Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2017 February 14

< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion‎ | Log
< February 13 February 15 >

February 14 edit

Template:BC Lions 2009 Roster 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).

The result of the discussion was delete. Primefac (talk) 15:41, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

single-use template which has been merged with the article Frietjes (talk) 21:33, 14 February 2017 (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:2002 Orlando Miracle depth chart 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).

The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. Primefac (talk) 15:43, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

single-use template which has been merged with the article Frietjes (talk) 21:30, 14 February 2017 (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:PD-US-LOC 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).

The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. Primefac (talk) 15:42, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unused file copyright tag. This tag is also misleading, as files from the LOC are not necessarily in the Public Domain. The equivalent tag on Commons has been deleted for this reason. FASTILY 20:47, 14 February 2017 (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:Good Game 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).

The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. Primefac (talk) 15:46, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Now all cast and crew removed per WP:PERFNAV, and duplicate links to the same article also removed, navbox does not provide any useful navigation function. Rob Sinden (talk) 16:40, 14 February 2017 (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:Idle Thumbs 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).

The result of the discussion was relisted on 2017 February 23. Primefac (talk) 15:45, 23 February 2017 (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:Cc-by-sa-2.0-be 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).

The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. Primefac (talk) 15:42, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unused copyright tag. Any future uploads under this license belong at Commons. FASTILY 10:02, 14 February 2017 (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:Cc-by-sa-2.0-de 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).

The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. Primefac (talk) 15:42, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unused copyright tag. Any future uploads under this license belong at Commons. FASTILY 10:02, 14 February 2017 (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:Cc-by-sa-2.1-jp 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).

The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. Primefac (talk) 15:42, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unused copyright tag. Any future uploads under this license belong at Commons. FASTILY 10:02, 14 February 2017 (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:Infobox Hindu leader 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).

The result of the discussion was merge to Template:Infobox religious biography. Primefac (talk) 03:03, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Infobox Hindu leader with Template:Infobox religious biography.
Hindu leader is a religious biography, so I don't see any need for two separate ones. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 02:33, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose:(but see the alternate suggested below) The Infobox Hindu leader template provides fields tailored to Hinduism (e.g. guru, influenced, etc), a few of which are absent in the other (e.g. influenced). The color coding of Hindu leader template is based on past consensus and appropriate, not so in the default set up for Hindu in the Infobox religious biography template. There is no harm in keeping the widely used tailored template on Hindu leader. Tailoring templates simplifies content addition and encourages editing by new users. This is another of many template merge request by @Capankajsmilyo in past 12 months, that seems unwarranted. FWIW, I was not involved in old consensus process, nor in the creation of either templates. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 09:14, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • merge, the only parameters missing from {{infobox religious biography}} are (1) |relatives= and |relations= probably useful, (2) |honors= probably useful, (3) |founder= i.e. "founder of", (4) |philosophy=, (5) |known_for=, (6) |free_label= and |free_text= (7) |influenced= of debatable value since this usually better in prose with citations, (8) |quote= better as a floating quote box outside of the infobox, (9) |footnotes= may be useful. mostly, this seems to be about allowing for some alternative labels, with a few generally useful parameters to merge. one alternative compromise would be to add some of these to {{infobox religious biography}} then rewrite {{infobox Hindu leader}} as a wrapper. Frietjes (talk) 00:07, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would support the suggested alternative compromise: add some of these to {{infobox religious biography}}, wrapper, plus appropriate color bands for Buddhism, Hinduism and Jainism just like the way we have color consistency for Christianity. It would be nice if our template writing experts can also include Sikhism within this initiative. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 04:37, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Frietjes: it would be useful to retain at least the philosophy, known_for and influenced parameters for Buddhism, Hinduism and Jainism articles in the wrapper, because of the sub-traditions and because Buddhists influenced non-Buddhists, Hindus influenced non-Hindus, etc. per WP:RS. If additional parameters can be added, we should consider adding influenced_by and influenced. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 14:20, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: Per Ms Sarah Welch. Regards, Cinosaur (talk) 02:05, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • merge, differences between parameters used in religious traditions are not that different, especially if you also consider other Indian traditions, such as Buddhism. @Ms Sarah Welch:, are you opposing or merging?--S Khemadhammo (talk) 20:50, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • I like the rewrite the wrapper idea of Frietjes more. If that would be difficult to implement, and merging would be a "mere delete", then oppose. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 02:31, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge: Per Frietjes, I support the rewrite of the infobox ({{infobox Hindu leader}}) as a wrapper to {{infobox religious biography}}. 117.212.44.39 (talk) 21:24, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Characteristics of religious biographies vary greatly between religions, yet still we don't use separate infoboxes for, say, Catholic bishops, Muslim Sufi saints and Siberian shamans. Keeping an exception for religious figures in Hinduism is hardly justifiable. I would rather see the few parameters listed by Frietjes added to {{infobox religious biography}}. Note that technically, the template color scheme can be made to vary depending on the value of the "religion" parameter, if it is a sine qua non for a particular religion. Ms Sarah Welch's argument about one template being easier to edit by newcomers than the other sounds a bit surprising to me, as both in their core form are nearly identical. At the same time, her undermining of Capankajsmilyo's work is not a kind of comment that helps in discussion on templates. — kashmiri TALK 13:18, 26 February 2017 (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/2017_February_14&oldid=768153035"