Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2017 November 16

< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion | Log
< November 15 November 17 >

November 16

edit

Template:WSJ topic

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 delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 16:27, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, and per the template's talk page it is apparently broken and unfixable. Alsee (talk) 17:04, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WAIT, I need to check something! Alsee (talk) 17:07, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It was still in use on six articles, but I have now removed those six broken usages. The only "use" now is in the SeeAlso sections of Template:New York Times topic/doc, Template:Guardian topic/doc, Template:Aljazeera topic/doc, Template:Bloomberg_topic/doc, and some talk or user pages. Alsee (talk) 17:30, 16 November 2017 (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:Int

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 Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 09:11, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

unused, duplicates {{Isnumeric}} with |boolean=true Frietjes (talk) 15:04, 16 November 2017 (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:Populated areas in Gampaha District of Sri Lanka

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 Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 09:11, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

unused duplicate of Template:Divisional Secretariats of Gampaha District Frietjes (talk) 13:54, 16 November 2017 (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:Pool B Men's Rugby sevens at the 2015 Pan American Games

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 Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 09:11, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

unused and empty Frietjes (talk) 13:53, 16 November 2017 (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:Politics of Oceania

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 Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 09:11, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

unused, articles are using {{Oceania in topic|Politics of}} instead Frietjes (talk) 13:47, 16 November 2017 (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:Politics of North America

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 Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 09:11, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

unused, articles are using {{Americas topic|Politics of}} instead Frietjes (talk) 13:44, 16 November 2017 (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:Politics of East Germany

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 2017 November 25. (non-admin closure) Nihlus 01:29, 25 November 2017 (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:Political Macedonia 3

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 Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 09:11, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

unused, should be added to Macedonia or deleted Frietjes (talk) 13:38, 16 November 2017 (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:Polish game shows

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 Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 09:11, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

unused, the list of Polish game shows with articles is covered by Category:Polish game shows. should be refactored to match the contents of the category and used or deleted. Frietjes (talk) 13:30, 16 November 2017 (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:KML teams 2011–12

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 Delete; deleted by Plastikspork (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 04:03, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

old and not needed Frietjes (talk) 13:15, 16 November 2017 (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:Tony Awards hosts

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 delete. (non-admin closure) Nihlus 01:20, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2017_November_6#Template:Academy_Awards_hosts ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:03, 16 November 2017 (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-line-loc-alt

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 delete after substitution as described. Primefac (talk) 22:23, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nonstandard, only 29 transclusions. Replace page content with the following text and substitute. Jc86035 (talk) 08:54, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply] 

{{S-note|wide=yes|text=Former services}}
{{Rail line|previous={{<includeonly>subst:</includeonly>#invoke:String|replace|{{{before}}}| station$||plain=false}}|route={{{line}}}|next={{<includeonly>subst:</includeonly>#invoke:String|replace|{{{after}}}| station$||plain=false}}}}
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nihlus 01:04, 16 November 2017 (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-line-loc

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 delete after substitution as described. Primefac (talk) 22:24, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nonstandard, only 144 transclusions. Replace page content with the following text and substitute (semi-automatic cleanup needed for articles using this more than once). Jc86035 (talk) 08:50, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply] 

{{S-note|wide=yes|text=Former services}}
{{Rail line|previous={{<includeonly>subst:</includeonly>#invoke:String|replace|{{{before}}}| station$||plain=false}}|route={{{line}}}|next={{<includeonly>subst:</includeonly>#invoke:String|replace|{{{after}}}| station$||plain=false}}}}
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nihlus 01:04, 16 November 2017 (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:Hamline Pipers football navbox

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 delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:45, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Only one season article exists, 1882 Hamline Pipers football season and it a perma-stub that is nominated for deletion. The template is used on only one other article, on Hamline Pipers football, and won't be used any more, since articles for single seasons of Piper football are very unlikely. - Mnnlaxer | talk | stalk 03:51, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about the poor argumentation, but the content that could be written about Hamline's five football conference championships would be better placed in the general athletic team article, or at most an article about Hamline Pipers football. The issue is whether stand alone season articles are needed or best to carry the content. If not, then a template is not needed either. Wikilinks in the general articles would be just fine to link to a few single season articles (again, if there is sufficient content). I would think that the athletic page or the team page should be the first place content should be added before a single season article is created. - Mnnlaxer | talk | stalk 00:02, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
This is not about a deadline. It is about whether this template for a small D3 school should exist. Templates like this one shouldn't exist. That there are some isn't an argument. Keep the program page for the future theoretical content. But there is no need for a navigational template that has nothing to navigate. If someone can find some coverage in RS and start working on improving the program article, then I might be persuaded to keep the template. Until then, delete. - Mnnlaxer | talk | stalk 01:43, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nihlus 00:30, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Still looking for a more solid consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nihlus 00:09, 16 November 2017 (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:IsNumber

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 delete. Template has been updated. May need to force updates since the main template is nested in multiple templates. (non-admin closure) Nihlus 01:26, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We already have a template with this function (Template:Ifnumber), and this template does'nt add anything but more complexity Christian75 (talk) 17:18, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Ifnumber has no problem with blank statements. Blank equals "not a number" and therefore, not a third situation. Christian75 (talk) 17:25, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
How to handle blank input is up to the calling teplate, I'd say. In logic, Null treatment is a vast topic, creating a third option. Not just "it's NaN". -DePiep (talk) 11:01, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That could be merged (if necessary) to {{ifnumber}}} Christian75 (talk) 13:13, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Your argument to keep it is that there is three different cases - Number (whennumber), NaN (whenfalse) and blank (whenblank) - but when I fixed your template so it only returned "whenfalse" when the input was non-empty and not a number, you reverted me with the reason it was a feature. Right now, if the input is a letter it will return "whenblank", but if that is undefined it will return whenblank. If the input to the template is blank, it will return whenblank. Why? Christian75 (talk) 14:16, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
We have established that this template has a three-way logic, and so is not the same as {{Ifnumber}} (as the OP incorrectly states). That's all there is to say. -DePiep (talk) 16:07, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
In matter of fact it doesn't because per default it prints the same value for what you call blank (empty paramter) and non-numbers, and you said (when I changed it) that thats was the design of your template. Thats exactly what {{ifnumber}} does. And the feature (the possiblity to print three different values) is unused and we do not keep templates just because it could be used. The only use of your teplate (AFAIK) is on one template, which could be substituted with {{ifnumber}} (but you reverted me). The documentation of your template suggest that your template can be used like ifnumber... If anybody wanted to check for empty parameters they could just use {{#if:{{{1|}}}||<text>}}. Christian75 (talk) 12:45, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It has a three-way function, by design and as testcases and documentation supportingly show. (What you did was change the code into breaking that, and then claim "its the same"?!). So your nom OP was and is incorrect (not a duplicate). BTW, meanwhile I claim an actual need for this in mainspace (see my comment below). -DePiep (talk) 09:40, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Frietjes. No it's not a fork. It has three-way logic: it discerns null-input (aka blank or whitespace only), then can give different output for that. (Like {{yesno}} has five-way logic.) -DePiep (talk) 06:50, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
you don't seem to know the definition of fork. again, there is no need for it in Template:Periodic table (32 columns, micro) or anywhere else that I have seen. as Christian75 pointed out above, you can wrap the {{ifnumber}} call to have separate logic for blank input if you really need this feature. Frietjes (talk) 15:48, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I add: one can not blanket claim that that is 'unnecessary'. What when I do need that option for example in maintenance? -DePiep (talk) 06:57, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I do know the definition of fork, but it is not a fork so your argument is idle. Because it has different functionality. Did you mean to say "duplication" (as in: same functionality), and do you still maintain that now that I have pointed out explicitly the three-way logic that is present?
Yes one can solve it differently (handcrafting code in every situation, as you propose). But why would we have to, per your statement? Why would you forbid a template that does automate repeating code, as templates are intended for? I do not understand which viable alternative solution you seem to see.
Also, could you reply to my other statements made: 1. why can you claim that this new function is "unnecessary" ever? And still so after I have pointed out a RL mainspace need for it? -DePiep (talk) 16:49, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
from the fork article, creating a distinct and separate piece of software, distinct is the opposite of duplicate. I have seen no examples presented which necessitate a new version of ifnumber (and yes this includes your "RL mainspace need"). Frietjes (talk) 13:22, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nihlus 00:08, 16 November 2017 (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/2017_November_16&oldid=1073610474"