Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2018 May 9

< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion‎ | Log
< May 8 May 10 >

May 9 edit

Template:AmericanMorningHosts 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 per #News_anchor_navboxes below. Primefac (talk) 02:33, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As a list of hosts of a TV show, this fails WP:PERFNAV. --woodensuperman 14:08, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep that's a very questionable construction of PERFNAV. At any rate, I see no good reason why we should delete useful navboxes such as this one. Lepricavark (talk) 15:39, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
"This includes, but is not limited to [...] television/radio presenters". --woodensuperman 15:51, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough, but I still do not see how deletion provides any benefit to our readers. Lepricavark (talk) 16:08, 9 May 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:People of Khorasan 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 2018 May 18. Primefac (talk) 02:29, 18 May 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).

White House press corps 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 2018 May 18. Primefac (talk) 02:29, 18 May 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:HRSpc 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) 02:17, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and I can't figure out how it could be used. —GoldRingChip 11:44, 9 May 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:HRCom 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) 02:18, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and I can't figure out how it could be used. —GoldRingChip 11:43, 9 May 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:The Times editors 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:The Times. Primefac (talk) 14:33, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:The Times editors with Template:The Times.
Substantial duplication of editors of The Times. Shouldn't need to be mentioned in both navboxes. Only consideration is whether we merge The Sunday Times editors, or we treat as a separate publication and split them out into their own navbox. --woodensuperman 11:42, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support as long as all of the information is kept on the resulting template. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:46, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support merger, I think a new template for the Sunday Times would be useful as the two papers started with different ownership, but could settle for one larger template including both publications. Warofdreams talk 13:15, 9 May 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).

Baseball parks type 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).

The result of the discussion was relisted on 2018 May 18. Primefac (talk) 02:29, 18 May 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).

News anchor 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).

The result of the discussion was no consensus. This discussion is being closed in conjunction with this discussion as "no consensus"; while there might be no intentional "gaming" of the system, having one template receive one result (delete) and a group of templates receive a different one (no consensus) results in a contradiction between the type of template they represent. There is prejudice against renomination of this family of templates; the previous close suggested having a discussion about the performer/journalist difference, and that did not happen, so now I am mandating it - if someone wants to get this family of templates deleted, they must have some sort of discussion regarding this difference. Once this has happened, there is no issue with renomination (all at once, please, none of this one-template and one-mass-nom), linking to the relevant discussion. Primefac (talk) 14:17, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As a list of presenters of television broadcasts, these fail WP:PERFNAV. It seems there was previous consensus for deletion, but there was a procedural close of no consensus due to WP:MASSNOM issues. See Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2016 October 1#News anchors and similar --woodensuperman 08:40, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

See also Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2017 May 31#TV news presenters. --woodensuperman 08:48, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep, these are journalists, not performers, so PERNAV has nothing to do with these templates. The previous no consensus should still hold, or an outright "Keep" should prevail. Wikipedia should not be labeling journalists as performers. And deleting these templates denies readers access to a good source of research information on the subject. And that "two-vote discussion" of TV presenters in May of 2017 should be overturned by an administrator as a good faith attempt to "pick off" a few journalist templates without alerting editors to the rest. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:09, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
News anchors are television presenters, and thus WP:PERFNAV clearly applies 100% here. Note that nearly all participants in the last discussion were in favour of deleting these navboxes. Other than yourself, all "keep" votes were procedural. --woodensuperman 11:16, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The last discussion was you and one other editor. Some news templates list "Correspondents" who are reporters in the field who work on a story, talk to sources, check facts, and write the resulting summary of their work. By "presenting" their summary they do not instantly drop the label of journalist. When breaking news occurs, such as school shootings and international turmoil, all of these individuals take on the complete role of journalist. Journalism covers all these templates and all of the people listed in them. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:23, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No, the last discussion for these navboxes: Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2016 October 1#News anchors and similar, where you were the only editor advocating a non-procedural keep. Whether or not they are also journalists is irrelevant here as this is a navbox for a television broadcast. --woodensuperman 11:26, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
? You link the 2017 discussion in your nomination, which included the Template:60MinutesCorrespondents which has everything to do with people who, as journalists, cover a story. A host of a reality show is a presenter, the host of giving the news to the public on a daily basis is a practicing journalist. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:31, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No I don't. I link the 2016 discussion in my nomination. The 2017 discussion is in a different comment as it is a similar discussion and does not cover the navboxes nominated here. And anyway, we shouldn't and don't have navboxes for journalists for similar reasons to WP:PERFNAV. --woodensuperman 11:33, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Even if they were journalists, that is no reason to keep. The same concerns for WP:PERFNAV still apply. We do not and should not have navboxes listing all journalists who work at a newspaper, magazine, etc, etc. --woodensuperman 15:53, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I don't care about PERFNAV. How does deletion help our readers? Lepricavark (talk) 16:09, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all. PERFNAV - yes they are still television presenters. Lists would work much better, and such lists already exist. Also, Template:Anchors of The Early Show is used in one article, Template:Anchors of CBS This Morning is only in three articles, and The Early Show seems to have two templates for its anchors. That doesn't aid navigation, in my opinion. I found an article that contains three such templates. Not everything needs a navbox. — ᴀnemoneᴘroᴊecтors 21:10, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reduce the CNN one. Merge the morning show ones. How broadly should PERFNAV be construed? WP:UNDUE is a good guide. Compare {{US Presidents}}, where the "role" of President of the United States is a lifetime pinnacle achievement, justifying the screen space — listening time, for reading-impaired users — of a navbox on every article it lists. At the other extreme, doing an on-air gig at CNN is unimportant within the context of many of those people's articles. Many of them had more prominent positions with other networks, or more prominent careers outside broadcasting. Restrict/rename {{CNN personnel}} to anchors, merge the specials to {{CNN}}, and maybe what's left will pass UNDUE. The CBS and NBC anchors navboxes are a tougher call. Are the programs prestigious enough that being an anchor is a lifetime pinnacle achievement, or at least close enough to justify the screen space and listening time? Finally, the three morning show navbox titles all link to the same article, and give no indication how they're distinct from each other. Matt Fitzpatrick (talk) 22:15, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep as franchises: These navboxes list news journalists of franchises, not performers of TV dramas; we don't delete navboxes of British royals just because The Queen presents a televised speech, and hence wp:PERFNAV does not apply to these groups of people. Instead, the above navboxes could be expanded for broader coverage of the various news franchises all 7 days per week. -Wikid77 (talk) 14:13, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That's a straw man argument. If the Queen presents a televised speech on Channel 4, she wouldn't be included in a navbox for Channel 4. It has nothing to do with her being a member of the royal family. These navboxes are about television hosts, so WP:PERFNAV 100% applies here. Whether or not they are journalists is not at question, but note that we do not have navboxes for journalists either, and nor should we, as they can work for many publications, etc. --woodensuperman 08:23, 15 May 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:Manichitrathazhu character map 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. (non-admin closure) Galobtter (pingó mió) 03:33, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The purpose of this has already been served by a navbox. --Kailash29792 (talk) 08:13, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:09, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 02:48, 9 May 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:Assyrian elections in Iraq, 2018 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 2018 May 18. Primefac (talk) 02:29, 18 May 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).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2018_May_9&oldid=841856075"