Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2024 April 17

< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion | Log
< April 16
April 18 >

April 17

edit

Template:Kerala State Television Awards

edit
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 2024 April 26. (non-admin closure) ToadetteEdit! 13:18, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Campaignbox Polish-Cossack-Tatar War (1666-1671)

edit
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 2024 April 26. (non-admin closure) ToadetteEdit! 13:14, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Halifax family tree

edit
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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) 12:38, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused family tree chart. The Halifax family as the name would suggest never existed and instead the Earl of Halifax is just a peerage title of different members of political families. Each with a different last name. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:43, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, an amalgamation of three family trees only connected by a shared title. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 05:13, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Polish-Cossack-Tatar War (1666-1671)

edit
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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) 12:39, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and only one link. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:34, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Duplicate of the one above, with one of the battles' articles having been incorrectly typed and showing as a red link. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 05:17, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:UK territories image map

edit
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the template's undeletion. Primefac (talk) 12:39, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused map. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:32, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Skytrain MIA

edit
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 2024 April 25. Primefac (talk) 12:40, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Animal actors

edit
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 no consensus. Primefac (talk) 12:41, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This navbox is not necessary IMO, as it essentially serves the purpose of a category. We already have a category and a page for animal actors, so we don't also need a navbox. Di (they-them) (talk) 00:07, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

EDIT, I would like to withdraw this nomination. As Randy Kryn pointed out, WP:CLN renders my concern moot. In addition, the navbox has been edited and is in much better shape than it was previously. Di (they-them) (talk) 03:18, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You don't need to withdraw it, Randy is misinterpreting the guideline. --woodensuperman 08:25, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And I think you are misinterpreting the guideline, please read it, and please don't ignore the nominator's comment about the navbox being in much better shape. As for categories, lists, and navboxes, of course all three are not needed in every case. But when all three do exist they, according to the guideline and commonsense, compliment each other and are not in conflict with each other. This animal actor navbox is a good guide to the subject and provides the topic with an easily viewed and easily understood Wikipedia map. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:45, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, there is nothing wrong with this navbox. As for having both a category and a navbox, please read WP:CLN which states: "Categories, lists, and navigation templates are three different ways to group and organize articles. Although they each have their own advantages and disadvantages, each method complements the others...Accordingly, these methods should not be considered in conflict with each other. Rather, they are synergistic, each one complementing the others." (boldface in original). Randy Kryn (talk) 00:56, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    You keep spouting the same spiel about WP:CLN but it seems like you haven't actually read it. Sometimes categories are appropriate where navboxes are not, and vice versa. The grouping of articles by one method neither requires nor forbids the use of the other methods for the same informational grouping. Instead, each method of organizing information has its own advantages and disadvantages, and is applied for the most part independently of the other methods. --woodensuperman 08:22, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • weak delete, seems strange that there are 10 entries in Category:Chimpanzee actors but currently only 7 "Non-human primates" in the navbox. seems like a maintenance headache to try to keep the category, list article, and navbox in sync. Frietjes (talk) 23:18, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Frietjes, thanks for pointing that out. The primate entries have been added (in one case removed, was Michael Jackson's chimpanzee Bubbles an actor?), so have addressed much of your concern. Randy Kryn (talk) 23:30, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    still a maintenance headache since there are still more missing. correcting this would require checking every entry in the category and in the list article and syncing with the template. Frietjes (talk) 23:35, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Done, at least as far as the list (have just synced the list with the navbox). Not really much of a headache at all, and similar to any other navbox which includes multiple entries (as all navboxes should). Will work on the category entries. The navbox could be further sectioned for accuracy and navigational ease (bears, etc.). Randy Kryn (talk) 23:37, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    and   Done for the categories and expanded the sections. Thanks Frietjes, your concern, now remedied, has helped to better this navbox. Randy Kryn (talk) 00:37, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Definitely better suited to category navigation. The articles do not refer to each other, the only association is tangential. We don't have a navbox for {{Human actors}}, no reason for the same logic not to apply here. --woodensuperman 08:19, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Human actors are a totally different topic. Dogs, bears, a crocodile and assorted other animals do not personally choose and endeavor to excel in a career in acting. These pets are made to act by their owners for personal profit. In any case, this is not a very large navbox, and if the Wikipedia collection of human actors included only 85 articles the topic would reasonably have a navbox, no? Randy Kryn (talk) 11:45, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    No, I don't think so. They are not a defined set, inclusion here is tangential, they do not relate to one another. --woodensuperman 12:21, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They are not a defined set and do not relate to one another? They are animal actors. What else do you need? Perplexed in Portsmouth, Randy Kryn (talk) 12:26, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And categorising animal actors as such is fine for categories, but it does not make a good navbox. Keiko (orca) and Trigger (horse) have nothing in common other than this tangential intersection. --woodensuperman 12:36, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm actually not understanding how your reasoning works on this. The topic is "Animal actors", which include both Keiko and Trigger. What do they have in common? Being animals, and being actors. And again, and I'm sure I don't need to remind you, WP:CLN specifically says not to pit categories and navboxes against each other, but correctly tel us that they compliment each other and work in tandem. Randy Kryn (talk) 00:20, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, they are are animals and actors. But that's not a reason to have a navbox for this, when a category is more appropriate. Why should we have different rules for human actors and animal actors? You are cherry-picking WP:CLN again, which clearly states: The grouping of articles by one method neither requires nor forbids the use of the other methods for the same informational grouping. Instead, each method of organizing information has its own advantages and disadvantages, and is applied for the most part independently of the other methods. There are advantages for a category or a list here, but it is not appropriate for a navbox. No-one needs to navigate between Keiko and Trigger in this manner. --woodensuperman 08:22, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above. Izno (talk) 17:20, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - There is long-standing precedent that seemingly duplicative lists, categories, and templates all serve distinct niches in our navigation framework and all serve to present content to interested readers in different formats. I would also argue that people concerned about animal rights and the potential exploitation of working animals would find a great deal of correspondence in the working conditions of cetaceans, non-human primates, elephants, etc., and may very well appreciate having all out animal actor articles available to them in one topic box. jengod (talk) 04:45, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 11:34, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Please note... that the nominator withdrew this nomination soon after it opened. Primefac, wouldn't this withdrawal make a difference in relisting? Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:41, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Nope. Primefac (talk) 11:49, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Okay, but would like to also point out for editors that one of the reasons for the nominator's withdrawing was "the navbox has been edited and is in much better shape than it was previously", which hopefully counts as reasoning for the next close. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:53, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It still has exactly the same issues, it's just been split into more groups. My !vote was placed after the amendments had been made. --woodensuperman 12:12, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    No, it doesn't have the same issues as the nomination (that's why it was withdrawn). The addition of more groupings improved the navbox to the extent that the nom was voided. That you still objected is tangential to that action. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:28, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    As well as misinterpreting WP:CLN you seem to be misinterpreting the WP:Deletion process too. The nom is not in any way void. How is my !vote tangential? --woodensuperman 12:32, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    What is tangential is saying that the navbox "has exactly the same issues". No, it doesn't, it was nominated on a set of concerns which were remedied. Your concerns are of a different nature than the nomination, that's what I meant. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:52, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It was nominated because it is better suited to a category. These concerns have not been remedied as it is still better suited to a category. --woodensuperman 12:56, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Please read WP:CLN, where it's clear that categories, navboxes, and lists should be considered as complimentary to each other and work together. It is your opinion that this topic should stay limited to a category, but myself and a few other editors see the quality of the topic in the navbox. If a good percentage of commenting editors notice that value then shouldn't the readers be allowed to experience the same value? Randy Kryn (talk) 15:39, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    For the third (!) time: The grouping of articles by one method neither requires nor forbids the use of the other methods for the same informational grouping. Instead, each method of organizing information has its own advantages and disadvantages, and is applied for the most part independently of the other methods. --woodensuperman 18:20, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This discussion seems mooted by Pinquinn's "ah-ha!" moment point just below, but probably appropriate to include this quote from WP:CLN for those who haven't read it: "Instead, each method of organizing information has its own advantages and disadvantages, and is applied for the most part independently of the other methods following the guidelines and standards that have evolved on Wikipedia for each of these systems. Accordingly, these methods should not be considered in conflict with each other. Rather, they are synergistic, each one complementing the others." Randy Kryn (talk) 23:54, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep compliments the category by grouping the actors by the type of animal, whereas there are only four subcategories in Category:Animal actors for specific animals. This therefore adds information not found in the category system and justifies its existence under CLN. Pinguinn 🐧 22:20, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Infobox Hindu term

edit
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 no consensus. Primefac (talk) 12:42, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template for making a bunch of translations. WP:NOTDICTIONARY PepperBeast (talk) 14:28, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 11:25, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Hum Award Best Music Band

edit
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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. ✗plicit 14:44, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

One entry, WP:NENAN --woodensuperman 11:22, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Hum Award Best Soap Series

edit
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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. ✗plicit 14:43, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Only one entry with an article, nothing to navigate --woodensuperman 11:22, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Hum Award Best Drama Series

edit
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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. ✗plicit 14:42, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

One entry, nothing to navigate. --woodensuperman 11:21, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Prize for the best interpretation at the Marrakech International Film Festival Awards

edit
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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. ✗plicit 14:41, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2 entries, WP:NENAN --woodensuperman 11:19, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Uw-wnr4im

edit
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 as G3 by Primefac (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 17:49, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Already covered entirely by {{Uw-hoax}}; there is no reason for there to be a specific UW template for intentionally fake and made-up hoax versions of Windows (WNR seems to mean Windows Never Released). Very likely to never be used. See {{Uw-wnr1}}. WhoAteMyButter (🌷talk│🌻contribs) 04:32, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:HK-MTR route title

edit
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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. ✗plicit 14:39, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redundant to MTR line articles. Using the infobox is ok. 阿南之人 (talk) 10:23, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module'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/2024_April_17&oldid=1251715455"