Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2011 March 4: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Latest revision as of 02:23, 11 February 2023

< March 3	March 5 >

March 4

Template:WMMS former owners

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) 02:54, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WMMS former owners (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose deletion Template is not used and is not likely to be used. Levdr1 (talk) 23:50, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not useful. Unsourced. — This, that, and the other (talk) 00:32, 5 March 2011 (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:Further

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 Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:23, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Further (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:See also2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Template:Further with Template:See also2.
Hatnotes. Effect will be: hatnote will read "See also: ...", not "Further information: ...". Semantically they are the same. Reducing the hatnote text-variants is just plain simple.

{{further|[[TOPIC]], and [[TOPIC2]]}} → {{see also2|[[TOPIC]], and [[TOPIC2]]}} →

Technically: both have the same structure, allowing free text for the 1st parameter. {{Further}} to become redirect, or botwise replacement. -DePiep (talk) 03:24, 8 February 2011 (UTC) Earlier TfD: 2007_May_11 (Keep). -DePiep (talk) 03:38, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: A related discussion is started here: {{see}}: change text into: See also: .... -DePiep (talk) 03:53, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose The meanings are not the same. "See also" merely indicates a related article. "Further information" implies a stronger relation, more similar to {{main}}. --Cybercobra (talk) 03:59, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose "Further" has a specific meaning that is not indicated by see also. 65.94.45.238 (talk) 06:42, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re Cybercobra and IP65: I must say, that's what I thought too until some days ago too. But just take a fresh look again: as a hatnote, the "Further information ..." says exactly the same as "See also...". Wherever used correctly in this encyclopedia, the essential hatnote information is not different, it only suggests so.

By definition, all hatnotes provide links to articles, and every link is related to the topic (section, sentence) it is mentioned in. Testing myself, I have browsed some dozen of links of "Further ...", and have not seen one occasion that that 'specific' meaning was required on that place. I even got less sensitive to a perceived different meaning. And sure {{main}} is different. -DePiep (talk) 09:47, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(1) Main would be an expansion of the topic of a section

(2) Further would be to expand on allied topics covered in a section

(3) See also would be any of those, in addition to tangentially related subjects

Atleast that is my understanding of the differences between them. 65.94.45.238 13:49, 8 February 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.94.45.238 (talk) [reply]

That difference between (2) and (3) can exist, but it is small as neglectible in the encyclopedia, and is not enforced/maintained over template use. In all, these two are interchangeable without error of understanding. Simply: "See also ..." points to related, linked topics. And that's all we need. Maintaining that difference would be more artificial than illuminating. -DePiep 14:03, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That is to say: differences do exist, I agree. But IMO they are too small to maintain here as hatnotes. It requires a high level of editing to keep details right, and still then they don't add much. -DePiep (talk) 17:34, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 23:00, 4 March 2011 (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:In-universe/Star Trek

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) 01:24, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:In-universe/Star Trek (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose deletion: This is just an overly specific variation of {{In-universe}} and redundant to it, as it has "subject" parameter. I also nominate the following templates for the same reason:

Armbrust ^{WrestleMania XXVII} _{Undertaker 19–0} 22:25, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all after ~~enabling subject-specific categorization in Template:In-universe and~~ replacing all transclusions, e.g., {{In-universe/Star Trek}} → {{In-universe|subject=Star Trek|category=Star Trek}} ~~{{In-universe|subject=Star Trek}}~~. The primary function of these templates appears to be to place articles into subject-specific categories, such as Category:Star Trek articles that need to differentiate between fact and fiction. However, since {{In-universe}} already contains a "subject" parameter, it is better to continue to use that template after enabling subject-specific categorization. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 22:53, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On closer examination, it appears that subject-specific categorization already is enabled in {{In-universe}} through the "category" parameter. So, adding {{In-universe|category=Star Trek}} to an article will place it in Category:Star Trek articles that need to differentiate between fact and fiction. The "subject" parameter, which I mentioned above, merely identifies the subject in the message box and perhaps can be removed altogether. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 02:26, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Black Falcon's suggestion seems reasonable. BOZ (talk) 23:30, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As the edit history says, I was modeling it after the Star Wars in-universe template (and, apparently, created the corresponding category). We have a newer, better solution now. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 02:52, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Go for it, but be sure to explain in that templates description that these parameters exist and can be used. No need to keep these templates if we have already have one that does the same thing, even if it needs more effort. Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:06, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all Why have this around when you can just do this: {{Inuniverse|anime and manga article}} and get the same result? - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 14:37, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all per nom. Neelix (talk) 16:55, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the suggestion to remove templates created ease of use - auto completing 3 of the 4 parameters in the parent template - and hope that later users will have a clue as to what to list for "subject", "described_object" and "category". That sounds a bit counterproductive. - J Greb (talk) 19:02, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- The described_object and subject parameters are highly optional. The default for described_object is "a work or element of fiction", and the more specific text "an aspect of a {Foo}" is not a critical improvement. In a similar way, stating "This Star Trek-related article" is not a significant improvement over "This article".
  In my opinion, described_object and subject could be deprecated with little or no loss of information; of course, I am not advocating for that since their presence is not detrimental in any way. Fundamentally, the replacement that matters in the context of a maintenance template is of {{In-universe/Star Trek}} with {{In-universe|category=Star Trek}}. The documentation for {{In-universe}} was incomplete, however, but I have attempted to improve it by restoring usage instructions pertaining to the three optional parameters. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 05:13, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - Fair point, and the wording on the base template example should be clear enough without hitting editors and/or readers over the head with the basic topic.
    I wonder if it may be worth converting the the "category" parameter to {{{1|}}} and a switch if the specialized versions are removed. It would simplify the 'bot run to replace them. - J Greb (talk) 23:00, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - That's an idea worth considering, though at the moment {{{1|}}} can be used to change the word "article" to something else, such as "list" or "section"—whether this is actually used in more than just a handful of articles is hard to say. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 19:17, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      - I'm looking at keeping the transition simple. Going from {{In-universe/<foo>}} to {{In-universe|<foo>}} is a very, very simple edit. It just requires adding the code to identify and categorize by that unnamed parameter. Leaving it as "1" just requires a single pipe. If page type is to supersede that, the edit would need 2 pipes and the additional coding should be in place at the same time. - J Greb (talk) 16:54, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for now. {{In-universe}} is not "idiot proof". In-universe's parameters are too complicated and confusing for editors to apply consistently and there is a huge risk that an article may not go into the correct or a non-existent cleanup category. An editor should only need to set one parameter to specify a subject area and ensure that the article is placed in the correct cleanup category. —Farix (t | c) 02:19, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Besides date, the template has only three other (optional) parameters. What aspect, in particular, do you find "complicated and confusing", which the documentation could address better? The "one parameter" to which you refer essentially is the category parameter, since the only function of the subject parameter is to specify the subject in the text of the message. It is possible to combine the subject and category parameters, but that would create the risk of an article being placed in a non-existent cleanup category. For instance, someone may want to specify "The Simpsons" for the subject and "Television" for the category. Thanks, -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 17:18, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete All Per nom. Just using the base template is more organized and allows for the same degree of versatility. EVula // talk // ☯ // 05:57, 10 March 2011 (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:WPMuslimGuild-invite

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) 02:56, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WPMuslimGuild-invite (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

The Muslim Guild has gone away. Superseded by {{WPIslam-invite}}. — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:21, 4 March 2011 (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:WPGTMessage

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. JPG-GR (talk) 01:23, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WPGTMessage (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Old, unused template. Purpose unclear. Near impossible to decipher this spaghetti code. — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:18, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry :( I meant it to be a template for announcements on WikiProject pages. I haven't used it in forever, although there might be some other project that does, judging by the "what links here" ... if it gets deleted, I'm fine with that. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 02:46, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As for it being hard to understand, I did include documentation: {{WPGTMessage|title|message|username}} —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 02:47, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete, per green light by user. Reh man 11:19, 12 March 2011 (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:ShaivaSampradayas

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) 02:57, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:ShaivaSampradayas (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Superseded by {{Shaivism}}. — This, that, and the other (talk) 09:53, 4 March 2011 (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:Banpresto Originals

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) 02:57, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Banpresto Originals (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused. Superseded by {{Super Robot Wars}}. — This, that, and the other (talk) 09:06, 4 March 2011 (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:Berrychart

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) 01:22, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Berrychart (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Informative template, but unfortunately with an unclear scope. Where would it be placed? Also unsourced and unused. — This, that, and the other (talk) 09:04, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Unused. Probably intended to be used at a single article. Reh man 11:17, 12 March 2011 (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:Campaignbox Ghost Dance War

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) 03:40, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Campaignbox Ghost Dance War (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused. WP:NENAN - only two articles. — This, that, and the other (talk) 05:53, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, per WP:NENAN. Reh man 07:39, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NENAN. -- Joaquin008 ^(talk) 20:58, 4 March 2011 (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:Cfd nomination

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, but please do userfy or revive if there is consensus to put it to use. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 01:16, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Cfd nomination (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

No longer used by the CfD process; see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion#How to use Cfd. No longer needed. — This, that, and the other (talk) 05:51, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The template was created to replace {{Cfd2}}, {{Cfm2}}, {{Cfr2}} and {{Cfc2}}, but it has never been put into systematic use. There was some support for the idea when I proposed it in October 2010, following complaints about the complexity of the CfD nomination process, but discussion died down due to valid reservations (and some confusion) about naming. I posted a notice of this discussion at Wikipedia talk:Categories for discussion to invite additional participation. If there is consensus to consolidate the level-2 nomination templates, then we can start working on the details; if there is not, then this template ought to be deleted if no one uses it. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 07:01, 4 March 2011 (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:Channels on StarHub TV

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) 02:59, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Channels on StarHub TV (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

I don't think the channels transmitted by a particular pay TV service represents a close topic navigation (per WP:NAVBOX). For example, how many different pay TV services would transmit National Geographic Channel? What if they all had navboxes on that article? There would be too many. Template currently unused. — This, that, and the other (talk) 05:45, 4 March 2011 (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.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-<noinclude><div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 0 auto; padding: 0 1px 0 0; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA; font-size:10px">
+<noinclude><div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 0 auto; padding: 0 1px 0 0; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA; font-size:10px">
 {| width = "100%"
 |-
-! width="50%" align="left"  | <font color="gray">&lt;</font> [[Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2011 March 3|March 3]]
+! style="width:50%; text-align:left;" | <span style="color:gray;">&lt;</span> [[Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2011 March 3|March 3]]
-! width="50%" align="right" | [[Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2011 March 5|March 5]] <font color="gray">&gt;</font>
+! style="width:50%; text-align:right;" | [[Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2011 March 5|March 5]] <span style="color:gray;">&gt;</span>
 |}</div></noinclude>
 ===March 4===
@@ Line 15: / Line 15: @@
 ==== [[Template:WMMS former owners]] ====
-<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd tfd-closed" style="background-color: #e3f9df; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
+<div class="boilerplate vfd tfd-closed" style="background-color: #e3f9df; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 :''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span>  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]).  No further edits should be made to this section.''
@@ Line 25: / Line 25: @@
 ==== [[Template:Further]] ====
+<div class="boilerplate vfd tfd-closed" style="background-color: #e3f9df; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
+:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span>  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]).  No further edits should be made to this section.''
+The result of the discussion was '''no consensus'''&nbsp;[[User:Plastikspork|Plastikspork]] [[User talk:Plastikspork|<sub style="font-size: 60%">―Œ</sub><sup style="margin-left:-3ex">(talk)</sup>]] 04:23, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
 :{{Tfd links|further}}
 :{{Tfd links|see also2}}
 '''Propose merging''' [[Template:Further]] with [[Template:See also2]].<br />
 Hatnotes. Effect will be: hatnote will read "See also: ...", not "Further information: ...". Semantically they are the same. Reducing the hatnote text-variants is just plain simple.
-{{tlx|further|<nowiki>[[TOPIC]], and [[TOPIC2]]</nowiki>}} &rarr; {{further|[[TOPIC]], and [[TOPIC2]]}}
+{{tlx|further|<nowiki>[[TOPIC]], and [[TOPIC2]]</nowiki>}} → {{further|[[TOPIC]], and [[TOPIC2]]}}
-{{tlx|see also2|<nowiki>[[TOPIC]], and [[TOPIC2]]</nowiki>}} &rarr; {{see also2|[[TOPIC]], and [[TOPIC2]]}}
+{{tlx|see also2|<nowiki>[[TOPIC]], and [[TOPIC2]]</nowiki>}} → {{see also2|[[TOPIC]], and [[TOPIC2]]}}
 Technically: both have the same structure, allowing free text for the 1st parameter. {{tl|Further}} to become redirect, or botwise replacement.
 -[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 03:24, 8 February 2011 (UTC) ''Earlier TfD: [[Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2007_May_11#Template:Further|2007_May_11]] (Keep)''. -[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 03:38, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
 :''Note:'' A related discussion is started here: {{tl|see}}: [[Template_talk:See#Proposal:_change_text_into:_.22See_also:_...22|change text into: ''See also: ...'']]. -[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 03:53, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
-*'''Oppose''' The meanings are not the same. "See also" merely indicates a related article. "Further information" implies a stronger relation, more similar to {{tl|main}}. --[[User:Cybercobra|<b><font color="3773A5">Cyber</font></b><font color="FFB521">cobra</font>]] [[User talk:Cybercobra|(talk)]] 03:59, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
+*'''Oppose''' The meanings are not the same. "See also" merely indicates a related article. "Further information" implies a stronger relation, more similar to {{tl|main}}. --[[User:Cybercobra|<b style="color:#3773A5;">Cyber</b><span style="color:#FFB521;">cobra</span>]] [[User talk:Cybercobra|(talk)]] 03:59, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
 *'''Oppose''' "Further" has a specific meaning that is not indicated by see also. [[Special:Contributions/65.94.45.238|65.94.45.238]] ([[User talk:65.94.45.238|talk]]) 06:42, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
 ::Re Cybercobra and IP65: I must say, that's what I thought too until some days ago too. But just take a fresh look again: as a hatnote, the "Further information ..." says exactly the same as "See also...". Wherever used correctly in this encyclopedia, the essential hatnote information is not different, it only ''suggests'' so.
@@ Line 46: / Line 50: @@
 <hr style="width:55%;" />
 :<span style="color:#FF4F00;">'''[[WP:RELIST|Relisted]] to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.'''</span><br /><small>Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, [[User:Plastikspork|Plastikspork]] [[User talk:Plastikspork|<sub style="font-size: 60%">―Œ</sub><sup style="margin-left:-3ex">(talk)</sup>]] 23:00, 4 March 2011 (UTC)</small><!-- from Template:Relist -->
+:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div>
 ==== [[Template:In-universe/Star Trek]] ====
+<div class="boilerplate vfd tfd-closed" style="background-color: #e3f9df; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
+:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span>  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]).  No further edits should be made to this section.''
+The result of the discussion was '''Delete'''&nbsp;[[User:Plastikspork|Plastikspork]] [[User talk:Plastikspork|<sub style="font-size: 60%">―Œ</sub><sup style="margin-left:-3ex">(talk)</sup>]] 01:24, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
 :{{Tfdlinks|In-universe/Star Trek}}
 '''Propose deletion:''' This is just an overly specific variation of {{tl|In-universe}} and redundant to it, as it has "subject" parameter. I also nominate the following templates for the same reason:
+{{columns-list|colwidth=30em|
-{{Top|bgcolor=transparent}}
 * {{tl|In-universe/Generic}}
 * {{tl|In-universe/Anime and manga}}
@@ Line 58: / Line 67: @@
 * {{tl|In-universe/Film}}
 * {{tl|In-universe/Literature}}
-{{mid|bgcolor=transparent}}
 * {{tl|In-universe/Star Wars}}
 * {{tl|In-universe/Television}}
@@ Line 66: / Line 74: @@
 * {{tl|In-universe/Video game}}
 * {{tl|In-universe/Warhammer 40,000}}
-{{bottom}} <font color="#082567">[[User:Armbrust|Armbrust]]</font> <sup><font color="#E3A857">[[User talk:Armbrust|WrestleMania XXVII]]</font></sup> <sub><font color="#008000">[[Special:Contributions/Armbrust|Undertaker 19–0]]</font></sub> 22:25, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
+}} [[User:Armbrust|<span style="color:#082567;">Armbrust</span>]] [[User talk:Armbrust|<sup style="color:#E3A857;">WrestleMania XXVII</sup>]] [[Special:Contributions/Armbrust|<sub style="color:#008000;">Undertaker 19–0</sub>]] 22:25, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
 *'''Delete all''' ''after'' <s>enabling subject-specific categorization in [[Template:In-universe]] and</s> replacing all transclusions, e.g., <code><nowiki>{{In-universe/Star Trek}}</nowiki></code> → <code><nowiki>{{In-universe|subject=Star Trek|category=Star Trek}}</nowiki></code> <s><code><nowiki>{{In-universe|subject=Star Trek}}</nowiki></code></s>. The primary function of these templates appears to be to place articles into subject-specific categories, such as [[:Category:Star Trek articles that need to differentiate between fact and fiction]]. However, since {{tl|In-universe}} already contains a "subject" parameter, it is better to continue to use that template after enabling subject-specific categorization. -- '''[[User:Black Falcon|Black Falcon]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Black Falcon|talk]])</sup> 22:53, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
 **On closer examination, it appears that subject-specific categorization already is enabled in {{tl|In-universe}} through the "category" parameter. So, adding <code><nowiki>{{In-universe|category=Star Trek}}</nowiki></code> to an article will place it in [[:Category:Star Trek articles that need to differentiate between fact and fiction]]. The "subject" parameter, which I mentioned above, merely identifies the subject in the message box and perhaps can be removed altogether. -- '''[[User:Black Falcon|Black Falcon]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Black Falcon|talk]])</sup> 02:26, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
@@ Line 78: / Line 86: @@
 ***Fair point, and the wording on the base template example should be clear enough without hitting editors and/or readers over the head with the basic topic.<br>I wonder if it ''may'' be worth converting the the "category" parameter to <nowiki>{{{1|}}}</nowiki> and a switch if the specialized versions are removed. It would simplify the 'bot run to replace them. - [[User:J Greb|J Greb]] ([[User talk:J Greb|talk]]) 23:00, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
 ****That's an idea worth considering, though at the moment <nowiki>{{{1|}}}</nowiki> can be used to change the word "article" to something else, such as "list" or "section"—whether this is actually used in more than just a handful of articles is hard to say. -- '''[[User:Black Falcon|Black Falcon]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Black Falcon|talk]])</sup> 19:17, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
+*****I'm looking at keeping the transition simple. Going from {{tld|In-universe/<foo>}} to {{tld|In-universe|<foo>}} is a very, very simple edit. It just requires adding the code to identify and categorize by that unnamed parameter. Leaving it as "1" just requires a single pipe. If page type is to supersede that, the edit would need 2 pipes and the additional coding should be in place at the same time. - [[User:J Greb|J Greb]] ([[User talk:J Greb|talk]]) 16:54, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
 *'''Keep''' for now. {{tl|In-universe}} is not "idiot proof". In-universe's parameters are too complicated and confusing for editors to apply consistently and there is a huge risk that an article may not go into the correct or a non-existent cleanup category. An editor should only need to set '''one parameter''' to specify a subject area and ensure that the article is placed in the correct cleanup category. —'''[[User:TheFarix|Farix]]'''&nbsp;([[User talk:TheFarix|t]]&nbsp;&#124;&nbsp;[[Special:Contributions/TheFarix|c]]) 02:19, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
 **Besides ''date'', the template has only three other (optional) parameters. What aspect, in particular, do you find "complicated and confusing", which the documentation could address better? The "one parameter" to which you refer essentially is the ''category'' parameter, since the only function of the ''subject'' parameter is to specify the subject in the text of the message. It is possible to combine the ''subject'' and ''category'' parameters, but that would create the risk of an article being placed in a non-existent cleanup category. For instance, someone may want to specify "[[The Simpsons]]" for the ''subject'' and "[[:Category:Television articles that need to differentiate between fact and fiction|Television]]" for the ''category''. Thanks, -- '''[[User:Black Falcon|Black Falcon]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Black Falcon|talk]])</sup> 17:18, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
 *'''Delete All''' Per nom. Just using the base template is more organized and allows for the same degree of versatility. [[User:EVula|EVula]] <span style="color: #999;">// [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|<span style="color: #366;">&#9775;</span>]] //</span> 05:57, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
+:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div>
 ==== [[Template:WPMuslimGuild-invite]] ====
-<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd tfd-closed" style="background-color: #e3f9df; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
+<div class="boilerplate vfd tfd-closed" style="background-color: #e3f9df; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 :''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span>  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]).  No further edits should be made to this section.''
@@ Line 92: / Line 102: @@
 ==== [[Template:WPGTMessage]] ====
+<div class="boilerplate vfd tfd-closed" style="background-color: #e3f9df; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
+:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span>  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]).  No further edits should be made to this section.''
+The result of the discussion was ''''delete'''. [[User:JPG-GR|JPG-GR]] ([[User talk:JPG-GR|talk]]) 01:23, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
 :{{Tfdlinks|WPGTMessage}}
 Old, unused template. Purpose unclear. Near impossible to decipher this spaghetti code. — <span style="border:dashed #666;border-width:1px 0 0 1px">[[User:This, that and the other|This, that]]</span>, and <span style="border:dashed #666;border-width:0 1px 1px 0">[[User talk:This, that and the other|the other<small> (talk)</small>]]</span> 10:18, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
 :Sorry :( I meant it to be a template for announcements on WikiProject pages. I haven't used it in forever, although there might be some other project that does, judging by the "what links here" ... if it gets deleted, I'm fine with that. —[[User:Disavian|Disavian]] ([[User talk:Disavian|<sup>talk</sup>]]/[[Special:Contributions/Disavian|<sub>contribs</sub>]]) 02:46, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
 :As for it being hard to understand, I ''did'' include documentation: <nowiki>{{WPGTMessage|title|message|username}}</nowiki> —[[User:Disavian|Disavian]] ([[User talk:Disavian|<sup>talk</sup>]]/[[Special:Contributions/Disavian|<sub>contribs</sub>]]) 02:47, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
+* '''Speedy delete''', per green light by user. [[User:Rehman|<span style="font-variant:small-caps; font-weight:bold; color:darkblue">Reh</span>]][[User talk:Rehman|<span style="color:green">man</span>]] 11:19, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
+:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div>
 ==== [[Template:ShaivaSampradayas]] ====
-<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd tfd-closed" style="background-color: #e3f9df; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
+<div class="boilerplate vfd tfd-closed" style="background-color: #e3f9df; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 :''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span>  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]).  No further edits should be made to this section.''
@@ Line 107: / Line 124: @@
 ==== [[Template:Banpresto Originals]] ====
+<div class="boilerplate vfd tfd-closed" style="background-color: #e3f9df; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
+:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span>  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]).  No further edits should be made to this section.''
+The result of the discussion was '''Delete'''&nbsp;[[User:Plastikspork|Plastikspork]] [[User talk:Plastikspork|<sub style="font-size: 60%">―Œ</sub><sup style="margin-left:-3ex">(talk)</sup>]] 02:57, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
 :{{Tfdlinks|Banpresto Originals}}
 Unused. Superseded by {{tl|Super Robot Wars}}. — <span style="border:dashed #666;border-width:1px 0 0 1px">[[User:This, that and the other|This, that]]</span>, and <span style="border:dashed #666;border-width:0 1px 1px 0">[[User talk:This, that and the other|the other<small> (talk)</small>]]</span> 09:06, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
+:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div>
 ==== [[Template:Berrychart]] ====
+<div class="boilerplate vfd tfd-closed" style="background-color: #e3f9df; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
+:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span>  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]).  No further edits should be made to this section.''
+The result of the discussion was '''Delete'''&nbsp;[[User:Plastikspork|Plastikspork]] [[User talk:Plastikspork|<sub style="font-size: 60%">―Œ</sub><sup style="margin-left:-3ex">(talk)</sup>]] 01:22, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
 :{{Tfdlinks|Berrychart}}
 Informative template, but unfortunately with an unclear scope. Where would it be placed? Also unsourced and unused. — <span style="border:dashed #666;border-width:1px 0 0 1px">[[User:This, that and the other|This, that]]</span>, and <span style="border:dashed #666;border-width:0 1px 1px 0">[[User talk:This, that and the other|the other<small> (talk)</small>]]</span> 09:04, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
+* '''Delete'''. Unused. Probably intended to be used at a single article. [[User:Rehman|<span style="font-variant:small-caps; font-weight:bold; color:darkblue">Reh</span>]][[User talk:Rehman|<span style="color:green">man</span>]] 11:17, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
-==== [[Template:CEV Cup / Challenge Cup]] ====
+:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div>
-:{{Tfdlinks|CEV Cup / Challenge Cup}}
-A bit of redlink fever here. — <span style="border:dashed #666;border-width:1px 0 0 1px">[[User:This, that and the other|This, that]]</span>, and <span style="border:dashed #666;border-width:0 1px 1px 0">[[User talk:This, that and the other|the other<small> (talk)</small>]]</span> 08:56, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
-*'''Keep''' - Should be blue ones. And see [[:Category:CEV navigational boxes]]. [[Template:CEV Cup]] is the same? That one could be a redirect. And that [[Template:CEV Cup seasons|third one]] is different (only for men)? [[User:Pelmeen10|Pelmeen10]] ([[User talk:Pelmeen10|talk]]) 09:31, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
-:Articles are in [[:Category:European volleyball club competitions]], so there are: [[Women's CEV Cup 2007–08]], [[Women's CEV Cup 2008–09]], [[Women's CEV Cup 2009–10]], [[Men's CEV Cup 2007–08]], [[Men's CEV Cup 2008–09]], [[Men's CEV Cup 2009–10]]. I think those need a navigational template. [[User:Pelmeen10|Pelmeen10]] ([[User talk:Pelmeen10|talk]]) 16:50, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
 ==== [[Template:Campaignbox Ghost Dance War]] ====
-<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd tfd-closed" style="background-color: #e3f9df; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
+<div class="boilerplate vfd tfd-closed" style="background-color: #e3f9df; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 :''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span>  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]).  No further edits should be made to this section.''
@@ Line 126: / Line 150: @@
 Unused. [[WP:NENAN]] - only two articles. — <span style="border:dashed #666;border-width:1px 0 0 1px">[[User:This, that and the other|This, that]]</span>, and <span style="border:dashed #666;border-width:0 1px 1px 0">[[User talk:This, that and the other|the other<small> (talk)</small>]]</span> 05:53, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
 * '''Delete''', per [[WP:NENAN]]. [[User:Rehman|<span style="font-variant:small-caps; font-weight:bold; color:darkblue">Reh</span>]][[User talk:Rehman|<span style="color:green">man</span>]] 07:39, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
-*'''Delete''' per [[WP:NENAN]]. -- [[User:Joaquin008|<font color="LimeGreen"><b>Joaquin008</b></font>]] <sup>([[User talk:Joaquin008|<span style="color: ForestGreen; font-weight: bold">talk</span>]])</sup> 20:58, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
+*'''Delete''' per [[WP:NENAN]]. -- [[User:Joaquin008|<span style="color:LimeGreen;"><b>Joaquin008</b></span>]] <sup>([[User talk:Joaquin008|<span style="color: ForestGreen; font-weight: bold">talk</span>]])</sup> 20:58, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
 :''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div>
 ==== [[Template:Cfd nomination]] ====
+<div class="boilerplate vfd tfd-closed" style="background-color: #e3f9df; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
+:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span>  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]).  No further edits should be made to this section.''
+The result of the discussion was '''Delete''', but please do userfy or revive if there is consensus to put it to use.&nbsp;[[User:Plastikspork|Plastikspork]] [[User talk:Plastikspork|<sub style="font-size: 60%">―Œ</sub><sup style="margin-left:-3ex">(talk)</sup>]] 01:16, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
 :{{Tfdlinks|Cfd nomination}}
 No longer used by the CfD process; see [[Wikipedia:Categories for discussion#How to use Cfd]]. No longer needed. — <span style="border:dashed #666;border-width:1px 0 0 1px">[[User:This, that and the other|This, that]]</span>, and <span style="border:dashed #666;border-width:0 1px 1px 0">[[User talk:This, that and the other|the other<small> (talk)</small>]]</span> 05:51, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
 *The template was created to replace {{tl|Cfd2}}, {{tl|Cfm2}}, {{tl|Cfr2}} and {{tl|Cfc2}}, but it has never been put into systematic use. There was some support for the idea when I [[Wikipedia talk:Categories for discussion/Archive 2010#Consolidated CFD nomination template|proposed it in October 2010]], following complaints about the complexity of the CfD nomination process, but discussion died down due to valid reservations (and some confusion) about naming. I posted a notice of this discussion at [[Wikipedia talk:Categories for discussion]] to invite additional participation. If there is consensus to consolidate the level-2 nomination templates, then we can start working on the details; if there is not, then this template ought to be deleted if no one uses it. -- '''[[User:Black Falcon|Black Falcon]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Black Falcon|talk]])</sup> 07:01, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
+:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div>
 ==== [[Template:Channels on StarHub TV]] ====
+<div class="boilerplate vfd tfd-closed" style="background-color: #e3f9df; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
+:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span>  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]).  No further edits should be made to this section.''
+The result of the discussion was '''Delete'''&nbsp;[[User:Plastikspork|Plastikspork]] [[User talk:Plastikspork|<sub style="font-size: 60%">―Œ</sub><sup style="margin-left:-3ex">(talk)</sup>]] 02:59, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
 :{{Tfdlinks|Channels on StarHub TV}}
 I don't think the channels transmitted by a particular pay TV service represents a close topic navigation (per [[WP:NAVBOX]]). For example, how many different pay TV services would transmit [[National Geographic Channel]]? What if they all had navboxes on that article? There would be too many. Template currently unused. — <span style="border:dashed #666;border-width:1px 0 0 1px">[[User:This, that and the other|This, that]]</span>, and <span style="border:dashed #666;border-width:0 1px 1px 0">[[User talk:This, that and the other|the other<small> (talk)</small>]]</span> 05:45, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
+:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div>
-==== [[Template:Child taxa/Life]] ====
-:{{Tfdlinks|Child taxa/Life}}
-This is not the child taxa list of all life; this is the child taxa list for some kind of virus (??). Probably broken. Unused. No use. — <span style="border:dashed #666;border-width:1px 0 0 1px">[[User:This, that and the other|This, that]]</span>, and <span style="border:dashed #666;border-width:0 1px 1px 0">[[User talk:This, that and the other|the other<small> (talk)</small>]]</span> 05:43, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
-:It ''is'' the child taxa list for all life. Less than half of those are virus taxa. It's not broken, as can be verified at [[:Category:Immediate_children/Life]]. As for its use, I unfortunately can't answer that. [[User:Smith609|Martin]] will know what it's used for and whether it's actually in use. I doubt he'd have a bot set up to update it if it weren't. [[User:Bob the Wikipedian|<span style="font-family:linux libertine o, times; font-variant:small-caps">Bob the WikipediaN</span>]] <sup>([[User talk:Bob the Wikipedian|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Bob the Wikipedian|contribs]]) </sup> 06:22, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
-==== [[Template:Infobox Civil Conflict]] ====
-:{{Tfdlinks|Infobox Civil Conflict}}
-This template is an almost guaranteed violation of NPOV anywhere it's used.  We don't need to refer to the budget [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=2011_Wisconsin_protests&diff=prev&oldid=416370877 debate in Wisconsin] (or the [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Scientology_versus_the_Internet&diff=prev&oldid=416598534 internets drama around Scientology] or a few dozen [[2011 Israel protests|Israelis whining about gas prices]]) using the same approach as we do for the [[Battle of Stalingrad]].  That is an unnecessary injection of drama into otherwise quotidian events, and therefore not neutral coverage.  Plus there's no such notion in social science as a "civil conflict."  This template needs to be '''deleted'''. -- <b>[[User:Y|Y]]&nbsp;[[User_talk:Y|not?]]</b> 01:25, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
-*'''Keep'''. The purpose of this template is not to show a civil conflict in the same light as [[Battle of Stalingrad]]; the purpose is to provide a less loaded alternative to [[Template:Infobox military conflict]] for non-military uses.  Btw, [[user:Y]], you're very biased or uninformed if you're saying the [[2011 Wisconsin protests|Wisconsin protests]] are merely a budget debate. Also, you believe these are a "quotidian" event?  So you're trying to claim having 75-100k protesters is a normal day?  If you need to claim that the mere use of the template is a "guaranteed violation of NPOV", then you need to say how.  You seem to only link to articles when they are at their most biased and not what they evolved to be currently.  I do agree that the template is a terrible fit for [[Scientology versus the Internet]], as that's hardly a civil conflict.  If you need a definition of a civil conflict, go look at one of the millions of [https://encrypted.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22civil+conflict%22&aq=f&aqi=g6g-m4&aql=&oq= google search results] or one of the [http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22civil+conflict%22&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart 20k scholarly articles on the subject].  The purpose of the template is to show that civil conflicts, for instance the uprising in [[2011 Bahraini protests|Bahrain]], is not one sided.  One of the optional features of the template, not that you have to use it, shows both sides of the conflict.  In an upraising, this would be the rebellion and the government forces.    The main purpose of an infobox is to provide the reader with a quick summary of the article.  The existing [[Template:Infobox military conflict]] contains too many loaded terms and [[Template:Infobox uprising]] fails to provide enough fields to adequately provide a summary of the article for the reader.  The purpose of this template is to span the area inclusively between protests to small armed rebellion and provide a useful template for the natural fluid progression that civil dispute takes between those stages.  ~ [[User:Justin Ormont|Justin Ormont]] ([[User talk:Justin Ormont|talk]]) 03:55, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
-* Example uses:
-::[https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/enwiki/w/index.php?title=2011_Saudi_Arabian_protests&oldid=417029789 Saudi Arabian protests with] vs. [https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/enwiki/w/index.php?title=2011_Saudi_Arabian_protests&oldid=416862785 Saudi Arabian protests without]
-::[[2011 Somalian protests]], although I'm not sure of the notability of the article anyway.  Perhaps more news will flow.
-::[https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/enwiki/w/index.php?title=2011_Wisconsin_protests&oldid=416938075 Wisconsin Protests with] vs. [https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/enwiki/w/index.php?title=2011_Wisconsin_protests&oldid=416346456 Wisconsin protests without]
-::[https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/enwiki/w/index.php?title=2011_Bahraini_protests&oldid=417043562 Bahraini protests with] vs. [https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/enwiki/w/index.php?title=2011_Bahraini_protests&oldid=416975450 Bahraini protests without]
-The history of why it was needed is here: [[Talk:2011_Wisconsin_protests#Military_conflict_template]].  People thought [[Template:Infobox military conflict]] was a poor fit as the article is not about a war.  People also objected to [[Template:Infobox uprising]] as it has connotations of an attempt to overthrow a government.  There was an unanswered call for an infobox which would be suitable for low to mid civil conflicts, and hence I made one. I'm very open to help from anyone willing to make the template as suitable for that purpose as possible as none other seem to exist.  ~ [[User:Justin Ormont|Justin Ormont]] ([[User talk:Justin Ormont|talk]]) 05:42, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
-*'''Delete'''. Template has no definable limits and is an inevitable POV violation. Someone could put this one on [[Schneider v. New Jersey]] or the [[Dershowitz–Finkelstein affair]] or [[Snyder v. Phelps]]. [[User:Jayjg|Jayjg ]]<sup><small><font color="DarkGreen">[[User_talk:Jayjg|(talk)]]</font></small></sup> 03:21, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
-**Thanks for commenting.  While any infobox could likely be used for any page, if not poorly, these examples are much better served w/ their current infoboxes.  I find no issue with an infobox being a versatile tool.  Please explain why you think it's a POV issue.  Do you equally want to delete [[Template:Infobox military conflict]] & [[Template:Infobox uprising]] because they could be a POV issue and used on other pages? See history listed above for why it was created.  My original limits that I had in mind for the infobox is listed above: <small>"The purpose of this template is to span the area inclusively between protests to small armed rebellion and provide a useful template for the natural fluid progression that civil dispute takes between those stages." </small> ~ [[User:Justin Ormont|Justin Ormont]] ([[User talk:Justin Ormont|talk]]) 05:45, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
-***You are saying that by sticking that box into the Wisconsin article, we are in essence expressing an editorial opinion that their little labor spat is going to "fluid[ly] progress[]" to "small armed rebellion"? That is the very definition of a POV-introducing template. -- <b>[[User:Y|Y]]&nbsp;[[User_talk:Y|not?]]</b> 05:48, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
-****[[user:Y]]: Quite the odd conclusion you come to by picking apart my words. Please look at the [[2011 Wisconsin protests]] article and explain how you think the template means the people of Wisconsin are attempting to overthrow the government with a small armed rebellion. There's of course nothing inevitable that a protest will escalate or deescalate; what do you see in the template that implies this? Merely because an infobox can be used for a few situations, of course doesn't mean that that one of those situations will change into another.<br />Hypothetically, let's assume someone makes an infobox very specifically only for a 'small protest' that couldn't be used for a 'large protest'.  By your argument, wouldn't using that infobox on an article about a small protest create a POV that the topic of the article will never become a 'large protest'? This continuation of your argument seems to lead to a [[reductio ad absurdum]] specifically, that no infobox can be used for any current event that may change.<br/>On another note, do you think it's better to make a template that can only be used for extremely specific situations than one that works well for a few? How would you make an infobox differently to be used only for small protests?  Sorry, this being a discussion and not a court of law, my language is imprecise; the 'fluidity' in my statement merely references that the ''definition'' has no clear, or hard division line between the low end and higher end of a civil conflict; the 'fluidity' isn't referencing that a conflict necessarily transitions easily; I should have worded that more clearly.  ~ [[User:Justin Ormont|Justin Ormont]] ([[User talk:Justin Ormont|talk]]) 08:48, 8 March 2011 (UTC)