Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2013 March 11

< March 10	March 12 >

March 11[edit]

Template:Principal cities of the Netherlands[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template 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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:41, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Principal cities of the Netherlands (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

The entries in this template do not have clear inclusion criteria, it links to List of cities in the Netherlands with over 100,000 people as "Principal cities" but not all of those are listed. All cities listed in this template already have a provincial navigation box, and 8 out of 15 entries are also listed in {{Dutch capital cities}}, which has clear inclusion criteria and seems better designed. The articles in this template have on average 3 other templates. I think that WP:TCREEP is applicable here, because the extra links this template offers to articles are very limited. CRwikiCA (talk) 23:26, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

delete. Non-clear inclusion criteria, adds mainly redundant information. TCREEP is likely indeed. Arnoutf (talk) 16:15, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as template overkill. Plenty of navboxes already at each of these articles to link them together (with better criteria). -- P 1 9 9 ✉ 13:42, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete There are no official statistics about cities in The Netherlands, only for municipalities and (statistical) neighbourhoods. The definition of what is a city in the Netherlands is already WP:OR, giving them a value as "principal" is WP:OR en WP:NPOV and sometimes WP:PEACOCK The Banner talk 19:31, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Subjective criteria for inclusion, apparently based on OR. Maralia (talk) 01:40, 22 March 2013 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Don't Look Back (Celeste Buckingham album) track listing[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template 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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Delete; deleted by RHaworth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 17:12, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Don't Look Back (Celeste Buckingham album) track listing (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused with only links for 3 songs. Navigation more simply served by the existing artist's navbox in {{Celeste Buckingham}}. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 21:31, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: First I created the template, and then decided not to use it, so fine with me. Tweny13 (talk) 21:39, 11 March 2013 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:War from a Harlots Mouth[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template 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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Keep. Ruslik_Zero 18:33, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:War from a Harlots Mouth (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

WP:NENAN, one band, four albums, no linked musicians = no need for a nav box (although I have no doubt Jax will come up with some stubs after this nomination) The Banner talk 19:17, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep -

Falling Upstairs does not link to In Shoals nor MMX (War from a Harlots Mouth album) ,
Transmetropolitan (album) does not link to MMX (War from a Harlots Mouth album) ,
In Shoals does not link to Falling Upstairs ,
MMX (War from a Harlots Mouth album) does not link to Falling Upstairs nor Transmetropolitan (album) ,
WFAHM released Voyeur recently as well.

--Jax 0677 (talk) 20:16, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Then fix it, Jax. It can perfectly be solved by normal wikilinking. The Banner talk 23:34, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reply - I did fix it Banner, by creating a navbox. If you think that it can be reasonably fixed by normal wikilinking, then show me how. Template:Sonny Throckmorton is similar to this one, and passed TfD with only 4 links. And Voyeur makes five, and does not link to ANY of the other four albums. --Jax 0677 (talk) 14:14, 20 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not every article related to a band needs to be directly linked to every article. With only 4 album articles here, there is no navigation problem which requires a navbox. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 09:35, 23 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Reply - There are five articles in the navbox. If what BHG says is true, then Where does it end??? --Jax 0677 (talk) 13:56, 23 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - It ends when editors like Jax stop creating navboxes for every topic which crosses their path, and start trying to assess which navboxes are sufficiently helpful to navigation to justify the clutter they cause. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:26, 23 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - Reply - If what BHG is saying is true, then there should not be any navboxes AT ALL. There were a significant number of articles when I created the navbox, and there are 5 articles in the navbox now (which NENAN requires BTW). Additionally, BHG has not merged Hero (van Canto album)‎ per the AfD disposition. --Jax 0677 (talk) 23:43, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      - Reply. Hero (van Canto album)‎ now merged. I have also PRODed Voyeur (War from a Harlots Mouth album); its creation looks like WP:POINTy disruption. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:33, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        Reply - Hero (van Canto album)‎ was redirected, not merged. There was notable information about the album in the reference contained within the article. --Jax 0677 (talk) 01:57, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        Reply. Per WP:BURDEN, the onus is on an editor adding material to an article to ensure that it is verifiable. I do not add unreferenced material to any article, whether as the result of a merge or otherwise. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 02:00, 25 March 2013 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Occitania Squad 2010 World Cup[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template 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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:43, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Occitania Squad 2010 World Cup (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

no purpose as there is not a single blue-link. non notable squad list Koppapa (talk) 09:13, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. All red links from a "nation" whose players are drawn from lower leagues. Unlikely any of these players could fulfill GNG, so the template does nothing to aid navigation. Fenix down (talk) 11:43, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not a single link to existing content. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 20:22, 12 March 2013 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.

NBA first round draft navboxes[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template 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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:43, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:BobcatsFirstPick (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:BullsFirstPick (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:SonicsFirstPick (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:SpursFirstPick (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:ThunderFirstPick (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Category:NBA first round draft picks navigational boxes by team

Delete all. These is banner-hanging, unnecessary and clutter-y. I personally think the NFL equivalent navboxes should be deleted too, but that's for another discussion. Jrcla2 (talk) 04:19, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have also added the corresponding category. Jrcla2 (talk) 04:21, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all Fails WP:NAVBOX point No. 3 "The articles should refer to each other, to a reasonable extent" and No. 5 "You would want to list many of these articles in the See also sections of the articles."—Bagumba (talk) 04:50, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all per Bagumba. Templates not needed for this. Rikster2 (talk) 12:08, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all - Navboxes are unnecessary. These set of players don't relate to each other very much, other than drafted by the same team in the first round.—Chris!_c/t 21:19, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I notified the creator of these templates.—Chris!_c/t 21:29, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all. I disagree that WP:NAVBOX criteria Nos. 3 and 5 are determinative (both criteria are phrased as optional), and numerous navboxes, such as those for the Heisman Trophy and other major awards, would also fail if criteria Nos. 3 and 5 were applied in isolation. In support of deleting this template, I would simply state the obvious: it has been the long-time understanding of Wikiproject Basketball not to create No. 1 draft pick navboxes for each NBA team, counter to the example of Wikiproject National Football League. That's more than enough reason to delete it. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 20:20, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Perhaps navboxes like Heisman Trophy are following WP:IAR, not that WP:NAVBOX 3&5 shouldn't generally be followed. At any rate, we agree on deletion.—Bagumba (talk) 20:43, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Many articles (such as Nikita Filatov, Jakub Voráček and so on) use {{Succession box}} for navigation between club's first round draft pick. Navbox is equivalent of such structure. NickSt (talk) 14:08, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nick, WP:Baseball, WP:College Basketball, WP:Basketball, WP:College Football and WP:NFL have all decided that succession boxes contribute more bottom-of-the-page clutter and less information than navboxes. The issue in the case of these templates isn't whether to replace navboxes with succession boxes on the same subject; the issue is whether No. 1 draft picks for each NBA team rate any navbox or succession box at all. In the case of the NBA, the project editors have decided to forgo navboxes and succession boxes for No. 1 NBA Draft choices. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 14:58, 14 March 2013 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.