Open main menu

Template talk:WikiProject U.S. Roads

Active discussions

WikiProject U.S. Roads (Rated Template-class)
This template is within the scope of the U.S. Roads WikiProject, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to state highways and other major roads in the United States. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
 Template  This article has been rated as Template-Class on the quality scale.

Requested moveEdit

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. While I sympathise with the opposers about the general pointlessness of moving templates, in this case there is a consensus that moving the templates will help with technical issues that apparently can't be solved by just using the redirect. Jenks24 (talk) 13:46, 1 August 2014 (UTC)



– I request two moves to improve the consistency of the same type of templates as Template:WikiProject UK Roads, Template:WikiProject Australian Roads, Template:WikiProject Hong Kong Roads, Template:WikiProject Indian roads, Template:WikiProject U.S. Congress, Template:WikiProject U.S. Streets, Template:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court cases, Template:WikiProject Canada, Template:WikiProject Canada Streets. Sawol (talk) 08:40, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

  • Oppose—the redirects exist already, so there is no actual proffered advantage to the move. While we are at it, I suggest that we trout the nominator for renominating the USRD template again after it was rejected twice less than three months ago. In the case of the USRD template, it has been discussed, and rejected, at least four times:November 2010, November 2013 and April 2014 and April 2014. The CARD/CRWP template was discussed in April 2011 when the move was rejected as well. If this move is rejected, there should be a moratorium against renominating for a year. Imzadi 1979  08:46, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
    • I was leaning toward doing back to my original "meh" from the last discussion in April, but of course Rich Farmbrough can't even spell my user name correctly, and he started tossing around stuff about ArbCom and editors not part of this discussion.... The nomination above still had no proffered advantage because readers can't tell if a template is transcluded with {{USRD}}, {{U.S. Roads WikiProject}} or {{WikiProject U.S. Roads}}, and there's been a redirect in place at the desired name since November 13, 2006‎. An editor, Ritchie333, someone who isn't the nominator from this nor the last request found an actual problem that a page move might solve that the redirect does not. If that's the case, then I'll support the change, if not, my indifferent opposition stands. Imzadi 1979  15:10, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
No problem! The template redirect Template:WPBiography is transcluded in over 125,000 pages. No need to change. Sawol (talk) 01:11, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
To opposer. Do you want to rename Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads, Category:WikiProject U.S. Roads? Sawol (talk) 01:11, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
Considering that the first solution would require renaming a few hundred subpages (which not even an admin can do with one click), and the second would also result in a bunch of work, no. --Rschen7754 01:55, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
Sawol, Izmadi and Rschen have been opposing this with a great big dollop of WP:OWN for years. Even the stubborn Kirill Lokshin has gone with the community way of doing this, though not until after he had drafted a very severe ArbCom result against me. There are some things its not worth the effort, though I will however give you a moral Support message, and assure you that no trout is deserved. All the best: Rich Farmbrough23:28, 25 July 2014 (UTC).
  • Oppose – It's not broken; it doesn't need to be fixed. TCN7JM 02:02, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose - Waste of time to move. Dough4872 02:12, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Neutral - Do whatever consensus says. Dough4872 00:41, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Support once again the tired old shibboleths are trotted out against this move. If the move were made it would make it much easier to identify banner templates, and offer potential for increased simplicity all round. There are only three project with non standard banner names, and the Canada roads one was I believe at the instigation of Izmadi. All the best: Rich Farmbrough23:28, 25 July 2014 (UTC).
  • Question - As a member of this project, I've never understood the vehement opposition to moving the banner. Yes, the name of the project is "The U.S. Roads WikiProject". However, there are other examples of standardized naming (i.e. the project home page is not located at Wikipedia:U.S. Roads WikiProject, but rather uses the convention of other projects Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads). So, is there a rationale other than "the name of the project" for not moving the template to a standardized name? Perhaps if there is a documented rationale, it would help fend off the recurrent move proposals... -- LJ  03:07, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Support I have only seen !votes that looks like WP:ILIKEIT and WP:OWN. All the other WikiProjects' banned are named this way. It might be that the 'project itself' is named one way, but it needs to be consistent. The cat and project-name is under WP USR, why not the banner to? (sorry, but... People seem to want to keep it "like it has always been", and are narrow-minded to only see it from this WikiProjects' POV.) Why should WP USR (and Canada) be an exemption to the standardization of the banner names? Please someone explain this, without saying "it works" or it is our name...since it is not. The official title is Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads, and you might have an inside name, but that doesn't change the fact that the project itself (and the category) is located under the name WikiProject U.S. Roads. (tJosve05a (c) 08:25, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - found a technical problem with the Articles for Creation helper script. The script picks up projects to assign new articles from, and appears to do it with any page in WP space that matches "WikiProject <name>". Under U, I can see Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Congress, Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Streets and Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court cases and even Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads/U.S. Route 66, but not this project, and I suspect the inconsistent name is confusing Theo's Little Bot into removing it from the available project list. Ideally, WikiProjects would be in a separate namespace, but we have to work with what we're given, and the name needs to change to support the bot.
Just for the record, although I !voted above, I have no fight whatsoever with those wanting to support this - everyone is entitled to their point of view and arguments seem to have been made with good faith. Furthermore, in the grand scheme of things, this debate is not too dissimilar to edit-warring over the colour color of templates, and it's worth putting that in perspective. (And, no matter how much we may wish otherwise, WP:TROUT is not actually policy!) Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:08, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
Can someone else verify what Ritchie333 is saying? It's not that I don't trust his judgment, it's just that this is the first time I can recall reasoning that wasn't "all the others are this way" and I'd like to confirm it. If it's true, I may be swayed after all. –Fredddie 14:52, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
The list itself (which the script uses) is in User:Theo's Little Bot/afchwikiproject.js - I've got no idea how it's generated, so I'll ping @Theopolisme: to see if we can get an answer. It must ultimately use the template name, because that's what it has to transclude onto a newly created talk page when an AfC draft is approved. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:06, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
@Ritchie333: Canada Roads is listed there, and like the USRD banner, it has a redirect at the "Template:WikiProject Foo" style name. Unlike the Mathematics project, which was is listed with its non-standard template name, {{Maths rating}} with "[manual] Adding Mathematics" as the edit summary, it appears the Canada Roads banner was picked up automatically by the bot. Imzadi 1979  15:17, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
Would a redirect from the "conventional" name not serve the purpose? Also, Theo hasn't been that active lately - @Technical 13: do you know, by chance? --Rschen7754 17:53, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
If I had to guess, adding our project name should fix it. --Rschen7754 19:27, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
It looks like the project was on there, but this bot edit wiped it out. Manually adding it would work to a point, but runs the risk of being wiped out later should Theo (or anyone else maintaining the list) decide to do a bot run. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 08:39, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
  • NeutralSupport - Doesn't make a lick of difference either way. There's a reason we have the redirect system, and semantics over template naming is just that. Consistency makes sense though. - Floydian τ ¢ 19:33, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Changed my !vote to support. Given some of the arguments above, it makes more technical and simplistic sense to just move the template and its subpages, done. My reasoning is 6-fold: 1) As noted by Rich F, these are two of three non-standard banner templates out of thousands! 2) The redirect system is a useless argument, because it applies equally to both outcomes. Moving the template won't disturb existing links to the current pagename. 3) As noted by Josve05a, the project itself and the categories are in the standardized order, but the template is not. 4) As noted in previous discussions (ie last July), the name is not compatible with AWB, which is inefficient for our many editors who use the program. 5) I don't understand the semantics of "Our project is the U.S. Roads WikiProject" vs "It's WikiProject: U.S. Roads". Does it really matter? Bring it in line with convention as far as page titles go and use one of the handy dandy templates that overwrites the level 0 header so that it shows up any colour you like when the page loads. 6) For all whimsical purposes, WP:USRD = Wikiproject U.S. Roads. Now the moniker CRWP, which I'm trying to phase out in support of WP:CARD, would have made sense in this situation, but such is not the case with how we (particularly you @Imzadi1979:) have strived to standardize the project names and shortcuts under WikiProject Highways. - Floydian τ ¢ 20:10, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
In fact... since I can't find any discussion for Canada and it only seems to be in place because the project was set up by mirroring the U.S. project, I may just make the bold move myself in a few days. There's really no logical reason to oppose this, and if it helps with tools, searches, and future editors... then it should be done! - Floydian τ ¢ 23:47, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Question: According to the section above, this template may have a pending re-write and transition to Lua coming. Does the coding of this template currently rely on complex sub-pages which would also have to be moved? If so, would the Lua rewrite eliminate the need for those sub-pages, and thus would it make sense to hold off on moving the template until the rewrite is done? -- LJ  06:45, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
    The Lua rewrite is months away at the earliest. I'm waiting for @Kephir: to finish Module:WikiProjectBanner before porting. I'm hoping for a December-January timeframe. As far as I can tell, the subpages, at least as currently constituted, would no longer exist in the rewritten version. Regarding the subpage count, there are 20 subpages + 1 redirect. Of those 21 pages, 7 are sandboxes, 3 are documentation pages, and 1 is a testcase page. That means there are 10 subpages in actual use. Some are more complicated than others.
    I'm definitely of the mindset that it would be easier to move the banner during the rewrite process. Moving the subtemplates wouldn't be the hardest thing to do, technically speaking, but why move them if the whole thing is going to be rewritten anyway? If the final consensus is to move, we'll need to decide when it should happen. -happy5214 09:00, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
    Thanks for the ping. I would not be so optimistic about the rewrite, though. I have to sort out some disagreements with S first, and I might not be available to work on this in the coming months. Keφr 09:14, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
    I would also think that it would be a long while before a Lua version would work with this banner since the tackforces are displayed in a different way to most other banners and that this template does not even use {{WPBannerMeta}}. -- WOSlinker (talk) 10:08, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Support It really makes easier for database scans, tools, bots, etc. if the WikiProject pseudonamespace has all projects. This does not affect the content of the WikiProject but makes life easier for the rest. -- Magioladitis (talk) 07:12, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Doesn't make a great difference either way, but support to bring into line with the WikiProject's main page. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:19, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

@Magioladitis, MSGJ, WOSlinker, Ritchie333, Josve05a, and Rich Farmbrough: It's been over two and a half years since the template was moved, but it still does not show up in the various gadgets, like the AfC helper script, as an option. It believe that was one of the main reasons why the move was requested. Where's the follow through on this issue? Imzadi 1979  02:39, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

Return to "WikiProject U.S. Roads" page.