Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2016 August 11

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
<
Log
< August 10 August 12 >

August 11

Template:Hoysala Architecture

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 and redirect to preserve attribution. ~ Rob13Talk 05:02, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

these image galleries were being used in only one article (Architecture of Karnataka), so I merged them with the article. Frietjes (talk) 23:52, 11 August 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:ArchINFORM

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 on 2016 August 23. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:23, 23 August 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:CNKI

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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:24, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Site-specific DOI template; redundant to {{doi}}. Only two translcsuions. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:58, 11 August 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:Metavisualizer

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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:25, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Non-functioning. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:55, 11 August 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:ColumnChart

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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:24, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Single-use; wraps a link to the non-functioning {{metavisualizer}}. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:50, 11 August 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:DoD detainees ARB

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 Keep

(non-admin closure) Primefac (talk) 19:53, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply
]

Pointless URL template, with no text content. 179 transclusions.

Typical use: [{{DoD detainees ARB|ARB_Transcript_Set_3_769-943_FINAL.pdf}} Summarized transcript (.pdf)]

Should be Subst:, then deleted.

(TfD template would break instances like that above, and so has been "noincluded".) Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:06, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • I've add a vote now to keep, due to nominator returning to editing without explaining what has changed since the last TfD making this template less useful than at that time. Nothing has apparently changed. Thus, no apparent rationale for deletion. Nearly 200 transclusions too. I'm open to further discussion on why this needs to be deleted, but at this time no valid reason has been submitted. --Hammersoft (talk) 14:18, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep url has already changed once. No objection to improving implementation, as suggested in previous discussion, though there may be some issues there. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 07:43, 12 August 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:CfDM

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 ~ Rob13Talk 05:00, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and unusable deletion discussion templates. These templates seem to be designed for use in some hypothetical world where CfD used the AfD system (of one subpage per category discussed). Such a system is not in use. It appears that such a system was briefly proposed and accepted but quickly overturned in 2008. Pppery (talk) 18:35, 11 August 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:Fb team ground Zamalek SC

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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 03:03, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

unused. Frietjes (talk) 14:35, 11 August 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:Largest cities of Illinois

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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:12, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

single use, should be merged with the article. Frietjes (talk) 14:12, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Just pointing out that you can't merge then delete something per
    WP:MAD Pppery (talk) 02:27, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply
    ]
A cut down version could be beneficial in the city articles demographics section. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 07:39, 12 August 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:Largest cities of Arkansas

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 soft delete.

WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13Talk 04:50, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply
]

unused. Frietjes (talk) 14:06, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Kansas version, because included in Template:Kansas. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 17:30, 11 August 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:The Surreal Life

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) Primefac (talk) 20:10, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply
]

We don't have cast and crew in navboxes per longstanding consensus. A navbox just detailing performers in a reality TV show is just an extension of the same principle. Navboxes like this just encourage

talk) 08:18, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply
]

If you take out the participants all you are left with is a couple of links, which isn't enough to warrant a navbox. --
talk) 07:52, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply
]
Ah see your point on that one then delete as per nom ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 12:47, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Listify then delete. I'm in favour of deletion for the reasons given above, but as there is no list I think one should be made, possibly in the existing article (perhaps a list for each season). I believe an "improved" template would only include links to The Surreal Life and The Surreal Life: Fame Games, so would be pointless. anemoneprojectors 11:22, 20 August 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:Celebrity Big Brother

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. The consensus here favors deletion, which happens to also match the long-running overall community consensus that is repeatedly found at TfD. While the arguments used in establishing the longstanding consensus here, they typically include

WP:TEMPLATECREEP. ~ Rob13Talk 04:41, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply
]

We don't have cast and crew in navboxes per longstanding consensus. A navbox just detailing performers in a reality TV show is just an extension of the same principle. Navboxes like this just encourage

talk) 08:09, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply
]

This isn't an infobox, it's a navbox. And yes, {{
talk) 07:58, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply
]
There's a longstanding consensus not to include cast or crew in navboxes. That is basically all this is... --
talk) 07:58, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply
]
They're not cast or crew - they're real people rather than employees or fictional characters. Jim Michael (talk) 09:59, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
A celebrity appearance in a television show counts as the same thing. --
talk) 11:35, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply
]
Who (other than you) says that they count as the same thing? Their stay in the BB House isn't acting or guest-appearing. They're not presenting or performing. They're not working with or for the show, the channel or the company that produces the show. BB isn't scripted - it's not even
structured reality. They're contestants who live in the BB House for the duration of their stay. Jim Michael (talk) 15:46, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply
]
It isn't
talk) 07:58, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply
]
It's not more useful than
List of Celebrity Big Brother housemates, which is the place to go to find a list of Celebrity Big Brother housemates, rather than a navbox. I'm sure the other templates will be discussed in due course. anemoneprojectors 20:58, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply
]
It doesn't only contain a list of celebs - it also contains links to each series. Jim Michael (talk) 09:59, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
These are already covered at {{
talk) 11:36, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply
]
They're not cast or crew; they're contestants in a reality show. Jim Michael (talk) 15:29, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I'm in favor of deleting all these templates because there is a list page containing all the same information. Each of the series main articles also has a sidebar linking each contestant (celebrity & civilian) to either their own Wikipedia article or links them to the season/series they participated in (see
    WP:TEMPLATECREEP. For shows like {{The Surreal Life}} that template can be restructured similar to one of the existing Big Brother series templates instead of a complete delete. This same discussion can also be applied to the templates of the Dancing with the Stars series as well. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 02:23, 18 August 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:California toll roads

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.

WP:REFUND into userspace applies for anyone seeking to create a bridge-only navbox, although there's no guarantee that won't swiftly find its way back to TfD. ~ Rob13Talk 04:54, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply
]

WP:NENAN. This is better suited by a category, especially as many of the express lanes don't and shouldn't have their own article, and the list will keep growing as HOT lanes become more popular in California. Rschen7754 03:31, 11 August 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
).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2016_August_11&oldid=1138533176"