Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2020 January 21: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 34: Line 34:
::1) 69 2) i 3) Pump Up the Volume 4) MARRS and 5) Colourbox (and now 6) New Clear Child per Gongshow below). [[User:GiantSnowman|Giant]][[User talk:GiantSnowman|Snowman]] 22:14, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
::1) 69 2) i 3) Pump Up the Volume 4) MARRS and 5) Colourbox (and now 6) New Clear Child per Gongshow below). [[User:GiantSnowman|Giant]][[User talk:GiantSnowman|Snowman]] 22:14, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. I just created an article on another of this act's albums. The template navigates a sufficient number of articles, in my view. <small><span style="border:1px solid">[[User:Gongshow|'''<span style="color:black">&nbsp;gongshow&nbsp;</span>''']]</span><span style="background-color:black">[[User_talk:Gongshow|<span style="color:#ffffff">&nbsp;'''talk'''&nbsp;</span>]]</span></small> 21:31, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. I just created an article on another of this act's albums. The template navigates a sufficient number of articles, in my view. <small><span style="border:1px solid">[[User:Gongshow|'''<span style="color:black">&nbsp;gongshow&nbsp;</span>''']]</span><span style="background-color:black">[[User_talk:Gongshow|<span style="color:#ffffff">&nbsp;'''talk'''&nbsp;</span>]]</span></small> 21:31, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
*'''Neutral''' Fifth nomination? Over what timeframe? If less than a year, then yes, [[WP:DROPTHESTiCK]] ''may'' be apt here. If over 5-10 years, that's not necessarily problematic, since [[WP:CCC|consensus can change]]. Nevertheless, I can't really see this under-populated navbox being useful or needed. Can we not substitute it at the bottom of the three or four articles and delete it? --[[User:Dmehus|'''Doug Mehus''']]''<span style="font-size:small; vertical-align:top;"> [[User talk:Dmehus|T]]</span>''·''<span style="font-size:small; vertical-align:bottom;">[[Special:Contributions/Dmehus|C]]</span>'' 01:23, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
*'''Neutral''' Fifth nomination? Over what timeframe? If less than a year, then yes, [[WP:DROPTHESTICK]] ''may'' be apt here. If over 5-10 years, that's not necessarily problematic, since [[WP:CCC|consensus can change]]. Nevertheless, I can't really see this under-populated navbox being useful or needed. Can we not substitute it at the bottom of the three or four articles and delete it? --[[User:Dmehus|'''Doug Mehus''']]''<span style="font-size:small; vertical-align:top;"> [[User talk:Dmehus|T]]</span>''·''<span style="font-size:small; vertical-align:bottom;">[[Special:Contributions/Dmehus|C]]</span>'' 01:23, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Revision as of 01:25, 23 January 2020

Similar to the Nihongo core TfD. This has 6 transclusions which can be changed to either {{Nihongo}}, {{Nihongo2}} or {{Nihongo3}}. Gonnym (talk) 22:26, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support whatever Trialpears or Pppery suggest as I'm afraid I'm not really understanding this template's purpose. It does seem under-utilized, so if this can be substituted and deleted, I'm fine with that. However, if TP or Pppery see it as being useful and worth keeping, I support and trust their analysis. --Doug Mehus T·C 01:21, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Created by a serial hoaxer, and made up of a number of the hoaxes they created. I think it was created merely to lend credence to their hoaxes. While this could be a useful template, I'm afraid it warrants a WP:TNT due to the circumstances of its creation. CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n! 17:03, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep CaptainEek, I don't know what you mean by "serial hoaxer." Nevertheless, what's wrong with this template? If it's related to the articles themselves, those should be AfD'd. I personally don't subscribe to the "delete everything of a sockpuppet" ideology. I think it should be case-by-case. I don't see a clear enough case for WP:TNT. --Doug Mehus T·C 01:19, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This template has been nominated many times. Discussions in 2013 and 2015 were closed as "no consensus".

2017 had three "keep"s but all three were just "it's fine" without any policy based reasons.

This is a clear-cut WP:NENAN as it navigates a whopping two articles, each of which is sufficiently interlinked, and the latter of which only barely seems notable. Even counting the collaborative song there are still only three, which is way short of the precedent of 5 established at WP:NENAN. Can we just get a proper consensus on this already? Ten Pound Hammer(What did I screw up now?) 01:34, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

1) 69 2) i 3) Pump Up the Volume 4) MARRS and 5) Colourbox (and now 6) New Clear Child per Gongshow below). GiantSnowman 22:14, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]