Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2018 December 27

< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion‎ | Log
< December 26 December 28 >

December 27 edit

Template:RSNSO 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. Galobtter (pingó mió) 08:23, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like a template that displayed a string of text for a long-deprecated notice board, and one transclusion. Substitute and delete. Steel1943 (talk) 20:10, 27 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Subst and delete per nom. Barely used, and won't be used in future. --Tom (LT) (talk) 01:01, 28 December 2018 (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:Vulgar slang 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 2019 January 5. (non-admin closure) Pkbwcgs (talk) 10:08, 5 January 2019 (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:Coimbra 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. (non-admin closure) Pkbwcgs (talk) 09:39, 5 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

With category WP:EGGs and links to sections of the same article removed, there is nothing left to navigate. --woodensuperman 13:56, 27 December 2018 (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:Association of Southeast and East Asian Catholic Colleges and Universities 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. (non-admin closure) Pkbwcgs (talk) 09:33, 5 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No primary topic, unused template Aloneinthewild (talk) 12:51, 27 December 2018 (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:League of Legends Challenger Series North America 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 2019 January 5. (non-admin closure) Pkbwcgs (talk) 10:08, 5 January 2019 (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:Team Apex 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. (non-admin closure) Pkbwcgs (talk) 09:42, 5 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Team Apex, an esports team, disbanded in 2016. The template has incorrect information and has not been updated since its creation. It serves no meaningful purpose as it only lists players, and because the team no longer exists, if it was updated it would be empty. CentreLeftRight ✉ 09:22, 27 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. No need for a navbox here, articles can link each other. --Tom (LT) (talk) 01:01, 28 December 2018 (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:Monthly clean-up category/Messages/Redirects for discussion 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 13:40, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

could someone please explain why this is needed and/or add some documentation so others know what is for? FASTILY 06:48, 27 December 2018 (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 themed area 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 no consensus. There's now no consensus on whether the two templates should be merged. Galobtter (pingó mió) 06:32, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Infobox themed area into Template:Infobox amusement park.

Very similar templates, with the "themed area" template appearing to be a subset of the 'amusement park' template, apart from |park=, which is labelled "Location" and is analogous to |location=. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:42, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Galobtter (pingó mió) 06:57, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom. Better to have unified template. --Tom (LT) (talk) 10:35, 18 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Reopening per discussion at Special:PermaLink/875524600#Other
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Galobtter (pingó mió) 05:02, 27 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • My main concern about this merger proposal is that while, yes, an attraction is a subset of a park, an infobox will look at completely different things. Take Tomorrowland for example - it's inside of six different parks - the entire "rides" section of {{infobox amusement park}} is useless (because it is a "ride") and the majority of the main parameters would need to be duplicated to have the functionality. I'm not saying it cannot or should not be done, but when I started working on this merge yesterday I was essentially looking at just copying the "themed area" code and pasting it directly into "amusement park" with almost no changes other than numbering - in my experience that's not a good merge candidate. Primefac (talk) 15:23, 27 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Could you give a different example? I've checked Tomorrowland which uses {{Infobox themed area}} and that template has a whole section for Attractions which is the same as the "Rides" section with an additional 2 other ride parameters not found in the park one. So if that was the only issue you found, it's currently already there. --Gonnym (talk) 12:20, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Since when did discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Holding cell mean TfD's get reopened? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:06, 27 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Step 1 in the deletion review process is to discuss the close with the closing admin and see if they're willing to re-open. That happened, and they did. Primefac (talk) 15:33, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Okay, so I've looked this over again. In "themed area" there are options for putting in which park(s) the area is located, and how many "attractions" (i.e. coasters, rides, etc) there are inside that area. In "amusement park" there are options for all the standard location/owner/opened/closed/etc, as well as how many rides (i.e. coasters, rides, etc) are in the park itself.
I suppose one could argue that the "number of rides" section could be used for both, but otherwise it's just sticking two completely different templates together. I guess I don't necessarily disagree with doing this, but when two templates have about 5 params shared between them (out of about 30 for each) it doesn't make much sense (i.e. I'm not supporting or opposing, just doing the numbers). Primefac (talk) 04:22, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If you merge you better make sure every article is proper. Otherwise. no. Valoem talk contrib 03:09, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That is generally how template mergers work. Primefac (talk) 15:08, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Oppose – As mentioned in another recent TfD discussion involving templates introduced by WikiProject Amusement Parks, it would be best to begin a discussion there (or at least provide a link to one) to discuss the proposal of these mergers in more detail. I am not fundamentally opposed to the idea of reducing unnecessary duplication, but to those that are not as experienced in maintaining templates, it would be great to see examples of how a resulting merger would work with valid testing beforehand. The original editors who were heavily involved in their creation are no longer active to my knowledge. Ahecht has provided some recent assistance to the project, so I'd like hear his/her thoughts on some of this as well. --GoneIn60 (talk) 15:03, 2 January 2019 (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).

Infobox settlement wrappers 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 2019 February 6. (non-admin closure) Steel1943 (talk) 18:56, 6 February 2019 (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:Buenos Aires 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 no consensus. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 13:45, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Buenos Aires City landmarks and Template:Neighbourhoods of Buenos Aires with Template:Buenos Aires.
Main {{Buenos Aires}} navbox is very sparsely populated, and there is some duplication of the neighborhoods. All would be better off under a single navbox. --woodensuperman 12:20, 19 December 2018 (UTC) [reply]

  • Keep separate the templates proposed for merging are very big and I don't think putting them in a single super template will help assist navigation. There aren't space constraints here, and the current arrangement is fairly logical. So I think it is best to keep them separate.--Tom (LT) (talk) 00:22, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
They're not big though, {{Buenos Aires}} is practically empty, and the majority of the links in {{Neighbourhoods of Buenos Aires}} are in {{Buenos Aires City landmarks}} anyway. --woodensuperman 08:57, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 01:43, 27 December 2018 (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:Uncategorized stub 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 2019 January 5. (non-admin closure) Pkbwcgs (talk) 10:06, 5 January 2019 (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/2018_December_27&oldid=882084811"