Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2020 August 14

August 14Edit

Template:Infobox Australia state or territoryEdit

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:Infobox settlement. Izno (talk) 20:32, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Propose merging Template:Infobox Australia state or territory with Template:Infobox settlement.
Merge into {{Infobox settlement}}, as was done with {{Infobox U.S. state}}, and delete. Certainly nothing fancy here that isn't supported by {{Infobox settlement}}. 9 usages in mainspace. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 21:24, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

  • Merge. Usage numbers are indeed low, begging the question as to whether the template is accomplishing anything the settlement template isn't. AlexKitfox (talk) 23:01, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose - Another merge for the sake of merging. This infobox requires no maintenance, the content rarely changes, no extra fields are required and so there is little to be gained by merging. It's just a waste of everyone's time to do so. @ProcrastinatingReader:, could you please demonstrate that there is nothing fancy here that isn't supported by {{Infobox settlement}} by showing an example of one of the uses converted to use IS? Also, I notice that US states now have two infoboxes, the second of which is {{Infobox U.S. state symbols}}. Why? If state symbols are not part of IS does this mean that we are going to have to create {{Infobox Australian state and territory symbols}}? If so, what's the point? --AussieLegend () 04:23, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
    It's just a waste of everyone's time to do so It is a volunteer community. Nobody said you have to implement the TfD. I must admit, I was wondering what oppose argument you'd have this time. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 10:45, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
    Regardless, it is a valid point. Instead of cherry-picking one thing from my post that you think that you can point-score with, can you answer the other questions? Can this infobox be merged completely into IS or are we going to have to create another infobox for the things that IS doesn't do? Since you don't think a merge is a waste of time, suurely you have time to do this? --AussieLegend () 10:53, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Merge. This will undoubtedly turn into a mess as it usually happens with infoboxes and Australian templates, but I'll jump in. Not every merge has to do with maintenance, and some, like this, have to do with a having a consistent style used between location articles. There is no reason why the style of these 9 pages should be different to the half a million other articles using Template:Infobox settlement. And while the maintenance of this template might be minimal, any change to the settlement infobox will have to be manually done here - and that is if it's even remembered and then if the local consensus of a very small group of editors allows for it. Having one consistent style in one location, allows for both easier and faster discussions for the community, and a consistent and familiar style for readers. --Gonnym (talk) 07:48, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
    • any change to the settlement infobox will have to be manually done here - What change done to IS would have to be done to this infobox? Just because someone changes something in IS, doesn't mean other infoboxes have to have the same change.
      allows for both easier and faster discussions for the community That's a bad assumption. Changes to IS can be made as is necessary. Merging will not change that at all. If anything, it may result in a slowdown for various reasons.
      My opposition is basically that all this does is make work for someone. As for style, I don't see a lot of difference in the style, which is why I asked for an example. --AussieLegend () 10:23, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Merge please merge or do something about this template. When I read article on any city on mobile it appears in the first sentence causing a lot of visual clutter and discomfort. It gives page lead an ugly view too. 103.255.6.247 (talk) 10:25, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
    • Your rationale for merge makes no sense as this infobox is not used on city articles. --AussieLegend () 10:28, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Merge per nom and User:Gonnym.--Darwinek (talk) 13:52, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Merge I support merging, since that "Australia" template seems kind of redundant. Friend505 14:42, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Merge per nom and User:Gonnym. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:39, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Make Wrapper. I think this could be easily made a wrapper, and that would make it consistent with {{Infobox U.S. state}}, however I am ok with a full merger. BTW, are you going to nominate {{Infobox province or territory of Canada}}? Techie3 (talk) 11:26, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
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:Infobox trade warEdit

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) Bsherr (talk) 00:33, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Zero usages. Duplicate of {{Infobox military conflict}} - here's the diff. Proposing deletion. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 21:16, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

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:2016–17 Indian Federation Cup Group A tableEdit

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) 01:37, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

no longer in use after being merged with the parent article (with attribution) per consensus at WT:FOOTY Frietjes (talk) 18:24, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 20:43, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
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).

ISO 639 name from code templatesEdit

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 after replacement. Primefac (talk) 18:14, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

There are currently around ~1300 templates in Category:ISO 639 name from code templates and Category:ISO 639 name from code templates without a category which produce a plain text language name. This is a nightmare for maintenance. Template:ISO 639 name has been changed to work with Module:ISO 639 name which removes the need of all these templates reducing the work to the template entry point and the module. If the TfD passes, the plan is to convert all direct "ISO 639 name x" usages to use Template:ISO 639 name. User:Trialpears will be assisting with the tagging of all templates which should happen soon. Gonnym (talk) 09:38, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Tagging in progress. Will take a few hours since bots are required to keep down the edit rate. --Trialpears (talk) 10:12, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
I expect that nominator intended to write: Template:ISO 639 name has been changed to work with Module:ISO 639 name ...
Trappist the monk (talk) 10:14, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
Yes, thanks. --Gonnym (talk) 11:14, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Delete all This is a perfect example of something that d: can host with Lua modules drawing from those data. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 12:43, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
    This proposal has nothing to do with Wikidata. * Pppery * it has begun... 14:42, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Delete all Clear misuse of the template namespace, and obsolete anyway. * Pppery * it has begun... 14:42, 14 August 2020 (UTC) (struck * Pppery * it has begun... 20:12, 18 August 2020 (UTC))
  • Keep unless it can be demonstrated that a Lua implementation is more user friendly and more efficient. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 21:28, 14 August 2020 (UTC).
    What does user friendliness have to do with this? The user just calls {{ISO 639 name|aa}} -> Afar regardless of whether these templates are deleted or not. As for "more efficient", don't worry about performance. * Pppery * it has begun... 22:06, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
    The module is not forgiving of incorrect usage, as the original implementation was designed to be. For example {{ISO 639 name|French}} used to work, now it gives an error.
    I copied this from WP:PERF.

Particularly in the area of template design, optimising server performance is important, and it's frequently done by users with a great amount of impact. It's not very hard. I've done it myself from time to time, but it's best done by people with a knowledge of the templates in question and the articles they serve.

Hope that helps.
All the best: Rich Farmbrough 19:38, 16 August 2020 (UTC).
  • I have to agree with Pppery. I don't understand your comment here. From an editor using these templates, the usage has the same amount of characters; from an editor wanting to update ISO 639 2 codes, instead of updating hundreds of templates, they just update Module:Language/data/ISO 639-2. Can you explain what exactly you want demonstrated? Have you actually even looked at the template and module, or was this just a reflex keep since you created Template:ISO 639 name aa? --Gonnym (talk) 07:42, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
    You require advanced permissions to edit that module. And you are instructed not to edit it in the wiki sense but use another module to do so.
    Instead of a simple 76 byte template in wiki-markup we have 17k module that only a very few people understand.
    The module is not forgiving of incorrect usage, as the original implementation was designed to be. For example {{ISO 639 name|French}} used to work, now it gives an error.
    I don't appreciate the personal attack in your last sentence.
    All the best: Rich Farmbrough 19:38, 16 August 2020 (UTC).
    At this edit, {{ISO 639 name}} was first protected (sysop – this was before template editor). At this edit protection level was adjusted to allow editing by those editors with template-editor rights. With this edit I set the protection level of Module:ISO 639 name to be the consistent with the protection levels established for its supporting data tables (template editor). Because the data tables are to reflect the state of the data from the various ISO 639 custodians, manual manipulation of the tables is discouraged. If we need to override a particular code/name pair, that is done in Module:Language/data/ISO 639 override.
    I try to write relatively simple, sufficiently commented, code so that any marginally competent coder can understand and maintain it. It is not necessary for everyone who uses the module to know how it accomplishes its work.
    It is true that {{ISO 639 name|French}} used to work. It did so by creating a call to {{ISO 639 name French}}, a redirect to {{ISO 639 name fr}}. There are also these few that follow the same pattern (this search):
    These, from the same search results, are not redirects:
    All of the above redirects are, apparently, not used.
    There were two others, {{ISO 639 name Serbian}} and {{ISO 639 name Italian}}. These were TfD'd in December 2012; see Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2012 December 6 § Template:ISO 639 name Serbian.
    So, while it is true that {{ISO 639 name|French}} used to work, French is not an ISO 639 language code so it is correct for the module to return an error message.
    Trappist the monk (talk) 16:11, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Delete all. The new method is much better. --Mirokado (talk) 21:13, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Keep Template:ISO 639 name did one simple thing: look up the code from a database and output the result (it also populated a tracking category that appears to be to indicate a complete non-problem and therefore should not exist). Module:ISO 639 name parses the given code with several Lua patterns and compares it to five different pages. No argument has been presented as to why all of this additional processing is necessary. While I agree that storing this in hundreds of different templates is not ideal, and it may be better to use a #switch statement or a /data module loaded by Module:Data, this TfD appears to be an attempt to introduce unnecessary code bloat. * Pppery * it has begun... 20:12, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
    Where database is hundreds of different templates and I suppose that's fine until you need that one language that isn't among the hundreds. it also populated a tracking category Not true. Yes, the particular version that you linked does populate Category:Pages using ISO 639 name redirect templates which category was added to the template in response to this TfD. While I haven't checked every iteration in the template's history, I have found no other versions that categorized anything.
    Yes, Module:ISO 639 name parses the given code with several Lua patterns and compares it to five different pages. In those five pages are listed all of the ISO 639-1, -2, -3, and -5 language codes. The fifth page is used to invert comma-separated names (primarily those from 639-2) and to use en.wiki-preferred language names (Piedmontese instead of 639-preferred Piemontese). The Lua patterns are used to extract ISO 639 language codes from IETF language tags. IETF language tags are not ISO 639 language codes so are invalid input to a template for ISO 639 codes. {{lang}} supports this same code-to-name functionality for IETF language tags.
    For completeness, there is a sixth data table: Module:Language/data/ISO 639 name to code. With that table, we can fetch the ISO 639 code that matches a name. For example, from ISO 639-5:
    {{#invoke:ISO 639 name|iso_639_name_to_code|Trans-New Guinea languages|5}} → ngf
    {{ISO 639 name}} did use a #switch statement until this edit. It seems to me that using a /data module loaded by Module:Data is less desirable than using the Module:ISO 639 name data tables because such a data table must be curated by hand.
    Trappist the monk (talk) 14:26, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
    It should also be noted that a switch or the current setup of thousand of templates can cause these templates to produce different values than {{In lang}} or working with a different data than {{Transl}} and {{Lang}}. I really can't see how this setup would be better than a single location where the same ISO codes can be found for all language-related templates. --Gonnym (talk) 14:36, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Delete all as useless when {{ISO 639 name}} exists. This case is very similar to the one with the link language wrappers, and can and should go a similar way to it. (As for the issues with ISO 639 name itself, those are fixable (if necessary), and don't justify keeping all the templates nominated here.) Glades12 (talk) 05:38, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Delete all I'm convinced by the argument presented by Trappist the monk. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 13:25, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Delete all. I am also persuaded by Ttm. --Izno (talk) 20:38, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
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:Extracorporeal assistance, performance, and therapyEdit

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. Izno (talk) 20:30, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

This template should be deleted because the contents do not have enough in common to justify being linked. This is despite the extremely broad title which I must say probably makes little sense to the vast majority of readers. I think it means 'Medical treatments that don't involve intravenous access' by the title but then it actually does (plasmapheresis) and contains a variety of very medical (cf also plasmapheresis) and more quixotic treatments (cf hyperthermia therapy).

I think it's better if this confusing template is just deleted. It is not a useful navigational aid and is unlikely to become one. Tom (LT) (talk) 08:28, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

  • Delete. The topic looks like it is based on an ICD-10 category. But otherwise, I agree the contents are not closely related. --Bsherr (talk) 00:37, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
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:Planet Pit track listingEdit

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. Primefac (talk) 01:22, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Redundant to the navigation provided for all the songs on this album in the {{Pitbull songs}} navigational box. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 00:53, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

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).