Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2012 August 20

< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion | Log
< August 19 August 21 >

August 20

edit

Template:Campaignbox Siege of Homs

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) 03:52, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Campaignbox Siege of Homs (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only two links and transclusions. Seems unnecessary, can be handled by links within the two articles. Jenks24 (talk) 15:02, 20 August 2012 (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:R-phrase

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 issues are being resolved and the discussion has died, so I am closing this one. Feel free to continue the discussion elsewhere if there is still a problem. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 16:32, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(WikiProject Wikipedia Chemistry was informed)
(WikiProject Wikipedia Accessibility was informed)

All instances of these templates and those calling them (which depend on the title attribute to convey information via a "tooltip") should be replaced by (or emit) the text phrase in full (probably as an unbulletted list; a job for a bot). Failing that, they should use {{Abbrlink}}, or at least <abbr>, to improve accessibility and web standards compliance (WCAG contains guidance for using <abbr>; see section H28: Providing definitions for abbreviations by using the abbr and acronym elements). Styles should be external, not inline.

{{R10}}, for example, currenty renders as:

<a href="/wiki/R10:_Flammable" title="R10: Flammable" class="mw-redirect"><span class="abbr" style="color: blue; border-bottom: 1px dotted blue" title="R10: Flammable">R10</span></a>

thus: {{R10}}. The link is redundant.

Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:11, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to remove the TfD template from the templates. You do have the right to bring it here for discussion (and I don't have strong opinions either way), but transcluded TfD template makes a mess out of the thousands of chemboxes which use the R and S templates. In any case, you've already notified the people involved. --Rifleman 82 (talk) 14:28, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Please do so...quickly. This is destroying every chemical page I view. -- atropos235 ✄ (blah blah, my past) 18:04, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I actually did it right after I posted that note. Do you still experience problems? You might need to add action=purge to the page to make it get a new copy, instead of using the cached one. --Rifleman 82 (talk) 19:31, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Always a nice problem, and not the first time, indeed. Showing the sentences in full is getting way too big, having them all as separate links is inconvenient (if there are 10 S sentences or 10 R sentences, that are quite a number of clicks to see them all). Tooltips are handy, but have their own problems (screen readers don't read them, ugly coding). Some inbetween solution would be great. Maybe other coding, more up to date, and if possible more compliant, would be welcome. --Dirk Beetstra T C 15:50, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The template is OK as is: The list of R phrases (with full texts) is linked. The tooltips are only a surplus. Having all phrases texts in the article as normal text is surely not an option. BTW: See also de-WP article on ammonia for comparison (i.e. different design). --Leyo 16:21, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Additional comment Consider how this information is (or is not) available to our users on mobile devices, which do not employ the concept of "tooltips". Or on a printed page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:29, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yeah, people who use the 'full' version of Wikipedia have extra functionality. For mobile devices it is linked, as it is for screen readers. Printed versions do not have wikilinks either. If thát is a reason to remove the functionality ... --Dirk Beetstra T C 17:32, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • That printed versions do not have Wikilinks is a red herring, because we generally link meaningful text, not obscure reference numbers. We would say for example, "Nick Mason was born in Birmingham"`, not "Nick Mason was born in X23". The former is understandable without using the link; the latter not. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:52, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • And that in itself is a red herring - It is of course completely clear for someone who knows that Birmingham is a city in the United Kingdom / England .... For those who do not know it, would have to look it up ... --Dirk Beetstra T C 16:50, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
          • The Birmingham example is far from being a red herring; to clarify: We could say "Nick Mason was born in Birmingham", but not "Nick Mason was born in X23"
  • If I'm reading these comments correctly, the underlying templates have been reimplemented to use properly accessible markup. Can you verify if this fixes the main problem, Andy? If not, what additional issues are there? Mobile devices not having practical support for displaying abbrs is inconvenient, but I'd argue that this is the responsibility of vendors of mobile UAs unless there's evidence to the contrary. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 11:17, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • The immediate accessibility problem for desktop users is resolved (but not for {{GHS phrases format}}); we still need discussion as to which of "R10" or "R10: Flammable" (or indeed just "Flammable"), displayed on the page, would best inform our readers. I contend that the former is meaningful only to specialists, and does not help the lay reader. Further, the link is to nothing more than an expansion of the abbreviation, with no explanation or other encyclopedic content. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:52, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • From my examination of the transclusions, am I correct in that these are being used primarily for statistical dumps in infoboxes and other tables? If so, I'd argue that having the abbreviations be wikilinks to the fuller explanations is the only practical default. Once that's done for {{GHS phrases format}}, I think that's the issue mostly resolved. None of the alternatives (expansion or an embedded key, for instance) seem to offer practical benefit beyond allowing interested readers to simply click through to find out what the abbreviations stand for. For use in data tables, it shouldn't be difficult to allow for a flag that would expand the definition inline. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 12:28, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • @Pigsonthewing: Have you ever imagined how much text e.g. Sodium chromate (11 R-phrases) would have to contain? That is clearly no option. --Leyo 12:52, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • I don't think that's a valid assertion. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:57, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
          • Running out of arguments? BTW: There are also S-phrases, H-phrases and P-phrases. --Leyo 14:05, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
          • That is a perfectly valid assertion, 11 R-phrases fully written out would be a massive, unreadable amount of text (probably about 300-400 characters for the 11 R-phrases, the S-phrases are generally longer, so the 4 there would probably another 300-400). That is why we have wikilinks (and for those who have the full functionality of Wikipedia, also the tooltip) .. --Dirk Beetstra T C 16:50, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
            • It is a perfectly valid opinion, which is far from being the same thing. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:19, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
              • Hmm, it's an infobox however. In terms of 'clarity', you can say about the same about all the other information points that it contains. I mean, how many readers will truly understand what the European classifications listed mean, or the 'Standard enthalpy change of formation'. Most of it is 'meaningless data' if you were not at least in the top 5% of the education system in a developed country. That is not uncommon in our infoboxes. I doubt these should be overly used in 'article text' however. I doubt substituting them everywhere they are used is a good idea, but there sure are some editorial choices in terms of appropriate use (and that of the link target) —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 18:17, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
                • I think that is true for most of the page where these boxes appear on (I think that for most physicists Resveratrol is about as comprehensable as String theory for me). But that is why we have wikilinks, so that people can browse through and get what R-phrases as used in the context of a chemical compound mean. Although we can certainly have it as a goal, we simply can't write every page in such a way that everybody would understand it. That does not mean that we have remove all such things, or write everything out in full on every occasion that it is used (string theory is explained on String theory, not on every other page that mentions the topic). Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia. --Dirk Beetstra T C 19:40, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
                  • But, unlike your example, the link in this case does not explain what "Flammable" is, in an encyclopedic manner, it merely expands the obscure abbreviation "R10". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:58, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
                    • You might want to add wikilinks to List of R-phrases then. However, since Flammable exists as a redirect, a reader should be able to find the relevant article. BTW: Have you ever though about whom the R-phrases are addressing? And do you understand the relation between them and the EU classification (hazard symbol)? --Leyo 22:47, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
                    • Oh, is it a problem of the R and S phrases not properly wikilinked so you can't figure out what it is? Just as with your printed wikipage "Dirk Beetstra was born in Waskemeer" - there Waskemeer is also not wikilinked, and one has to figure out where it is. And for abbreviations, U.S.A. works perfectly, MDMA. I know what both are, I don't need to follow the wikilinks. There is nothing wrong with the use of abbreviations, as long as they wikilink through to their end result (which they do - but above you have even problems with them linking through, because in the printed version they do not link and no-one would know what they mean), and you have problems with the tooltip because it tells you what it means (but not to those printed). Could you please create a sandbox where you show for Sodium chromate how you think that the R and S-phrases should be in the infobox? Because I am sure that totally omitting these is not what you have in mind. --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:02, 23 August 2012 (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:NOI-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) 01:50, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:NOI-Class (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

No idea why this was created. Unused anyway. Magioladitis (talk) 08:47, 20 August 2012 (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:Sunni-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) 01:30, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Sunni-Class (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

No idea why this was created. Unused anyway. Magioladitis (talk) 08:46, 20 August 2012 (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:Santa Clara University Provosts

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) 01:30, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Santa Clara University Provosts (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This navbox has no articles in it. Unless there are at least a half dozen Provosts of SCU, this serves no purpose Mercurywoodrose (talk) 00:04, 20 August 2012 (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/2012_August_20&oldid=1078570630"