Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2018 January 4

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion | Log
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by DePiep (talk | contribs) at 11:17, 7 January 2018 (→Element Infoboxes: no, no need to tag articles, because articles are not affected (no content change, no visual change). This would be a *technical* change, no change in rendered pages!). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
< January 3 January 5 >

January 4

Element Infoboxes

Full list of templates

I don’t think we need 118 separate templates for each element, since each is used only on the corresponding article. Instead, I suggest transcluding {{Infobox element}} on each page. For technical reasons, I can only go up to tin, element 50, in the initial nomination. I’ll add the remaining 68 later. LaundryPizza03 (talk) 21:02, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
EDIT: Added the rest, and three undiscovered elements. 23:02, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

No, because it is not a deletion. It is a reverse-merge (upmerge?). -DePiep (talk) 09:27, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Also no need to add a tag in articles, because this is not a deletion, nor content change. It is a technical change. When done, no content change will happen at all (we must hope)! No visual (rendered) change even, to mainspace. (and, btw, adding a tag to all infoboxes could be done quite simply, just ask me. But I will revert). - DePiep (talk) 11:17, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: What is the gain to convert everything? It is well maintained it works fine there is no exponential growth in numbers expected. First and foremost we had the discussion years ago and the arguments are still valid. Are there new ones? The old discussions yielded no Delete vote, where should they come from now?--Stone (talk) 21:36, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: The reasons given by the proposer are identical to the reasons given in the past. In the links given above, all !votes listed appear to be keep except for the proposer. It seems every discussion was closed either by WP:SNOW or because the proposer withdrew the proposal. YBG (talk) 22:42, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. The only argument that keeps coming up, is that templates "may" not be used as single-instance, "maskerading as article text" (well, this time not even that is mentioned, which indicates poor preparation and research). I'll explain why this is too short-sighted, or Wikilawyering. Disclosure: my involvement.
First of all, being a guideline allows for reasoned exceptions. And even within the relevant guidelines, the very first sentence says "Templates should not normally be used ..." (which comes nearest to the objections, to fill that in by lack of true arguments in nom). Now, this is a "not normally". I do not simply claim Be Bold/Ignore All Rules, I claim a Reasoned Exception.
Second, having article data in a template is as common as the weather. Navboxes are the easiest example. Of course, every such template has the view-talk-edit links. This way of editing is fully acceptable for Wikipedia, and is supporting "the encyclopedia everyone can edit". Important to note: this way of editing is irrelevant wrt the number of transclusions. Let me repeat this: no editor is hindered because of the fact that a template is transcluded only once.
Third: transclusion is core of internet pages. If we want to build serious webpages, we'll have to include the option to transclude. And OTOH, no editor is helped when having all content in one page. Not for structuring the page, not for editing the page (to think about: we also have section editing).
Fourth: While these templates are set up this way since inception, we can and do maintain a high grade of perfectionism and correctness. Checking, editing and improving the 121 element templates is made easy and well-controlled by their being standalone. I would not wish any editor or maintainer having to go through 121 articles to find a specific data point for check or change. Some years ago, moving the metatemplate from wikitable form into {{infobox}} form could not have been done having to check individual article pages. We would have to create sandboxes of all articles. At the moment, a similar big change is in the air wrt using Wikidata.
Also, the complementary non-infobox part of the article, that is all other page content, is maintained very good, I can say, since 104/121 (86%) of the articles are FA/GA. None of these FA/GA creating editors has ever complained about this infobox situation.
TL;DR; a. It is about a guideline, so allows reasoned exception (not even simply claiming Be Bold/IAR in this). b. Editing templates through view-talk-edit links is accepted as Wikipedia article setup. Number of transclusions does not matter to the editor. c. Transclusion is a basic feature of webpages. Wikipedia does accomodate that, while maintaining "everyone can edit". d. Infobox and article maintenance and editing are not helped by adding infobox data to the article. e. No involved WP:ELEMENTS editor asked for this—ever. Articles and their infoboxes have 86% FA/GA, so something must be done right. Big changes, like going from wikitable to {{Infobox}} (done) and using Wikidata (todo), cannot be done smoothly nor easily, if at all, when code is in article.
Keep per my comment, and earlier TfDs. -DePiep (talk) 11:05, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Short Circuit

With two films and one song, this just doesn't seem necessary. Navigation is not really improved by having this. WP:NENAN. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 19:23, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:NPSL South Playoffs

redundant tournament bracket template Frietjes (talk) 15:45, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 06:11, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:NPSL Winter

unused and out-of-date Frietjes (talk) 15:43, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 06:00, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete It seems out of date or need to be updated. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 06:00, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:NFL WR stats start

unused Frietjes (talk) 15:43, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:NFL punting and returning stats start

unused Frietjes (talk) 15:42, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:NDB/Nativeno

not used by Template:NDB Frietjes (talk) 15:42, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:NaturalCompoundImage

unused; unclear purpose Frietjes (talk) 15:40, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Native

unused; unclear purpose Frietjes (talk) 15:40, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:National rugby union team templates

unused navboxes wrapper for a group of other navboxes Frietjes (talk) 15:31, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:National football top goalscorers player

unused Frietjes (talk) 15:30, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 21:06, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:National football squad break (debut)

unused Frietjes (talk) 15:29, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 21:02, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:National football squad player (light)

unused Frietjes (talk) 15:29, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 20:49, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:National Youth Competition season 2010 ladder progression

should be added to 2010 National Youth Competition (rugby league) season or deleted Frietjes (talk) 15:28, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:National World University Championships baseball record

unused infobox Frietjes (talk) 15:27, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:National Rugby League Teams

unused and out-of-date Frietjes (talk) 15:26, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Named 2017 FIA World Endurance Championship

unused; appears to duplicate Template:2017 FIA World Endurance Championship Frietjes (talk) 15:06, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:NYNH&H lines

unused Frietjes (talk) 15:04, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Were created in order to handle future articles on, and mentions of, NYNH&H stations that did not survive to be taken over by any other railroad or agency. Will certainly become used, most likely sooner rather than later (judging from the pace of recent pickups in activity in WikiProject Greater Boston Public Transit and its relations). Whoop whoop pull up Bitching Betty | Averted crashes 15:10, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:NWLLR lines

unused Frietjes (talk) 15:03, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:NS Sneltrein lines

unused Frietjes (talk) 15:03, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:NSSR color

unused Frietjes (talk) 15:02, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:NRW-Liga

unused and out-of-date Frietjes (talk) 15:01, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 20:36, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:NRL map2

should be added to an article or deleted Frietjes (talk) 15:01, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Added it to the NRL article.Fleets (talk) 20:12, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:NRHP in Crater Lake NP

appears to have been replaced by Template:Crater Lake Frietjes (talk) 14:57, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:NIRDublinLineColor

unused; replaced by Template:NIRColor Frietjes (talk) 14:55, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:NIRRail start

unused; replaced by other s-line templates Frietjes (talk) 14:54, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Page metrics 2013-2014

Outdated template which will probably not be used again in the future. Substitute all transclusions (less than 5 not counting the pages related to itself), then delete. Steel1943 (talk) 21:19, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 01:48, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Distilled beverages

unused; appears to duplicate a section in Template:Alcoholic drinks Frietjes (talk) 17:28, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 01:46, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:The X-Files RT scores S10

single-use templates, should be merged with the articles; there is no need to keep the scores in separate templates Frietjes (talk) 15:07, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 01:46, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge. I don't see how does using templates would prevent vandalism. It seems like in some cases it actually could increase the likelihood, as less people would be watching the templates than the articles themselves. Single use templates should generally be avoided, these seem to fit that criteria. Cheers, Dresken (talk) 02:04, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per Dresken. I also fail to see how requiring editors to watch the templates and the article will help prevent vandalism. If you are having problems with vandalism, ask to have the articles protected. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:10, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2018_January_4&oldid=819094666"