Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 October 19

< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion‎ | Log
< October 18 October 20 >

October 19 edit

Template:Apeejay Schools edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:52, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is an unused template now. All of the schools listed are long-standing red links or are articles that were recently deleted through PRODS. Liz Read! Talk! 21:43, 19 October 2021 (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:Dylan Prestholt edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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 Materialscientist (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 10:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:TFD#REASONS number 3: "The template is not used, either directly or by template substitution (the latter cannot be concluded from the absence of backlinks), and has no likelihood of being used." This appears to be about a non-notable high school athlete since the new user who created this has also edited Newman Catholic High School (Iowa), and there is an athlete at that school by the name of Dylan Prestholt. See https://ia.varsitybound.com/sports/boystrack/2019-20/newman/varsity/Roster Meters (talk) 19:11, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    • Technically, it is actually used in one place, the user's sandbox. It's not used anywhere in mainspace and is not likely to ever be used in a constructive manner. Meters (talk) 19:17, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy subst and delete per WP:G6 (clearly created in wrong namespace). Elli (talk | contribs) 22:09, 19 October 2021 (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:Citi Field dimensions edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:52, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and not needed. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 19:08, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - would only be used on one article anyway, and I am not even sure how given the format. MSG17 (talk) 13:43, 20 October 2021 (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:Boujdour Province edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:52, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, two redirects, and one red link. Not enough for a navbox. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 19:04, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure a province would have a lot of potential articles to be added.† Encyclopædius 21:05, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It would but there isn't a lot of information currently and the navbox doesn't help given the current limitations. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:44, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I will translate some of the corresponding articles from the French wiki. There is plenty to be said about the province and the navbox will encourage browsing. Aymatth2 (talk) 11:52, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The template is now used in six articles. Coverage of this region is still atrocious, given its size and history. Aymatth2 (talk) 13:50, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We can close this discussion as the template has been cleaned up and is being used across six articles. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 14:40, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Per the diligence of Aymatth2, it does indeed have very poor coverage and should be expanded, not deleted.† Encyclopædius 17:15, 21 October 2021 (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:Windows NT edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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) 20:02, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If there is one thing that Wikipedia has too many, it is navboxes for Windows articles. To wit, {{Windows 7}}, {{Windows 8}}, {{Windows 10}}, {{Windows 10 version history}}, {{Windows 11}}, {{Windows 11 version history}}, {{Windows Mobile}}, {{Windows Phone}}, {{Windows tablets}}, {{Windows Vista}}, {{Windows XP}}, and of course {{Microsoft Windows family}}.

So, someone thought it is good idea to make this template too! It's bulky, ugly, and redundant; plus, it resorts to the poseur's trick of coupling the dead-and-buried "NT" designation to modern versions of Windows. Links in this template randomly go anywhere. In one case, "NT" goes to Windows Vista. In another, "NT" goes to Windows 7. And so on. "10.0.x" once goes to Windows Server 2016 and another time to Windows Server. To prevent its deletion, the creator has resorted to a dishonest trick: He added {{oldtfdfull}} to the template's talk page to dupe us into thinking that this template survived a deletion on 2021 June 28. Waysidesc (talk) 11:05, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Edit: I've struck out parts of the original proposal that are no longer relevant. Now, the template is just redundant all the above. I still don't think plastering articles with linkboxes is good contribution. Waysidesc (talk) 18:29, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Redundant to a group in {{Microsoft Windows family}}. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 15:15, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Unnecessary and poorly thought out navigation box full of Easter eggs. Existing templates already provide almost all the functionality this is attempting to achieve. wjematherplease leave a message... 09:35, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Actually, I am not finished with the template, it's still in construction. I will fix this template as soon as possible, it in my user page. Next I will add the component pages from Windows NT. And to be honest, what you guys are saying about me is not true.VictorRocks (talk) 18:20, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Unsure. Had the links in the template been more focused on features common to most or all iterations of Windows NT, I might have said Keep. But as it stands, it is just a list of Windows NT family operating systems. That is indeed redundant to {{Microsoft Windows family}} and should be deleted. Furthermore, this template seems more like it ought to be a list article than a sidebar template. — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  19:41, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 18:04, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete A sidebar is not necessary. We already have a vast number of navboxes for the same navigational purpose. What could one more do that hasn't been dealt with already? — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiCleanerMan (talk • contribs) 18:43, 2021 October 19 (UTC)
  • delete, duplicates navigation found in {{Microsoft Windows family}}. Frietjes (talk) 14:03, 27 October 2021 (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:2014 Oakland mayoral election vote count by round edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:59, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This should be substituted on the 2014 Oakland mayoral election article and removed from Libby Schaff's article. Election results are not a good use of template space. This is information that belongs on an article as part of the article. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 00:38, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep as a valid template used on multiple articles. I don't see a clear reason why this shouldn't be on Libby Schaaf's article, and it's not really justified to remove templates from articles just so they become single-use and can be subst- and deleted. There is no scarcity of template space. Elli (talk | contribs) 13:26, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Substitute and delete. This level of detail is excessive for anywhere but the election article itself; Schaff's biography should only contain a simple prose summary linked to the election, making this a single use template. wjematherplease leave a message... 09:45, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 18:04, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Remove from Libby's article and subst to the election one. I agree with Wjemather about the excessive amount of detail for her article and also agree that a prose summary is what belongs there instead. Gonnym (talk) 20:58, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Substitute and delete per Wjemather. MSG17 (talk) 13:31, 20 October 2021 (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:Alhatorah edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:53, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Used in the creator's sandbox and on one article. No good reason to maintain a custom template and module for so few uses. * Pppery * it has begun... 03:35, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - This template links to a scholarly version of many Jewish commentaries to the Bible (and English translations of some of the commentaries). Similar to Template:Bibleverse, it provides a simple and authoritative link to use instead of a plaintext reference. Thus, it is appropriate to be used in hundreds or thousands of references currently found in various Wikipedia:WikiProject Judaism articles. So far I have only used it in one place, and it is not well known so nobody else has used it, but it has the potential to be used much more widely. If I find time someday, I may do so myself. Ar2332 (talk) 13:03, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I just added the template in two more places, and in doing so, I discovered and fixed a copyright violation (the translation linked to by the template was being used without attribution as Wikipedia text). I think that demonstrates the template's value. Ar2332 (talk) 06:34, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:00, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I'm conflicted here. I can see the potential in such a template, however after 4 months it is only used in two pages. Such low usage does not need a template and usages can be done manually. Gonnym (talk) 09:05, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
How much usage do you think is necessary for it to remain? I have added it in some more places, now it is used in about 10 pages and about 20 times overall. In the course of making these edits I discovered and removed more plagiarism... Ar2332 (talk) 11:24, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
For me that's at least ok for now for a keep as the template is still less than a year old. Good job adding it to more articles. Gonnym (talk) 10:49, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 18:03, 19 October 2021 (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:Lunisolar calendar edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:55, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. See below for subpage information. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:54, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note previous nomination. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:54, 19 October 2021 (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:Lunisolar calendar/number/1 edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:55, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused templates. Brought over from ko.WP in 2017; the main template is transcluded there about 80 times, but most or all of the /number subtemplates do not appear to be transcluded there either. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:47, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete All unused. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 18:46, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question: How are these Lunisolar templates supposed to work? What are they supposed to do? — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  02:39, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • See the documentation page's Example section at {{Lunisolar calendar}}. It's intended to be some sort of calendar conversion template. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:11, 21 October 2021 (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:Greenlandic general election, 2018 edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. ✗plicit 23:55, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

All unused and not needed as the election articles have the information presented. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 16:06, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete all per nom. Here we go again with unused election templates. — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  02:40, 20 October 2021 (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:Relations of China edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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:Foreign relations of China. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:10, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused sidebar that's really a fork of the navbox of the foreign relations of China template. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:57, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@WikiCleanerMan: can you point to the alternative navbox ? Yug (talk) 🐲 16:10, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Foreign relations of China --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 16:11, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - As creator of that template I support its deletion. {{Foreign relations of China}} is a superior version. @WikiCleanerMan: Thanks ;) Yug (talk) 🐲 16:12, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. I incorporated some of the links from this template into the other one, so no information should be lost when it is deleted. MSG17 (talk) 13:39, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just a note that this temlate is not a fork of the navbox as it was created in early 2007, more than a year before the other one. Still, it's redundant to it, and sidebars should generally be avoided, so I agree that it's not needed. – Uanfala (talk) 22:32, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - since it's unused, could we just make this redirect to {{Foreign relations of China}}? MSG17 (talk) 13:50, 21 October 2021 (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:Borders of Ethiopia edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request undeletion of these templates. Primefac (talk) 09:21, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

All unused with only one link. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:49, 19 October 2021 (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:Dominican Republic 2016 general elections series edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. ✗plicit 23:54, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and only links are to political parties in the country. Nothing else exists about the 2016 elections other than the main article. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:38, 19 October 2021 (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:Y: The Last Man edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:08, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Majority red links with one redirect within the sections. The TV series was canceled during its first season, thus a list of episodes and characters relating to the series won't be created as there isn't enough information. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:29, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Among the blue links, one is a redirect and one is to the historic spy, not the character of the show. Too few links of navigation to justify a template. ✗plicit 23:59, 26 October 2021 (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/2021_October_19&oldid=1055517551"