Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2016 July 14

< July 13	July 15 >

July 14 edit

Template:Catholic mysticism 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 here. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 00:58, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Catholic mysticism (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Christian mysticism (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Template:Catholic mysticism with Template:Christian mysticism.
Since User:Jujutsuan failed to gain WP:CON to rename Template:Christian mysticism in this discussion, he chose create Template:Catholic mysticism as a duplicate of it instead (see WP:FORK). While he has added some new Catholic-related links to the (already long) Christian Template, the template itself is added to the bottom/top of some pages that already have the first template. It just makes no sense to have two template on the same pages with most link duplicated in both. One obvious fix would be to only keep the currently duplicated links in just one template or the other, Jujutsuan objects to this as unnecessary. Jujutsuan has (so far) mostly added the Template:Catholic mysticism template to pages (that he thinks are) about mysticism literature, but has never given a reason to have the two similar templates. tahc ^chat 16:16, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The reason is WP:SUBPOV. This was actually Chicbyaccident's idea, not mine. The original version of this, which was quickly redirected to {{Christian mysticism}} to let the RM finish, was deleted to make way for the un-userfying of the current version, but you can check out its talk page and the RM to see that it's true. I'd say I added a lot of new links, to plenty of people as well as literature. I don't just think they're relevant, they were all (or virtually all) in categories that indicated their relevance. I mean, we could merge Christian mysticism into Catholic mysticism, but then the template would be undeniably Catholic-oriented. (Tell me, are any of the links in the Catholic one not about Catholicism?) So here's the choice, Tahc: change the name to "Catholic mysticism" and merge, or have two separate templates, one as an overview, one more comprehensive about the Catholic SUBPOV. Jujutsuan (Please notify with {{re}} talk | contribs) 17:31, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Either merge into the Christian mysticism template or, better, change the Catholic template to a footer. Side and footer templates are used on the same page, even if they contain duplicate listings, so to differentiate the two that would be one solution. As said, if not a footer, merge into Christian mysticism (maybe some of the literature should be in both templates as well). Randy Kryn 13:06, 15 July 2016 (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:Mercom Capital Group 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; deleted as G2 by Mackensen (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:09, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Mercom Capital Group (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

A template with no content other than the letter "H". Not being used on any pages. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:58, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete as test page; appears to be an accidental creation from their sandbox —PC-XT+ 07:51, 14 July 2016 (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).

Series overview and Episode table subtemplates 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. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 00:40, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Series overview/special (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Series overview/split (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Series overview/row (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Series overview/special/doc (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Series overview/split/doc (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Series overview/doc2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Episode table/cell (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Episode table/reference (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Sub-templates and their documentations (as well as the documentation test page doc2) no longer required after main templates were converted to modules and these particular sub-templates became deprecated and no longer supported. Alex|The|Whovian^? 06:39, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete them as redundant to their replacement —PC-XT+ 07:53, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom; redundant and obsolete. Jujutsuan (Please notify with {{re}} talk | contribs) 17:37, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 22:49, 14 July 2016 (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).