Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2015 February 19

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
<
Log
< February 18 February 20 >

February 19

Template:J. Tune Camp

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 as not (yet) needed Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 14:13, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:J. Tune Camp (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

The label/agency and artists are linked to each other already, and I don't think a navbox is necessary to link the artists together. Plus, it seems like overkill to have a navbox for only four links. Random86 (talk) 23:32, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Don't delete: Even if it is deleted now, in the future, when the company has more artists on the roster, it will have to be created again. So why not just keep it and see how it goes? --Deoma12(Talk) 15:48, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment: This is never a good argument, as Wikipedia does not
      predict the future. --Random86 (talk) 22:18, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply
      ]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 20:49, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Far too few links to justify a navbox. If there is need for one in the future, just remake it. Shinyang-i (talk) 08:50, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Exactly, too soon and these few links doesn't need a template. Noteswork (talk) 07:39, 1 March 2015 (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:Blakey 65moll.jpg K/T impact site

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 as uncontroversial request, may be recovered through

WP:REFUND if anyone still wants to recover it Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 09:33, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply
]

Template:Blakey 65moll.jpg K/T impact site (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

The image that went in here was deleted from Commons, so whatever this is supposed to be or do, it doesn't do it anymore. Herostratus (talk) 17:04, 19 February 2015 (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 sport event

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 Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 09:38, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages
) (130 transclusions)
talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages
) (59 transclusions)

Propose merging

Template:Infobox championship event
.
Very similar templates. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:02, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete
    template:Infobox championship event -- this template is built with HTML table entities ; replace all instances with template infobox sport event, which uses template:infobox -- 65.94.40.137 (talk) 03:37, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Comment - @Pigsonthewing: Andy, I am inclined to support your proposed merge because it appears that we have two small templates that are performing nearly the same set of functions which can be easily combined into a concise survivor with few, if any issues. That having been said, I have two requests before moving to "support/merge":
  1. Can you please notify the creator of the second template, User:Arsennik, that this TfD is pending; and
  2. Can you please provide a list of the identified parameters for proposed surviving template?
Thank you. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 22:49, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Dirtlawyer1: The first you can do yourself. The second is a matter for discussion here. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:19, 3 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Pigsonthewing: Fair enough. User:Alakzi has notified User:Arsenikk, as the creator of Infobox sport event, of this TfD [1]. As for my second question above, yes, I agree that it is a matter for discussion here. As the TfD nominator, and presumably as the template editor who would implement the proposed merge, could you describe/discuss the dozen or so parameters you foresee as those of the surviving template after the merge? Thanks. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 17:14, 3 February 2015 (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) 04:17, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • oppose, for now, would be better to merge
    Template:Infobox championship event, (see the example in both templates). Frietjes (talk) 16:07, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    • The curent proposal would not prevent that merger from taking place subsequenlty. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:00, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • Andy, it's been 6 days since I made the request above for a list of the parameters of the surviving template of this proposed merge. Heck, I'm inclined to support the merge, but I cannot vote for a "pig in a poke," if you'll pardon the unfortunate pun. Per Frietjes, perhaps this TfM discussion should involve three or more templates that are best considered at the same time, with a proposed list of parameters (and displayed field labels) so that all TfD participants may understand what we're going to get at the end of the day. Thanks. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 20:46, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 15:22, 19 February 2015 (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:Proof of Suspension

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 Speedy delete Per CSD:G2. Stifle (talk) 16:24, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Proof of Suspension (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

I didn't understood how this template works nor I understood how it is useful. Created by a new user. I think G2 also applies. Jim Carter 13:40, 19 February 2015 (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:Latest stable software release/X.Org Server

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 to delete; still may have a useful purpose. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 09:49, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Latest stable software release/X.Org Server (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

I declined speedy deletion as not qualifying under CSD T3. The following reasoning was given on the speedy deletion template: "Not needed. The version upgrade is now manually managed. See Talk:X.Org Server#"frequently updated" parameter in the Infobox software?". Safiel (talk) 17:46, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete unused and unneeded; having it part of the article as it is makes much more sense.--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 18:55, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep ( and restore to X.Org Server article ) delete/G6. Unused, housekeeping. Template:Latest preview software release/X.Org Server should also be deleted. PaleAqua (talk) 21:15, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Striking until Xephyr is taken care of. While it was planed to replace Xephyr in a future release, this has not happened yet and it has received updates in recent releases including in 1.17 for caps lock issues. Given that, I am reconsidering replacing this template as it is easier than keeping multiple articles in sync. PaleAqua (talk) 04:43, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • I'm now leaning keep and restore to the X.Org Server article. Template is easy-enough to change and probably the best way to make sure the Xephyr article stays up to date. PaleAqua (talk) 04:27, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Template is still transcluded at the article Xephyr. That needs to be appropriately updated before this template falls. Otherwise, though I failed to state as much when I transferred this to TfD, I support deletion. Safiel (talk) 22:30, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 11:41, 19 February 2015 (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 Satellite awards

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 for now. While there does appear to be a consensus in theory for merging, it appears to be a complex job. Until there is a clearer way to do this, I see the opposes on this ground as valid, hence no consensus. Mdann52 (talk) 12:06, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Satellite awards (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Infobox film awards (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Template:Infobox Satellite awards into Template:Infobox film awards.
Satellite awards are "film and television awards". Note that {{

Infobox TV awards}} redirects to {{Infobox film awards}}. The TV-award parameters in the 'Satellite' box would seem useful in a more generic template. Best resolved by making a wrapper then substitutions. The 'Satellite' box has only 19 transclusions. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 00:09, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply
]

I've made a start. There are some issues to consider, not least since one template is undocumented, the other incompletely so. Numbered for convenience of discussion, not order of importance:

  1. Is |best_directon= the same as |best_director= ?
  2. Can we find a better parameter name for |best_comedy/musical_film=?
  3. Do we need both of the Satellite Awards box's |best_film= and |best_drama_film=?

-- Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:13, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 10:53, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • How about adding a bunch of customisable fields to {{
    talk) 02:16, 8 March 2015 (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.
  • You people should have reach now on some consensus, i think this merging thing is taking too long, it is not looking good in an article where this template is being used because of the message above the template.
    talk
    ) 1:18, 18 March 2015 (UTC).

Template:Auto change

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 merge with {{Alarm clock}}. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 09:58, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Auto change (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused Bgwhite (talk) 17:45, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bgwhite, are you sure it is unused if it is always substituted? Frietjes (talk) 00:49, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Frietjes I'm an idiot and as always, you are right. Keep and close discussion. Bgwhite (talk) 01:06, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Bgwhite, I think we should still consider deleting it, given the age, the time last time the creator edited here. could we find substituted versions using a database search? Frietjes (talk) 01:09, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I can see this being useful, e.g. for automatic updates of info. -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 18:14, 14 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to {{Alarm clock}}. Auto change has a few extra features, and I think a redirect is helpful (because "auto change" is more intuitive than "alarm clock" IMO). -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 15:00, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 10:51, 19 February 2015 (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.

Railway icon templates

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 Keep. There is consensus that at least some of these templates may be useful when translating articles where they are used in the source article, and concern that merging will lead to a difficult to maintain central template Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 13:51, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:BJS icon (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:BLNMT-icon (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:CRT icon (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Dresden S-Bahn (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:GZM icon (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:HK-MTR icon (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:LACMTA icon (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Ligne STIB (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:MOSMETRO-bull (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Nuremberg S-Bahn (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:OASA icons (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:ÖPNV Berlin (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:ÖPNV Frankfurt (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:ÖPNV Innsbruck (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:ÖPNV München (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:ÖPNV Salzburg (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:S-Bahn-Basel (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:S-Bahn-Bern (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:S-Bahn-Hannover (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:S-Bahn-Karlsruhe (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:S-Bahn-Kassel (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:S-Bahn-NRW (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:S-Bahn-RheinNeckar (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:S-Bahn-Stuttgart (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:S-Bahn-Zürich (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:SHM icon (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:SPBMETRO bull (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Stadtbahn-S-U (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:S-train service small (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:SZM icon (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:TJM icon (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:WHM icon long (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:WMATA icon (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Rail-interchange (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging the templates listed above with Template:Rail-interchange.
This set of templates should be merged into the standard {{

rint
}}/{{R-I}} template (which has over 7,500 transclusions); there is no need for a separate template for each city with a rapid transit system.

In addition, {{NYCS time 2}}; {{Taiwan line}}; and {{China line}} could be merged but they would require some new named parameters.

ping|Jc86035}} to reply to me 04:13, 19 February 2015 (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/2015_February_19&oldid=1048266908"