Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2018 May 18

< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion | Log
< May 17 May 19 >

May 18

edit

Template:Astatine compounds

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) ~ Winged BladesGodric 07:34, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not enough articles. 2 of the 5 bluelinks are redirects, and the 3 articles are the same as those in Category:Astatine compounds. Very little is known about the chemistry of astatine since there are no long-lived isotopes. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:37, 18 May 2018 (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:People of Khorasan

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) ~ Winged BladesGodric 07:34, 28 May 2018 (UTC) Close overturned; the result of the discussion was no consensus. Primefac (talk) 15:25, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not a suitable topic for a navbox. They are not intrinsically linked to each other other than where they came from. Best left for categories. Imagine if we had a {{People of New York}} navbox, etc, etc... --woodensuperman 10:20, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Per this discussion, I am relisting this; short version is that the creator was not notified of this discussion and has requested an opportunity to contest the nomination.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 11:58, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It seems that the "creator" of the template wasn't exactly the creator of the template: here is the notification. --woodensuperman 12:13, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Preserve: The reason put forward by User:Woodensuperman, by making an analogy between a modern, culturally diverse city (i.e.,New York) and an old region that represents a cultural heritage (for modern countries) and a rich civilization, is meaningless. Anyone familiar with the Middle East history would agree that the template is important in a sense that it best complements the discussion in this section of the main article for Greater Khorasan, and it helps the readers to navigate. This is not the only template that enlists scientists and scholars arising from a similar region or sharing a similar culture, Template:Ancient_Greece_topics (see subsection for People), Template:Astronomy in medieval Islam, Template:Chinese philosophy, and many other templates which have lists of people. If those templates are justified to preserve, then why this one would qualify for deletion. --Cabolitæ (talk) 13:35, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete in say Chinese Philosophy, people are linked by topic, not their origin, and are thus related. There is no navigational utility in these completely unrelated people except for their birth place, while you would want to learn of other chinese philosophers. (also, greater khorassan seems too vague and big of an area to reasonably include reasonably include people, does it not?) Galobtter (pingó mió) 13:46, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Preserve Given the prominent historical role of this region, i support a preservation of this template.---Wikaviani (talk) 00:49, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete While this navbox is useful because it includes medieval scholars of an important historical region, it's not more special than the other regions. We use categories for similar cases and this navbox should not be an exception. Delete and replace it with a category. --Wario-Man (talk) 07:38, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 02:29, 18 May 2018 (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).

White House press corps

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 merge to Template:White House press corps. I do note that there are other types of correspondents than just TV, so if a name change is needed to clarify I see no issue with that. Primefac (talk) 02:08, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:ABCWH with Template:White House press corps.
Propose merging Template:CBSWH with Template:White House press corps.
Propose merging Template:CNNWH with Template:White House press corps.
Propose merging Template:NBCWH with Template:White House press corps.
These could all be merged to a single {{White House press corps}} navbox, which could include journalists not affiliated to a network. (see article White House press corps). Although, is this even a suitable topic for a navbox? Maybe the navboxes should be deleted and let the article and a category do the job... --woodensuperman 11:52, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 02:29, 18 May 2018 (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).

Baseball parks type navboxes

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. The rationale(s) forwarded, in favor of deletion, outweighs that of the opposite camp. (non-admin closure) ~ Winged BladesGodric 07:31, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Classic WP:NENAN. This is category material at most, and even there some of these categories and categorization is questionable. The corresponding lists at the baseball park article are largely unsourced and essay-like, so as the basis of navboxes it is exceedingly inappropriate. oknazevad (talk) 10:43, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete all per nom. No need for navboxes breaking down stadium by type. Many other more useful navigation boxes exist for this topic. --woodensuperman 10:54, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep, and ?. These templates are good sources of interesting information. The baseball Wikiproject should also be notified. Which "many other" templates exist for stadiums? I come here for one thing and find things like this, do good templates get deep-sixed every day in this sad corner of Wikipedia? Randy Kryn (talk) 11:26, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The project was notified here (and the creator here.) oknazevad (talk) 11:50, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Baseball league stadiums navigational boxes, etc, etc... And navigation boxes are not here to be sources of information, they are here for navigation. The clue's in the name. If people are going to continually introduce inappropriate navboxes, of course you should expect to see them at TfD!!! --woodensuperman 11:28, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Those are all minor league parks. The templates under the gun above are all major league parks. A good faith suggestion, if you don't know the difference between major and minor leagues in American and Japanese baseball then maybe you shouldn't be ivoting on such a nomination. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:36, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
{{MLB Ballparks}}. --woodensuperman 11:37, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That's a listing of present parks without including historical parks or breaking them down into things like "Jewel box" which have an exact meaning. The templates under discussion all have their uses and may be of interest to different sets of readers. One size doesn't fit all on Wikipedia (is there an essay?). Randy Kryn (talk) 11:43, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
What there is is a guidance on when a navbox is appropriate and when categories are appropriate. This, being a breaking down by type, is more category territory. There's also the baseball park article with its embedded lists to provide more context (though much of that article is in need of cleanup, as it's far too much unsourced analysis). oknazevad (talk) 11:50, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Templates are another form of communicating the existence of articles, a Wikipedia map of the subject. For example, I've edited the template on Jewel Box baseball parks and found it and its entries very interesting and educational. Just because something exists in an article doesn't mean that each of the pages listed on the template will include links to those articles, hence the templates. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:26, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 02:29, 18 May 2018 (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:Assyrian elections in Iraq, 2018

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. Primefac (talk) 01:51, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Result of an election still to come. But this is about a part of that election, not the general results or a separate election. With all candidates mentioned and most of them annotated, it looks more like an election poster. The Banner talk 03:25, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The fact that the results have not arrived yet does not mean it doesn't need to exist, so I don't know why you mentioned that. The page's aim was to have the profile of the 66 candidates the Assyrian community has a option for. I don't understand your comparison to a poster. It's an informative page about the candidates. Here is United States House of Representatives elections in Michigan, 2014 that was part of United States House of Representatives elections, 2014. The later can't fill every state's candidate with the vote number per candidate. In Iraq's case, it's separated per Governorates and per minorities. If we had enough Iraqis contributing, we should have Iraqi parliamentary election in Nineveh, 2018 or Iraqi parliamentary election in Kirkuk, 2018 along with Iraqi parliamentary election, 2018. Note the template is used for Assyrian elections in Iraq, 2018. So would putting the table in that page make any difference in the matter? Chaldean (talk) 10:18, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It is just a part of the wider national elections, not a stand-alone election. And yes, other stuff exists but you should not take the American over-exposure as a leading principle. The Banner talk 08:48, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Could you please show a Wikipedia rule/law that says a part of a wider national elections cannot have a template or page? If you can't (which you can't, because it would go against the Michigan/USA example I showed), then you are making the proposal to delete something based on an opinion you have. You also did not answer my question if the table was put in the page instead of a template make any difference for you or not. Chaldean (talk) 10:00, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The idea of a template is indeed that it should be used on multiple pages. And I did respond to your remark at the Michigan elections: but you should not take the American over-exposure as a leading principle.. For the rest I leave it to the administrators, as I know that there is so much emotion around this subject, that there is even an ArbCom-decision about it. The Banner talk 12:10, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
So what you are saying is that if the table was in the actual page and not a template, then there is no problem. And I did not know that rule about it being used in multiple pages. So you turn out to be right. Thank you for teaching me something new today. In that case, I don't mind it being deleted. Chaldean (talk) 18:54, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 02:48, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 02:29, 18 May 2018 (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/2018_May_18&oldid=1138372918"