Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2013 February 16

< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion‎ | Log
< February 15 February 17 >

February 16 edit

Template:Prune 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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete after replacement with {{very long}} or {{overly detailed}} or {{plot}}. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:49, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Prune (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

~50 uses for a template in existence since 2009 is not healthy. This is also redundant to {{verylong}}, which has more parameters to make it more flexible for specific pruning needs. (Also, it looks disturbingly like the old {{Expand}} template). Suggest deletion or merging to {{verylong}}. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 21:02, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete If something is too long then slapping a big sticker on top is making matters worse, not better. Warden (talk) 21:30, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Just because the template currently has 50 transclusions does not mean that it has only been transcluded 50 times throughout its entire existence. It only means that there are currently 50 articles that have the template applied to it. The template may have been applied to thousands of articles since 2009, there is really no practical way of knowing that number for sure. Also, Warden's deletion rationale above is clearly irrelevant. A personal opposition to all cleanup tags is not a valid reason to delete one cleanup tag. I'll stay neutral on this for now; I guess I just wanted to come here and point out everyone's mistakes. :P ‑Scottywong| confer _ 21:57, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I do not object to all such tags. For example, {{stub}}, {{coord missing}}, {{incomplete list}} and {{citation needed}} are all reasonably polite and I use them freely, especially the stub templates which invite editors to contribute in an attractive way. It's the banner tags which demand attention with a honking great box that we don't need as they are rude and unpleasant. This one is especially obnoxious because it so obviously adds to the clutter in an absurd and redundant way. Prune it. Warden (talk) 01:12, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment they are not functionally equivalent. "verylong" is for very long sections or articles. prune is for sections or articles that contain information needing removal. It would seem to be more equivalent to something needing copyediting, or having offtopic/tangential material. The way the template is used now seems to be for removal of extraneous material or oververbosity, and requesting summarization instead of full exposition in a section, which is not the same thing as being very long. -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 05:35, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • But the trouble is that there's no way of telling what's to be pruned. Let's look at an example. The first occurence in What links here is Steve Biko which was added nearly 2 years ago in a flurry of editing which followed Jimbo taking an interest in the page. When you track down the edit summary, it indicates specific items which might be pruned but there's no mention of this on the talk page and so these clues are buried in the edit history and so nothing gets done. Why on earth didn't the editor just remove the particular items he didn't like? The existence of the template seems to discourage editors from being bold — they instead just leave a vague suggestion which becomes someone else's problem. Prune it. Warden (talk) 18:37, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • A "reason" parameter can be made mandatory for all new instances. (date tag all instances, so a datecheck will flag it with a big red message telling you you forgot to specify a reason). -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 06:12, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per argument of previous IP editor, with which I agree completely. Also, the number of transclusions does not have to be higher than it is for the template to be considered useful.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Debresser (talk • contribs)
  • Okay, then what's the difference between "very long sections" and "information needing removal"? They seem pretty parallel to me, or at least too subtle to warrant two templates. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 14:03, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • very long is a subtype of needing removal. If you have a table of statistics on a minor subtopic of the article, or some other extraneous information, it doesn't have to be very long to be undesirable to have in the article. -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 02:09, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Urgh. Even speaking as as editor for whom the preservation of content at all costs is not a primary concern, "shorten this section" is not, in itself, a requirement of any part of our guidelines. If a section contains unencyclopedic content, then we already have a number of more specific templates to flag it with. If a section simply goes into too much detail relative to the rest of the article, but is otherwise encyclopedic in nature, our general recourse is to split it to a new page. If the IP above can come up for a valid use case for a reason= here then I'm all ears, but in general this is misguided. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 13:55, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • I think all cleanup templates should have a |reason= parameter, to show exactly what the tagger was thinking about needing cleanup -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 23:27, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - I believe that one needs both kinds of templates: ones that ask for removal of content; ones that ask for addition of content. I don't think it's prudent to deprecate the prune template as it would be an unbalanced decision. I use the prune template quite often. Those 50 articles might have been my doing! Haha, I've said my piece. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 21:42, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:15, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as redundant; possibly redirect to a suitable equivalent, after orphaning, Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:11, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, we don't want to have a template for every option, nor that they replace talk'ing; something more or less generic, like {{verylong}} in this case), plus a note on talk is likely to work much better - Nabla (talk) 20:23, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete, seems redundant to {{very long}}. Frietjes (talk) 22:02, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment the discussion prior to relisting shows how it isn't the same as "very long" (instead this is "too long") "very long" would be a special case of "prune", not the other way around. -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 01:13, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Orphan and delete, because it's redundant. I typically am not a fan of deleting old titles that are redundant to something else, but redirecting to {{very long}} would be confusing — when I saw the header, I expected it to be a template for dried plums. Nyttend (talk) 14:55, 5 March 2013 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Events by year for decade BC 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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was no consensus Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:20, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Events by year for decade BC (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This template is used to populate articles like 280s BC with information from articles like 286 BC. This can't be kosher. Articles should use actual text, otherwise it becomes hugely confusing. In addition, there may be events that are significant to a year within a decade, but not to a decade itself.  Ryan Vesey 05:32, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

so how is this any different from template:Events by year for decade, or are you nominating that one as well? 64.134.48.7 (talk) 17:17, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - I get the point about confusion. If one of the years gets something in the wrong position, it can mess up the decade article without any indication on the year article, or any actual edit to the decade article. I fixed one of these messed up article pairs not very long ago. Events not significant to a decade can be marked as such in the year article by adding noinclude tags, but many editors do not know this. I still think it should be kept at least until a better system can be suggested, even if it's just a substantial reason for substitution and future manual editing of all these articles. In my humble opinion, this way helps to keep years more organized and standardized, but I'm open for change. PC-XT (talk) 13:23, 22 February 2013 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Infobox People's Choice Awards 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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:20, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox People's Choice Awards (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to {{Infobox award}}. Only 25 transclusions. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 00:39, 16 February 2013 (UTC) Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 00:39, 16 February 2013 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Infobox Olivier Awards 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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:20, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Olivier Awards (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to {{Infobox award}}. Only three transclusions. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 00:38, 16 February 2013 (UTC) Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 00:38, 16 February 2013 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Infobox MTV Awards 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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:20, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox MTV Awards (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to {{Infobox award}}. Only 126 transclusions. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 00:37, 16 February 2013 (UTC) Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 00:37, 16 February 2013 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Infobox Genie Awards 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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:20, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Genie Awards (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to {{Infobox film awards}} or {{Infobox award}}. Only six transclusions. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 00:35, 16 February 2013 (UTC) Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 00:35, 16 February 2013 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Infobox BET Awards 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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:20, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox BET Awards (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to {{Infobox award}}. Only two transclusions. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 00:33, 16 February 2013 (UTC) Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 00:33, 16 February 2013 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Infobox Emmy Awards 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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:20, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Emmy Awards (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to {{Infobox award}}. Only 90 transclusions. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 00:31, 16 February 2013 (UTC) Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 00:31, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy Keep: It should kept because it is kind of like tells you when the date of an important event occurs in any infobox. BattleshipMan (talk) 17:08, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    so, how again is it not redundant to {{Infobox award}} which also "kind of like tells you when the date of an important event occurs in any infobox"? 64.134.48.7 (talk) 17:14, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, per nom. Redundant. Axem Titanium (talk) 05:48, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, It needs an updated version, similar to the Oscar template. In addition to the basic info, an Emmy template should tell you what show won best series for comedy, and drama. And also, which show won the most major awards that night, and which show had the most major nominations. 1906cubs (talk) 22:35, 18 February 2013 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Infobox Grammy Awards 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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:20, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Grammy Awards (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to {{Infobox award}}. Only 59 transclusions. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 00:29, 16 February 2013 (UTC) Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 00:29, 16 February 2013 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Infobox Tony Awards 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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:20, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Tony Awards (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to {{Infobox award}}. Only 67 transclusions. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 00:27, 16 February 2013 (UTC) Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 00:27, 16 February 2013 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Infobox Helpmann Awards 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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:20, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Helpmann Awards (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to {{Infobox award}}. Only three transclusions. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 00:24, 16 February 2013 (UTC) Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 00:24, 16 February 2013 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Infobox Teen Choice Awards 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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:20, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Teen Choice Awards (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to {{Infobox award}}. Only three transclusions. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 00:21, 16 February 2013 (UTC) Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 00:21, 16 February 2013 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Infobox Kids' Choice Awards 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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:20, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Kids' Choice Awards (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to {{Infobox award}}. Only 32 transclusions. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 00:20, 16 February 2013 (UTC) Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 00:20, 16 February 2013 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Infobox Dove Awards 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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:20, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Dove Awards (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to {{Infobox award}}; only 44 transclusions. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 00:17, 16 February 2013 (UTC) Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 00:17, 16 February 2013 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2013_February_16&oldid=1078573916"