — can be found at the "Holding Cell".

For an index of all old and archived discussions, see Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/Archives.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion&oldid=1240534959"