Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 November 24

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by WikiCleanerMan (talk | contribs) at 23:09, 24 November 2021 (First set of unused map templates for deletion). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

All unused maps and not needed anywhere. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:09, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused template, part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Fungi/Fungi Collaboration, now marked as historical. No reasonable chance of future use. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:26, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 17:27, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Per discussion with Trappist the monk on the Talk page for rtl-lang, I think I'm right in saying that neither of these templates need to exist. Both {{lang}} and {{para}} seem to detect rtl-functionality as a matter of course now; there are a lot of extraneous language templates, and these are two of 'em. Please note I've been unable to properly add a deletion discussion notice to rtl-lang because the page is permanently template-protected; apologies. --Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) ({{ping}} me!) 16:19, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was Delete; deleted as G7 by Maile66 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT 21:19, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have just realised this article is too old for DYK eligibility; self-nominated deletion. —AFreshStart (talk) 15:45, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Done — Maile (talk) 19:50, 24 November 2021 (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).

Unused, seemingly redundant to Template:Infobox US Supreme Court case. Hog Farm Talk 14:58, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, could possibly only ever be used in one article, and a prose list is used there instead. Hog Farm Talk 14:49, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Per Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 November 13#Template:R1, the S-phrase templates in Category:S-phrase templates should be deprecated, placed in Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Holding cell, replaced with relevant P phrases and deleted when unused.

Pinging previous discussion participents: User:Tom (LT), User:Graeme Bartlett, User:DePiep, User:Izno, User:Jonesey95 and closer User:Primefac. Gonnym (talk) 10:25, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • They have already been tagged for deletion for a while. They have already been deprecated for years. They should have been discussed along with R1, but I think the nomination was not adequate to list the affected templates. I support the idea to replace by P phrases, and I am about the only one doing that job. However deleting will make a mess in the history of all the most important chemical articles, including ethanol. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:44, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Used by only a single user on personal user pages. Izno (talk) 00:08, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • This template provides userspace links across wikiprojects, in the same way that {{sister project}} does so for articles. It's hasn't really been advertised, but there really isn't an appropriate substitute for this functionality. I'd be thrilled if we had an all-encompassing cross-wiki linking template that would recognize the different links for articles, user pages, template pages, etc. but until that time, these templates should be left available for users to get access across Wikimedia sister projects. VanIsaac, MPLL contWpWS 02:20, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 17:20, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as serving a useful function, well within our userspace template tolerances – unless there's a better/easier way of doing the same thing. This could, however, move to User:UBX/Userboxes/Wikipedia/Cross-wiki user, then be listed at User:UBX/Userboxes/Wikipedia. We alreay migrated a large number of userboxes out of the Template namespace years ago and should do more of them.  — SMcCandlish ¢ 😼  19:23, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to some other template in Category:Wikimedia account user templates. This appears to be redundant with pre-existing userboxes, at least in purpose if not exact feature-set.  — SMcCandlish ¢ 😼  19:26, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @SMcCandlish: I think you misunderstand the purpose then. This is not a userbox for advertising a person's cross-wiki activities, and does not really function as such. It is a tool for userpages so that editors can have access to their main links on sister projects, much like other cross-wiki templates provide links to sister project content in other namespaces. VanIsaac, MPLL contWpWS 06:13, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    The only functional difference I can see between this and several templates already in that category is that this one provides talk, contribs, uploads, and watchlist links, which are features that can be added to a pre-existing template as parameters. Several of those other templates are also redundant and can merge away.  — SMcCandlish ¢ 😼  08:39, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I would be happy to relist this along with other templates you think are at least partially redundant to see what sort of merger we could accomplish. I originally made this template because I couldn't find anything to accomplish the task, so if that functionality is already present elsewhere, it should be merged, and we should be doing better at categorizing and linking those templates so that others can find them. VanIsaac, MPLL contWpWS 09:09, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Without looking in subcategories, every template in that category appears to be redundant. A combined one could, with no parameters produce output like {{User SUL}}; with just a username, {{User unified}} or {{User global}}; with a username and a parameter for what one's "home" wiki and/or language are, the output of {{User SUL Box}} (which also renders the German-hardcoded {{User SUL-de}} and the fewer-options {{User SUL-bar}} completely pointless). I would suggest starting with {{User SUL Box}} which has the richest options, and adding parameters to display talk, contribs, etc. links when a "home" wiki is specified.  — SMcCandlish ¢ 😼  18:48, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Mainly looking for more opinions on merge v. delete.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 08:38, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Per precedent at Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2018_April_30#Template:Taiwan's_Top_100_surnames. –LaundryPizza03 (d) 07:25, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's a pity that no one uses it now. Q28 left a message at 00:07, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You could use it, and then it wouldn't be orphaned :-) --Trovatore (talk) 04:38, 24 November 2021 (UTC) [reply]

It is no longer used. -- Q28 left a message at 00:05, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is a welcome template but no longer in use. Q28 left a message at 00:04, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

One thing I noticed is that this template is not being used. Q28 left a message at 00:03, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]