Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2018 April 16

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
<
Log
< April 15 April 17 >

April 16

Template:Cladex

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 2018 April 24. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:50, 24 April 2018 (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:3gen

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 2018 April 24. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:49, 24 April 2018 (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:Ancestors

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 redirect to Template:Ahnentafel. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:44, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging

Template:Ancestors with Template:Ahnentafel
.
Please see below.
talk) 22:24, 16 April 2018 (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:Pedigree

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 do not merge. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:34, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging

talk) 22:24, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply
]

  • Comment
    Chicbyaccident this is used on racehorse and probably dog and cat articles. You should advertise this proposed merger in the project groups that support those types of articles. One problem is that the conversion you are proposing will need to consider if the default heading will need to be changed depending on the type of article it is being included in. Eg a racehorse does not have a "family" it has a "pedigree". -- PBS (talk) 12:26, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • do not merge, without input from WikiProject Horse racing. I could make the Ahnentafel module support the alternative parameter input, but making it generate two different output formats (to match {{Pedigree}}) would be painful. Frietjes (talk) 12:41, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • do not merge - the pedigree template is a standard look and feel for horse racing, reflecting the Jockey Club's equineline.com and any number of other sources. There's a fair of breeding jargon (eg "top(bottom) of the pedigree" "inbred 4 x 3") that reflects the standard layout) Jlvsclrk (talk) 23:07, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do not merge as the two usages are distinct and the benefit of having one less template would be overwhelmed by the complexity of the merged result. Johnuniq (talk) 05:50, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • do not merge - per Frietjes, Jlvsclrk, and Johnuniq. Ealdgyth - Talk 12:08, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do not merge - Trying to merge the two formats would be a nightmare. Froggerlaura ribbit 23:10, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do not merge - Pedigree template works just fine for horses. I wouldn't change anything unless it could be shown to lead to an improvement. Tigerboy1966  07:03, 20 April 2018 (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:S-anc

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 2018 April 24. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:48, 24 April 2018 (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:Ahnentafel-tree

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 2018 April 24. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:49, 24 April 2018 (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:Abm

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 Procedural close. Moved to correct venue.

(non-admin closure) Galobtter (pingó mió) 20:12, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply
]

There is no correlation of the abbreviation "abm" with albums (see

album}} template exists. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 19:25, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply
]

WP:RFD is the correct place to nominate a template redirect Galobtter (pingó mió) 19:41, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply
]
  • Keep - Wrong venue. Additionally, "Abm" are three letters in the word "album". This TfD is extremely similar to the
    WP:R#D2
    does not apply as confusion is less likely to occur in other name spaces.
  1. "Unless a WikiProject [or anyone else, for that matter] has actually expressed interest in usurping [these redirects], I don't see [them] doing any harm." To date, no other use for {{
    WP:R#KEEP
    , "If someone says they find a redirect useful, they probably do".
  2. "Alleged confusion is not very plausible at all. So absent evidence of any harm there is no reason to delete."
  3. "There seems to be no evidence of confusion, just conjecture on the part of nominator, and no argument grounded in WP:R. Laziness is the exact purpose of redirects, to be perfectly honest, and the creator of a useful redirect that saves one or two characters should be commended. We don't delete redirects based merely on conjecture. Someone obviously found these useful given they were created."
  4. "One of the lowest things one can do is steal another mans tools. So you have no use for it. That it's being used is good enough, and there is zero reason to take away something that has no higher use. Such Nominators should be required to be the one to hand edit and remove any deleted tags."
  5. "
    tlx}} or whatever as useful shorthand
    for editors."

--Jax 0677 (talk) 20:06, 16 April 2018 (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
).

Module:DigitLocalizer

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; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 06:07, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, unnecessary as enwiki only uses one numeral system. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 17:29, 16 April 2018 (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
).

Module:Plain text

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 2018 April 27. Primefac (talk) 15:27, 27 April 2018 (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:San Diego Padres retired numbers

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 2018 April 28. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:57, 28 April 2018 (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:Hera Pheri series

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) 17:56, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not enough links to warrant a navbox. --woodensuperman 13:52, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete, the three articles are already well-connected. Frietjes (talk) 13:55, 24 April 2018 (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:Shiva Rajkumar

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) 02:29, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As an actor's filmography it fails

WP:FILMNAV --woodensuperman 13:50, 16 April 2018 (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:Infobox military award

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. Primefac (talk) 17:55, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging

talk) 13:17, 16 April 2018 (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:Nazi Germany occupations

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 2018 April 25. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:28, 25 April 2018 (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:German administrative territories

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 2018 April 25. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:28, 25 April 2018 (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:Administrative divisions of Nazi Germany

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 2018 April 25. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:28, 25 April 2018 (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:Super Dancer

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) 02:33, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing to navigate --woodensuperman 10:11, 16 April 2018 (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:Zara Nachke Dikha

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 2018 April 24. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:33, 24 April 2018 (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
).

Mass Fb team templates Japan (3)

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) 02:26, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Old style, no need, even some of are redlinks, should be subst or replaced by other template or style, such as using

talk) 05:59, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This discussion has been included in
talk) 06:37, 16 April 2018 (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:LGBT films list lead

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 no consensus. Primefac (talk) 15:26, 27 April 2018 (UTC) [reply]

Templates should not be used to store article text — JJMC89 (T·C) 05:04, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment (template creator): The relevant guideline is in Wikipedia:Template namespace § guidelines: Templates should not normally be used to store article text, as this makes it more difficult to edit the content (emphasis mine). All of the affected text was (and were previously) identical aside from the year, so the template doesn't change the article text, and standardizes the phrasing of the leads. I think this raises two questions:

  1. Should the lead text be basically identical across the List of LGBT-related films by year lists?
  2. And if basically identical text is deemed acceptable, is template use justified?

For question 1, I am uncertain, and have already raised this concern at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style § Boilerplate leads in lists. For question 2, if identical lead phrasing across articles is deemed acceptable, the templates are meant to standardize the text.

If this deletion discussion is in favor of removing the lead templates, do not remove them by undoing each of the edits, as a few of the edits fixed some erronious text. Instead, I can quickly remove them in a semi-automated way by changing each template to {{subst:LGBT films list lead}}.

talk | contribs) 05:11, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply
]

Extended discussion about LST and Pppery's subst vote
@
talk | contribs) 17:03, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply
]
Sorry, that is a jargony term. It means converting to use
labeled section transclusion. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 17:05, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply
]
@
talk | contribs) 17:34, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply
]
@
talk | contribs) 17:35, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply
]
Probably would technically work, but I'd oppose it anyway on the grounds of needless pollution of articles with template coding (yes, I am aware there's a fine line between this) {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 17:37, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Pppery: The thing is, I don't see this template as needless, because the leads are all identical, and standard phrasing is not necessarily negative for a set of lists because lists are defined based on fixed criteria; my opinion is if the leads are not customized, the template is a recognition of that. This is not the exclude future variation if it has a point (e.g. "the 60's were a time when LGBT related film releases began to increase in frequency, and were defined by X and Y.) Even with variation, this template could simply serve as a basis for standardizing the lists' inclusion criteria.
I am probably missing some of your concerns, and I invite you to express them if I am.
talk | contribs) 17:48, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply
]
I have two related but distinct beliefs here. 1: Templates should not be articles -- no text that can be stored in mainspace should be stored in templates 2: Articles should not be templates and should not contain markup like {{PAGENAME}} or {{#if}}. Given that the leads of the lists are not exactly identical (some numbers change), it is impossible to satisfy both of these goals without duplicating the text. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 20:27, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@
talk | contribs) 13:29, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply
]
Yes. Were the leads completely identical, I would !vote LST-ify. To the second question, that belief is an extrapolation from the relevant paragraph of
WP:TMPG quoted above. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 19:02, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply
]
@
talk | contribs) 21:13, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply
]
You're attempting to use a template to make one particular line of text conform across several article. I think you need to remember that this is a wiki. If people change the line on one particular list, then maybe its a reasonable change. You should not be putting barriers up. -- Netoholic @ 09:43, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Netoholic: I have no problem with the text being changed; this is a wiki after all. What I do see as problematic is non-specific changes to a particular list, i.e. unrelated to the list's year or decade, because these changes should be treated as proposed changes to the set of lists' criteria. Currently, the lead text reads "This is a list of lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender-related films released in year or decade. It contains theatrically released films that deal with important gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender characters or issues and may have same-sex romance or relationships as a plot device." If someone wanted to, for example, remove the word "important", it wouldn't make sense for that one individual article's criteria to be inconsistent with every other article.
Regarding the argument that "You should not be putting barriers up.", this "barrier"'s purpose is to ensure list criteria consistency across as set of related pages, as I elaborated in the previous paragraph. It does make it more difficult to edit the content, but no one has proposed individualized phrasing for the leads. Even a new editor could likely figure out the basics of template transclusion by trial-and-error. They may not be able to edit the template text, but they could probably figure out to delete and replace the template transclusion for an individualized phrasing, and that could be evaluated as appropriate. There are plenty of other things new editors cannot edit if they don't understand template transclusion like navboxes and sidebar formatting; unless you have an individualized format to recommend for the list leads, I am of the opinion they should be in templates for cross-article consistency.
talk | contribs) 16:35, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply
]
  • Keep I don't have a problem with templates being used for consistency of (small) amounts of article content in this manner; I don't feel that it contravenes the principle of the guidelines. I'm not convinced that the text needs to be identical and invariant between lists in this manner, but I don't have a problem with it being the case so long as further context could be added — for example (with ‡‡ added here to make the divide between the template text and the additional context more obvious for this discussion):

This is a list of lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender-related films released in year or decade. It contains theatrically released films that deal with important gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender characters or issues and may have same-sex romance or relationships as a plot device. ‡‡ Year or decade was notable in LGBT+ culture because event meant that cultural consequences and Some Film became the first film to depict something or other. At the same time, another event had seemingly unrelated consequence, which led to some other thing that impacted the LGBT+ community in some other more-direct manner.

In nearly 14 years of editing Wikipedias, I had never heard of
ping}} me in replies) 17:59, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply
]
@
talk | contribs) 18:14, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply
]
@
ping}} me in replies) 18:18, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply
]
@
talk | contribs) 01:42, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply
]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 00:37, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The likely alternative seems to be
WP:IAR
.
If the decision is to delete, we could merge the template into
Ping}} me if you need help with this. Daask (talk) 14:27, 20 April 2018 (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:Yahwistic titles of Jesus in Greek

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 2018 April 24. Primefac (talk) 17:46, 24 April 2018 (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/2018_April_16&oldid=1142562376"