Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2012 February 13

< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion | Log
< February 12 February 14 >

February 13

edit

Template:BAFTA Children's Awards

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, the template is completely empty, with nothing but the titlebar, and can be easily recreated, so no point in moving it to userspace. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 14:42, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:BAFTA Children's Awards (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

seems premature given the lack of navigation. perhaps write the articles first? Frietjes (talk) 22:33, 13 February 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:Infobox Townlands

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 no consensus, it appears there is no strong objection to merging this template with another, but it's not clear where it would be merged. Perhaps a good first step would be to refactor the template as a frontend, and then discuss the merits of having the template as a frontend vs. substituting it. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 15:03, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Townlands (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

recent creation, redundant to {{Infobox settlement}}, {{Infobox UK place}} or suchlike. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:47, 13 February 2012 (UTC)# Note: {{Infobox settlement}} is for "settlements… as well as other administrative districts, counties, provinces, etcetera - in fact, any subdivision below the level of a country"[reply]

  • delete after adding any necessary functionality to {{infobox UK place}} and replacing with {{infobox UK place}}. Frietjes (talk) 22:33, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • keep This template states that it is intended to cover townlands in the Republic of Ireland as well as Northern Ireland, so {{Infobox UK place}} would presumably not be appropriate for consistent coverage (townlands pre-date the partition of Ireland). Also, the two more general infoboxes are not easy for many editors to adapt to historical administrative areas such as townlands. By contrast, the continued existence of {{Infobox UK ward}} demonstrates that specialised infoboxes can be useful. The documentation for {{Infobox UK place}} is already daunting for many editors. This would be exacerbated by adding detailed information to cover this historic Irish administrative unit, making a combined template harder to understand: editors of Great Britain articles may be confused by seeing detailed template documentation that is not relevant outside the island of Ireland; and editors of Ireland articles would have to wade through lengthy GB template documentation that is not relevant to townlands. Though {{Infobox England and Wales civil parish}} is being merged into {{Infobox UK place}}, civil parishes are contemporary English administrative units related to modern local government hierarchy and covering a large part of the UK (i.e. much of England), whereas townlands occupy a more distinct niche, so the case for retention of the townlands template is much stronger. — Richardguk (talk) 00:12, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • You don't address the suitability of {{Infobox settlement}}. WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS applies. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:35, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Addressed by inference: "the two more general infoboxes are not easy for many editors to adapt to historical administrative areas such as townlands". More specifically:
      • the {{Infobox settlement}} documentation has many irrelevant parameters which would confuse some editors; and
      • it does not included obvious equivalents for several of the {{Infobox Townlands}} parameters: derivation, derive_lang, meaning, derivation2, derive_lang2, meaning2, civil_parish, council, ward, barony, county, country, grid_ref, settlements, hectares, acres – the non-bold parameters would be complicated to adapt for less confident editors, the bold ones are currently not possible using the settlement template.
      If you disagree, please illustrate how you would broadly replicate the information conveyed where the new template is used using one of the more general templates. Even if it were possible, there would still be a case for retaining the townlands template for ease of use, converting it to call one of the more general ones. But I don't see how conversion would even be possible.
      — Richardguk (talk) 13:32, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • The derivation parameters should be added to {{Infobox settlement}}; grid ref as a footnote to WGS84 coordinates; settlements listed under subdivision_type_n. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:16, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        1. It's true that derivation parameters might one day be added to {{Infobox settlement}}, but none of us can know at present whether there would be community consensus to add them to such a widely-transcluded and already-complicated template. So it is premature to delete {{Infobox Townlands}} while those parameters do not exist elsewhere.
        2. Not sure how a gridref footnote would fit with {{Infobox settlement}}, (i) visually within the infobox, (ii) for automated geolinking and (iii) for editor usability. (This is one of the many advantages of {{Infobox UK place}} for editors using the Irish or GB national grid: the code is adapted to deal with the local coordinate system. But I have already set out why I think even the UK template has too little geographical and functionality overlap with NI and Irish Republic townlands.)
        3. subdivision_type_# / subdivision_name_# are very unintuitive parameter pairs to cover multiple settlements (which are places in, rather than divisions of, a townland). Also, the need to specify the subdivision label manually (instead of "Settlements" etc being coded into the infobox) demonstrates the difficulty in maintaining a standard appearance for the row headings.
        Looking again at the settlement template documentation, I am even more concerned that most editors would have no idea how to list relevant townland information in a style which is consistent across townlands. I repeat the invitation for you to demonstrate an example of use, perhaps by picking an article where the townland template is currently in use and showing here how the settlement template would be used instead, so we can compare the wikitext and the appearance side by side.
        I have left a note on the template creator's talk page, as it would be useful to have the perspective of the user who has been most active in actually editing and using the townlands template. (Not sure whether the editor is aware of this discussion, but it is certainly unfortunate that, contrary to best practice, no note was left there at the time of nomination, and that the {{Tfd}} code on the template was missing the pagename parameter until I fixed it just now, which meant that article notes implied that the article itself was a TFD instead of the townlands template.)
        — Richardguk (talk) 02:24, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • Its not uncommon for a TfD to close with a decision to change a related template; the template under discussion is not deleted until that has been done (this could apply to non-WGS84 gird refs, too). Editors do not seem to have a problem using the parameters of {{Infobox settlement}}, but if that's really an issue, it would be possible to make this template a wrapper for that one. Either that or deletion reduces the maintenance overhead, and ensures that any stylistic or semantic changes are cascaded immediately. I will set up a comparison in a sandbox, when I have a minute. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:21, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • keep A townland is not necessary British (you have also Irish townlands) and not necessary a clear settlement (most townlands I know here in County Clare have only scattered farms). So the use of {{infobox UK place}} and {{Infobox settlement}} fails. Night of the Big Wind talk 03:17, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep per above, but with reservations about having too many infoboxes on the same page. It might be a better idea to rename and reserve this template for townlands in the Republic of Ireland, and only give townlands in the UK the {{Infobox UK place}} template. - Jorgath (talk) 16:02, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Infobox spans the whole island of Ireland not just the part of the United Kingdom that does. Infobox also displays very specific information about the townland that {{Infobox UK place}} and {{Infobox settlement}} do not. It is also programmed so that it will display the appropriate country map.
These articles focus on a townland not a settlement - for example Tobermore as oppossed to Tobermore (townland). There are many townland articles on Wikipedia spanning the whole island that this infobox i hope at some stage will encompass all of - so it will not be a minor infobox of only a handful of articles and will not be specifically about those within the UK.
Whilst all settlements are in one or more townlands, the majority of townlands do not have a settlement. A townland is a territorial sub-division that pre-dates most settlements in Ireland and is unique to Ireland and indeed pre-date the United Kingdom and Republic of Ireland by centuries. There are over 60'000 of them on this island and understanding the proper concept of them has always eluded non-Irish people.
Check most of the articles that this template is attached to at the moment and only 3 or 4 out of over 20 have a settlement mentioned. All the parameters provided in the infobox serve to give the reader as much information as possible, a lot of interesting information in my opinion, and Pigsonthewings suggestion of what they think should be carried over ignore a large portion of that information.
I also don't feel Jorgath's point on having too many infoboxes on the same page will be a problem as this template is intended for townland articles not settlement articles. I do concede however that some settlement articles do make passing reference to the associated townland of same name in the lede - yet most of these make no other mention of the townland, which with a little information gathering can have their own article.
Also the coding of {{Infobox UK place}} and {{Infobox settlement}} is already too complicated as it is and took a long time to decypher properly for me to get this infobox to even work right. I think there is already too many parameters and the like in those infoboxes as it is - parameters that don't provide the information that i am providing here. Yet if it could be worked into them then great, however as i already said those templates are already overloaded as it is.
Finally two complaints about the filer of this deletion proposal:
  1. "recent creation, redundant to {{Infobox settlement}}, {{Infobox UK place}} or suchlike." - "or suchlike"? For the time-consuming hard work put into this Infobox i'd expect an arguement a little more complex than this which i feel is quite disrespectful to me.
  2. The fact they never notified me of this meaning that until Richardguk thankfully left me a notice i would not have had a chance to contest this. Mabuska (talk) 11:57, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Your point about Ireland vs. UK is negated by the suggestion to use "{{Infobox settlement}}… or suchlike". What "very specific information about the townland" cannot be displayed by the alternative templates? As noted above, {{Infobox settlement}} is for "settlements… as well as other administrative districts, counties, provinces, etcetera - in fact, any subdivision below the level of a country". Your claim that "understanding the proper concept of them has always eluded non-Irish people" is lacks substantiation, is offensive, and implies a stance contrary to Wikipedia policy. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:21, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
To answer your question i will assume you know more about the two templates you quote than i do: do they support all of the parameters in my template? Above you picked out a few that are obvious, but what about the rest? For example land size in hectares and acres? Deriviations? Barony? Electoral ward? Townland map parameter? Why are you so against this template for? It is hardly a casual and simplistic trivial creation with no thought that serves no purpose. In fact i enact WP:IGNORE for this case considering this isn't some trivial nonsense infobox. Mabuska (talk) 16:17, 20 February 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:Khulna Royal Bengals in 2012 Season

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) 04:09, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Khulna Royal Bengals in 2012 Season (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Single use template and fancruft. Wikipedia is not a newssite. Night of the Big Wind talk 00:30, 13 February 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_February_13&oldid=1078572261"