Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2013 October 12

< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion‎ | Log
< October 11 October 13 >

October 12

edit

Template:Infobox Complexity Class

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 Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:58, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Complexity Class (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

2 transclusions. It has been removed from all complexity classes but two. I am not sure we need this. Magioladitis (talk) 22:55, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No idea. In fact I wanted to write "if it was ever used... it has been now removed". I don't know if it was ever used. -- Magioladitis (talk) 10:47, 30 September 2013 (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) 21:58, 12 October 2013 (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 future comics

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The result of the discussion was delete, I replaced it in Vampire Hunter D: American Wasteland, and added a unpublished=y parameter to that transclusion if someone wants to merge it with Template:Infobox comic book title. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:08, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox future comics (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Single use. I think Template:Infobox comic can do the job. Magioladitis (talk) 13:54, 29 September 2013 (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) 21:54, 12 October 2013 (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.

All language icon child 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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was keep, there is a clear consensus at this point.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:50, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Language icon templates (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Aa icon (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
etc.

There's absolutely no need for all of these, can be handled centrally by {{language icon}}, just like with {{lang}}. — Lfdder (talk) 19:56, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete this system is confusing and should be simplified. LT90001 (talk) 22:53, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
delete the two-letter redirects, but keep the icons for now. also, probably should be procedurally relisted considering the lack of tagging or broader notification. Frietjes (talk) 15:04, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not gonna go about tagging 300-odd templates. I left a note at {{language icon}}. – Lfdder (talk) 08:29, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, unnecessary clutter, risk of forking and maintenance burden. I would also call for the official deprecation of {{language icon}}, especially considering that there exist valid alternatives (e.g. the language parameter of the various {{cite web}}, {{cite news}} etc). 219.73.122.176 (talk) 03:07, 12 October 2013 (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) 18:10, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Not really, just not this change which is pretty self-evident. Comments like the above will not help your cause one bit, and everyone would be happier not to be patronized. Reasoned, non-ad persona arguments only please.Brigade Piron (talk) 08:08, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that some moderation would help, but what Lfdder meant was "WP:ILIKEIT". Reasoned arguments, you say? Sorely lacking in the "keep" camp, given their inability to read how their concerns are either invalid or already addressed. 219.78.115.45 (talk) 01:38, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral per recent posts. --Vanquisher.UA(talk) 18:11, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and consolidate into a single template that can be easily modified, use all ISO codes, and do any tracking and checking en masse. Tracking and categories is not a technical issue. Maintenance burden however is an editorial issue. Typing should not be an issue, it's a little far fetched--in my opinion--to say that a few more characters outweight the clarity and benefits of a central template. There doesn't have to be a burning problem for us to improve something and reduce clutter. Not to mention, to most people rarely used things like "Aa icon" don't mean anything until they realize "Aa" is a language code. I surely think that "Language icon|Aa", even "langicon|Aa", even "licon|Aa" once seen once is way more readable. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 21:00, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • "consolidate into a single template that can be easily modified, use all ISO codes, and do any tracking and checking en masse" All of which {{language icon}} already can do! — Lfdder (talk) 01:44, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge please dont delete highly used templates. merge them into better templates; subst all old transclusions if you must. When you look at an old revision of an article, it is very annoying to see 'red' templates, especially cryptic ones like 'icon Aa' - in order to understand what it was, the reader needs to click on the red template link, go to the deletion log, which hopefully links to this TfD, and then the reader needs to understand this template discussion in order to guess what it used to do and look like. John Vandenberg (chat) 22:54, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep the category and xyz icon named templates. Whether we convert these into wrapper templates or not, we should not be deleting them, per comments about using WhatLinksHere, and categorization of the redirects is a good idea, so keeping the category around would allow us to see what redirects exist. As they are highly used and widely known, deleting them will cause alot of disruptions and people will go back to adding "(X)" in text, instead of using the alternate template, as they will not know it exists. ; Delete all the templates/redirects that are not xyz icon as those are highly inconsistent, many other templates for languages are not language icons but use that naming, xyz. We should try for consistency in their naming to make sure they all function alike, instead of mistakenly choosing some other language template that isn't a language icon template. As for converting the templates to become wrappers neutral -- 76.65.131.217 (talk) 01:10, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • I've already addressed WhatLinksHere above. "categorization of the redirects is a good idea, so keeping the category around would allow us to see what redirects exist" This isn't CfD. We're not deleting the category while it's still got templates in it. {{xyz icon}} redirects should also be deleted; they're separate codes and should be treated separately -- even though they resolve to the same name. "As they are highly used and widely known, deleting them will cause alot of disruptions and people will go back to adding "(X)" in text, instead of using the alternate template, as they will not know it exists." People are somehow gonna overlook thousands of edits to substitute {{language icon}} in? "language icon" is also much more intuitive than "xyz icon". "As for converting the templates to become wrappers neutral" They are wrappers.
Your continual uninformed !votes on TfD are borderline disruptive. — Lfdder (talk) 01:41, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This may sound funny but can anyone please ping me once the result of this deletion request is over? I use this template a lot. Might have to go through each of my articles and switch it up. Thanks. Proudbolsahye (talk) 05:05, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Not necessary. See Lfdder's comment above: "Transclusions will be replaced with {{language icon|fr}}" 219.79.91.36 (talk) 06:26, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
maybe because you cant? — Lfdder (talk) 16:01, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I don't like the idea of typing {{language icon|ko}} instead of {{ko}} to produce (Korean) . This "I don't like" has a name, it's called ergonomy. Replacing a 6 key-strokes sequence by a 20 key-strokes sequence seems to be a strange way to provide a short cut for the 14 key strokes sequence '''(Korean)'''. Obviously, all of that could be solved by using [quotation] a proper fucking text editor [end quotation]. May be the nominator should join the Visual Editor team: his proficiency in discussing with the random user, as proven here, would be useful there. Pldx1 (talk) 16:13, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep – per John Vandenberg. —Bloom6132 (talk) 00:21, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, per Pldx1's comments on ergonomy. --Omnipaedista (talk) 03:51, 17 October 2013 (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:Airline codes/A

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 Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:56, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Airline codes/A (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This is part of a series that was replaced a while ago with articles like Airline codes-A. Do all 27 of these (A-Z and 0-9) need separate nominations or can they all be deleted once this one goes? Vegaswikian (talk) 18:07, 12 October 2013 (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:Statistical regions of Serbia

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, now that it has been revised. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:54, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Statistical regions of Serbia (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This template is a hoax. It describes NUTS regions of Serbia, but in reality:

  • Serbia is not shown on the latest NUTS map here
  • Serbia is not mentioned in the 2010 NUTS catalogue here
  • Serbia is not mentioned in the latest update to NUTS, here.
  • This list of non-EU countries using NUTS does not mention Serbia.

Templates should not present fiction as fact. bobrayner (talk) 13:32, 12 October 2013 (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/2013_October_12&oldid=1140217434"