Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2020 August 18

< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion‎ | Log
< August 17 August 19 >

August 18 edit

Template:Tltt 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 redirect to Template:Tlx. No opposition. Primefac (talk) 00:07, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

These Category:Internal template-link templates are placed within <kbd> tags. The intent is to have monospaced text with a "tooltip" (from the span name). The problem is that kbd signifies user input like keystrokes[1], and it is impossible that there are any uses of these templates that conform to that purpose. Rather, <code> should be used. Another problem is that tooltips are not accessible and contravene Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Accessibility#Text. Transclusions of these templates should be reviewed and changed to a different internal template-link template, and then the templates deleted. Bsherr (talk) 19:17, 18 August 2020 (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:Sensors 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 List of sensors. Primefac (talk) 00:23, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The template is too broad and useless. Either split it in specific templates or delete as it doesn't cover all sensors. Störm (talk) 16:08, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Merge with List of sensors I agree with nom. A navbox the size of a page is not helping navigation, it is a list in template space. --Tom (LT) (talk) 23:01, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge with List of sensors per above. There's no doubt there's more specific templates that can be grouped into others. – The Grid (talk) 17:27, 24 August 2020 (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:Antivandalism 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 2020 August 28. Primefac (talk) 00:21, 28 August 2020 (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:Zoey 101 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) TheTVExpert (talk) 15:28, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary template for just one TV series that lists three links that are prominent in each article to the others in lead, infobox, or a major section. Geraldo Perez (talk) 14:41, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. --Tom (LT) (talk) 23:01, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Second the motion for deletion. Pahiy (talk) 23:17, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong delete Only three links which are the show itself, character, and episode guide. 67.81.161.226 (talk) 17:55, 22 August 2020 (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:Shared IP special 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. Primefac (talk) 00:21, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposing to delete this template and replace each transclusion with the appropriate template from Category:Shared IP header templates. In each instance of use, a more specific shared IP header template would be better. Bsherr (talk) 22:44, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete after replacement, per nom. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 08:31, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I had closed this as "delete", but while reviewing, I changed my mind. The purpose of this template is not to provide information to users of the IP, like Template:Shared IP & co. Rather, it is a wiki-political statement by Spectrum (the IP editor, not the cable company) about the value of IP editing. The other templates would not fulfill this purpose. If not kept, it should at least be moved back to User talk:2604:2000:8FC0:4:68BA:3B32:8613:8B6D/header, from which it was moved to its current location. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 16:34, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't think we've ever userfied to the user talk namespace. We also typically wait for a request, but I wouldn't mind an outcome of userfying to the user namespace. --Bsherr (talk) 21:34, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 10:28, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep This template has a very different message from the normal Template:Shared IP, and is more intended as a political Statement. Techie3 (talk) 00:09, 28 August 2020 (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:Anatomy navs 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. No indication that this template is strictly necessary, and past precedent says that navigation between templates should not be done in article space. Primefac (talk) 00:03, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think that most if not all of the transclusions of this nav relate to its use in {{Human systems and organs}}. To be honest, I don't think that the information contained within this list is worth preserving - that navbox does a good job of listing relevant articles within its scope. Most anatomy articles already also link to Anatomical terminology in text, in the see also sections, as well as via infoboxes. So I think this template could just be deleted. Tom (LT) (talk) 23:14, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • I fine either with a Delete or a convert to separate navbox for linking exclusively between the templates, per nom and per WP:XNR. --Izno (talk) 20:34, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 13:44, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 10:25, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • If needed then convert to a navigation template and place it on the documentation section of linked templates. --Gonnym (talk) 12:36, 18 August 2020 (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:Cerebral palsy and other paralytic syndromes 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. It's possible a demonstration of the merged templates will be more likely to result in informed opinions (i.e. sandboxing). NPASR if this is done. Primefac (talk) 00:01, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Cerebral palsy and other paralytic syndromes with Template:Nervous and musculoskeletal system symptoms and signs.
Despite the name 'Cerebral palsy', this template is just ways of describing problems with movement, which can be due to lots of reasons, including upper motor neuron and lower motor neuron causes. Therefore, these templates have the same scope. I propose that they are merged and the final template is for clarity called {{Symptoms and signs related to movement}}, which is what both templates scopes are actually about. Tom (LT) (talk) 23:27, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • I tend toward keep here. The one template is already large (really, 2nd-level subgroup?). --Izno (talk) 14:37, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 13:44, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Izno if there's consensus to merge, I will revise the template to be more symptom-centred - something along the lines of primary sections "Gait", "Involuntary movement", "Weakness" and "Other", rather than the current confusing layout. I hope and think you'll find this will remove a lot of the blue space and make a template that is much easier for readers. Based on my previous article and template work, any chance I can sway your opinion on this...? (In my opinion such a merge will result in a better reading experience :P). --Tom (LT) (talk) 04:45, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 10:25, 18 August 2020 (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:Inflammation 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 keep. Keep is the official result, but I find the discussion reflects a consensus to partially listify, specifically the template contents concerning inflammatory conditions in specific parts of the body. @Tom (LT): I won't put this in the holding cell for conversion, as I think that would suggest deletion after conversion is done. (non-admin closure) Bsherr (talk) 23:46, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am proposing that MOST of the content from this template is deleted (sorry, again there is no option for this on Twinkle but this venue is called 'templates for discussion').

I do not think it is helpful for anyone to list in template for every '-itis' in the body, much as we do not list every cause of death on death or every form of infection on infection. What I propose is:

  1. The content about inflammation in specific locations is moved to a list called Inflammatory conditions by location Tom (LT) (talk) 04:22, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think it's possible for one template to list every '-itis' in the body  . That being said, I didn't see any article/list for inflammatory conditions by type/location/etc, so I've added it to my (admittedly long and unfinished) list of to-dos. So, basically, delete, but if so, if this could be copied to my userspace (or someone's) as a reference for said article/list, I'd appreciate it. bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 06:38, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think this one needs TFD. You have not proposed to delete the template, just some amount of its content. I do think a general template on -itis would be overwhelming for navigational purposes. --Izno (talk) 14:34, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Copy/pasted reply for editors who haven't read my replies to these comments earlier - template work is very time-consuming and I don't want to put that work in only to have an editor revert it and then require discussion; here is a good central venue and quite active, and should be renamed "Templates for deletion" if discussion requests are to be considered inappropriate. Additionally this request involves deletion of most of the template's content. --Tom (LT) (talk) 00:56, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 13:43, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 10:24, 18 August 2020 (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:IK Sirius squad 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) ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 13:01, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A template for the sport of bandy with not a single notable player. A navbox is supposed to navigate between actual articles. Geschichte (talk) 09:40, 18 August 2020 (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:Independence Media Holdings 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) TheTVExpert (talk) 15:27, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No longer a defining characteristic as company currently owns no stations. Raymie (t • c) 09:22, 18 August 2020 (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:Eureka Broadcasting 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) TheTVExpert (talk) 20:07, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Owns four stations, all in the same market ({{Eureka Radio}}). Not enough links to justify a navbox. Raymie (t • c) 09:21, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. With no article for the topic, I am skeptical this is a notable connection between the constituents of the navigation box. --Bsherr (talk) 18:01, 25 August 2020 (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:Lost Coast Communications 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) TheTVExpert (talk) 20:07, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Owns four stations, all in the same market ({{Eureka Radio}}). No need for a navbox. Raymie (t • c) 09:20, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. With no article for the topic, I am skeptical this is a notable connection between the constituents of the navigation box. --Bsherr (talk) 18:02, 25 August 2020 (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:Wolfhouse Radio 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) TheTVExpert (talk) 20:08, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Owns three radio stations, all in the same market ({{Santa Cruz Radio}}). Too few articles for a navbox. Raymie (t • c) 09:19, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. With no article for the topic, I am skeptical this is a notable connection between the constituents of the navigation box. --Bsherr (talk) 18:02, 25 August 2020 (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:Mean Green Radio Network 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) TheTVExpert (talk) 15:27, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There are too few affiliates to justify a navbox of this college sports radio network that does not even qualify for an article. Raymie (t • c) 09:17, 18 August 2020 (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:Nassau Broadcasting Partners Radio Stations 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 2020 August 25. (non-admin closure) TheTVExpert (talk) 15:27, 25 August 2020 (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:Northwest Broadcasting 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) TheTVExpert (talk) 15:26, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As a result of the sale of this entire media group to Cox Media Group, this template is no longer transcluded in any articles other than Northwest Broadcasting having been replaced by {{COXMG}}. Raymie (t • c) 09:11, 18 August 2020 (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:Dix Communications 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) TheTVExpert (talk) 15:26, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No longer enough articles to sustain an infobox. This group sold off most of its holdings to other broadcasters and newspaper owners in the years since the template was created. Raymie (t • c) 09:08, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: Only two articles, both radio stations in the same city as each other; both stations' articles also feature two market navboxes that contain both stations. That wouldn't be an issue if Dix still owned other stations in other markets (and its newspapers for that matter), but there's no longer any reason to keep this. --WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:39, 24 August 2020 (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:Mapleton Communications 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) TheTVExpert (talk) 20:08, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No longer needed; company sold all its stations, mostly to Simmons Media Group, in 2019. Raymie (t • c) 09:05, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Ceases to be defining characteristic of the stations. --Bsherr (talk) 19:53, 25 August 2020 (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:Waterman Broadcasting Corporation 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) ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 12:57, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Too few stations owned to justify a template. Raymie (t • c) 09:02, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Csworldwide1 (talk) 15:26, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: A company with only two stations — both in the same market at that — and only one actually being owned by the company proper (the other station is merely managed, but owned by a third party) does not require a navbox. --WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:38, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. --Tom (LT) (talk) 23:01, 18 August 2020 (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:Mount Ida Mustangs football coach navbox 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 2020 August 25. (non-admin closure) TheTVExpert (talk) 15:26, 25 August 2020 (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/2020_August_18&oldid=975344897"