Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2022 March 22

< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion‎ | Log
< March 21 March 23 >

March 22 edit

Template:Dutch Senate elections 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) 21:40, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Dutch Senate elections with Template:Dutch elections.
There is no reason for keeping them separate, in other countries indirect elections are usually in the same template. Julio974◆ (Talk-Contribs) 18:55, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose The reason for keeping them separate is the long-standing consensus that the main national election/referendum templates do not include indirect elections (which is the case of Dutch Senate elections). Number 57 21:05, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:48, 22 March 2022 (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:Sendai Girls Junior Championship 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 11:11, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just two articles linked. Not enough for a template. HHH Pedrigree (talk) 10:59, 22 March 2022 (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:Andre Agassi start boxes 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 substitute and delete. ✗plicit 11:09, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Single-use, so should be substituted and deleted per the recent discussion. The remaining 8 templates in Category:Tennis preceded and succeeded boxes that I haven't nominated here all have a second transclusion in their respective players' career achievements articles. Letcord (talk) 02:24, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Subst and delete per nom. Single use templates that can only evert be used in the biography article of that person, as they apply to no one else. -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 03:28, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete without subst. As I stated in the previous discussion, these duplicate the navbox award templates that each article also has, so we end up with a navbox with succession links and a table with succession links. Since the navbox offers the better layout, there is no need for these to duplicate the same information in the same exact section. Gonnym (talk) 05:43, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That's not quite true, though. Template:Martina Hingis start boxes for example has succession links for 12 separate achievements, but there are only navboxes for three of those on Martina Hingis, so deleting without substing would remove info from her article. While I agree something needs to be done about the redundancy of having both types of template for some of those awards, the correct outcome here is subst and delete. Letcord (talk) 07:04, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I do agree however that a general debate on the utility of these succession boxes is worth having. Some are completely trivial ("Fan Favorite Shot of the Year"?), and while aesthetically pleasing when maybe a couple are used, the skyscrapers that some of the top players have built up look ridiculous and reveal the inefficiency of this way of displaying the information. I would personally limit them to only those that are official awards in the sport an athlete competes, e.g. ITF World Champions and the No. 1 ranking for tennis, as who preceded/succeeded a player in a general athlete award like the Laureus World Sports Awards is completely irrelevant to the athlete. Letcord (talk) 07:38, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think they're worth having but if some people find them interesting then some of them definitely need to be trimmed down. Serena's box for example could be edited to look like this. ForzaUV (talk) 08:56, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That looks much better to me. I'd even go further and remove the newcomer/most improved/comeback/fan favorite doubles team awards, leaving just those achievements that Serena "took" from other players, like the No. 1 ranking and ITF World Champion status. Letcord (talk) 11:18, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Martina Hingis has 17 award navboxes under the "Martina Hingis in the Grand Slam tournaments" header and 11 under the "Martina Hingis achievements" header. If there are still some that are missing at this point then either they are not notable (such as Swiss Sports Personality of the Year) or are somehow notable but missing a navbox which should be created. Gonnym (talk) 10:01, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The "somehow notable but missing a navbox" category of achievements is why these templates can't be simply deleted here and now. What achievements do and don't deserve a navbox is a topic that would require a full discussion at the tennis project page. Also tennis isn't alone in having too many of these, Usain Bolt's list is just as long. Letcord (talk) 11:14, 22 March 2022 (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:Cuphead 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 10:48, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Template consists entirely of two unique pages in mainspace. All the other entries are sections of the originating work's article, or point to articles like the Cuphead character that no longer exist to reflect consensus among editors, as per the merge proposal here. It serves no purpose other then as an expression of enthusiasm by a fan. Haleth (talk) 03:59, 22 March 2022 (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:Aeromot aircraft 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 and redirect Template:Aeromot to Template:Aeromot aircraft Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:42, 30 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused duplicate of Template:Aeromot created by the same editor. Gonnym (talk) 06:15, 22 March 2022 (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:Petty family 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. ✗plicit 23:43, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NOTGENEALOGY Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 14:24, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • keep, no worse than the family-based navboxes. Frietjes (talk) 15:24, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Being used and not in violation of the Genealogy policy. Connects articles relevant to the subject at hand. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 18:42, 22 March 2022 (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:Charles 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 relisted on 2022 March 30. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:51, 30 March 2022 (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:Ctime:07 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. If needed, these can be restored upon request. ✗plicit 23:42, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused Chinese date and time templates. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 19:58, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Well, these don't seem to be used and the creator hasn't been around for years. I'd say relist for another week to be on the safe side and if still no usage found then delete. Gonnym (talk) 08:35, 29 March 2022 (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:CRT color 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) 21:38, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and superseded by Module:Adjacent stations/Chongqing Rail Transit. Gonnym (talk) 22:51, 22 March 2022 (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/2022_March_22&oldid=1080839722"