Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2015 August 3

< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion | Log
< August 2 August 4 >

August 3

edit

Template:Infobox wrestling PPV series

edit
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 do not merge. (nac) Alakzi (talk) 10:41, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Infobox wrestling PPV series with Template:Infobox WWE reality competition.
Very similar templates. 30 and 2 transclusions respectively. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:15, 3 August 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 cometary globule

edit
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 replace with and redirect to {{infobox nebula}}. — Earwig talk 03:50, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Single use, redundant to {{Infobox astro object}}. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:06, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment why don't you ever bring these up at the relevant wikiprojects? Your proposed replacement is the wrong template to use, there's a more relevant one. You'd have to know what a cometary globule is to select the correct infobox in the infobox heirarchy. -- 67.70.32.190 (talk) 07:14, 4 August 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 Internet in country

edit
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. — Earwig talk 03:38, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:58, 3 August 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:Cecily von Ziegesar

edit
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. (nac) Alakzi (talk) 10:18, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not enough links to provide useful navigation. Rob Sinden (talk) 13:24, 3 August 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:Prvoslav Vujčić

edit
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. — Earwig talk 03:47, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Umm. Nothing in the navbox is linked other than the author's name, so does not provide any useful navigation! -- Rob Sinden (talk) 13:22, 3 August 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 cricketer six columns

edit
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; deleted as G7 by Shirt58 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 12:10, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A fork of {{infobox cricketer}} which is functionally no different, since {{infobox cricketer/career}}, which they both use, only supports four data columns. If more columns are required, they should be added to the original cricketer infobox. Alakzi (talk) 11:02, 3 August 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 Cheerleading Squad

edit
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 2015 September 16. Opabinia regalis (talk) 05:52, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary wrapper of {{Infobox sports team}}. Used on only ten articles. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:53, 3 August 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).

US miniseries templates

edit
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, though creating list articles has some support independent of what to do with the navboxes. Opabinia regalis (talk) 05:54, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not a coherent topic for navboxes. They share little in common, other than that they happened to be produced for U.S. television in the same decade. -- Rob Sinden (talk) 10:43, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. This is what categories are for. Alakzi (talk) 11:04, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Alakzi. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:15, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - I tend to agree with the nominator's rationale -- that the American television miniseries are not closely related enough to serve as the basis for a navbox -- but I would also suggest that the creator, User:TAnthony, should be given the opportunity to convert this template to a "list of" article if he so chooses. That said, I don't see this navbox as a useful aid to navigation: too big and too loosely related. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 14:14, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Reply - I still stand by the usefulness of these (and similar) templates for navigation. In this case, the miniseries is a specific format basically limited to these three decades and of interest to some readers. I created these templates because I wanted to navigate the related articles in a systematic way, and thought others might want to as well, and Category:American television miniseries does not take years into account. That said, since creating them I have a better understanding of nav box guidelines and how these templates violate them. I really don't see the issue with a nav box mirroring a category considering that even WP:NAVBOX concedes that navigation is faster with a navbox vs a category, and as I noted, in this case the category is limited. I also don't agree in general that TV series have to be created by the same company to be "related", if the collection is finite and there is a definitive connection like, in this case, s specific and limited format, or in the case of {{LGBT web series}}, a specific topic likely to be searched out by readers. BUT, I get it, the rules are what they are at the moment and I'm just rambling. Thanks Dirtlawyer1, I have copied the templates and will consider a list.— TAnthonyTalk 15:01, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I tried navigating between some of the articles that are in the navbox using categories, and then doing the same using the nav boxes. It was much simpler to do the latter. I think that these boxes are consistent with the purpose of an encyclopedia and are easier to use than categories (and there is no risk that someone will come along and just remove the category as non-defining as has happened recently to some articles on my watchlist.)  Etamni | ✉  00:50, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Per my previous comments and those of Etamni above. The miniseries-by-year functionality is more useful than the existing categories, and the works in these templates are finite because the genre is specific to these decades.— TAnthonyTalk 02:23, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as redundant to categories and/or lists. --torri2(talk/contribs) 11:48, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. More appropriate as a category. Masonpatriot (talk) 12:38, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nominator, replace with categories if they don't exist already. Jc86035 (talk • contribs) Use {{re|Jc86035}} to reply to me 09:56, 10 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Links are not closely related enough, more appropriate, as has been stated, as category. -- Wikipedical (talk) 01:59, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep These are very interesting templates, they provide a look at a decade, at what interested audiences in that decade, and historically place events in chronological order (something categories don't do). Giving the reader more choices, and more interesting arrangements of those choices, is one function of an on-line encyclopedia. I urge the closer to take into consideration that categories and templates are two very different animals, animals who sometimes overlap on the trails. Randy Kryn 12:35, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • convert to a list article. informative? yes, but better to format as a list article rather than a navbox which cannot be viewed on mobile devices. why exclude this from the mobile audience? Frietjes (talk) 18:48, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Mobil phone use should not dictate template topics. I've already used these templates several times, and have urged their creator to continue thru the 2000s. A list would be good too, but that doesn't negate the quick availability of opening a template and seeing what it has to offer, which, in this case, is a nice historic overview of viewer habits (other than their insatiable appetite for reality programming) during each decade. Randy Kryn 20:48, 27 August 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).
Retrieved from "https://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2015_August_3&oldid=1136721994"