Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2018 January 9

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion | Log
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Bellezzasolo (talk | contribs) at 16:32, 16 January 2018 (→Template:Infobox UK school). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
< January 8 January 10 >

January 9

Template:Campaignbox Peasants' revolt in Palestine

Per WP:TFD#REASONS. The template has only valid 4 articles, is about an occurrence that already has a category of its own, and has multiple in-links at the main Peasants' revolt in Palestine article. Yambaram (talk) 08:59, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:43, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2016–17 Euroleague Regular season results

unused and out-of-date; results are already in 2016–17 EuroLeague Regular Season Frietjes (talk) 15:21, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:38, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2017−18 Liga MX Aggregate table

unused and out-of-date; duplicates Template:Apertura 2017 Liga MX table Frietjes (talk) 15:31, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 09:46, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:37, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Nimian States

unused Frietjes (talk) 21:02, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Nikita ratings

not used in Nikita or related articles Frietjes (talk) 21:02, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Nigerien presidential election, 2004

duplicates the results table in the article Frietjes (talk) 21:00, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Nicola Tribal Association

replaced by a subgroup of Template:Nlaka'pamux governments Frietjes (talk) 20:59, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Ngayarta

unused Frietjes (talk) 20:59, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:New York gubernatorial election, 2014

duplicates the table in the article Frietjes (talk) 20:57, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:New York State Historic Sites

unused; appears to generally duplicate Template:National Register of Historic Places in New York Frietjes (talk) 20:56, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This should correspond to List of New York State Historic Sites; it just needs to be fixed. ɱ (talk) · vbm · coi) 14:03, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:New Jersey Counties Labeled Map

unused, articles are using Template:Counties of New Jersey image map instead Frietjes (talk) 20:53, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Netscapeversions

replaced by navigation in Template:Netscape Frietjes (talk) 20:49, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Nevada/color

unused Frietjes (talk) 20:48, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Neoplasms

unused Frietjes (talk) 20:02, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Neighbourhoods of Güzelyurt

unused, all red links Frietjes (talk) 20:02, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Navseasoncats2

unused Frietjes (talk) 20:01, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox UK school

Propose merging Template:Infobox UK school with Template:Infobox school.
I have nominated for Infobox UK school template to be merged with Infobox school template. The Infobox school template is very comprehensive and better organised than the UK school template. The fields/parameters which I mentioned on Infobox school template talk page (also listed below) should be copied from the UK one, then UK school articles can also use the Infobox school template too, which acts as a 'standard' school template. But as these fields/parameters are the only ones missing, there wouldn't really be any need to have an Infobox UK school template, and the rest of the fields/parameters on the UK template are already there. This is why a merge would make sense. These fields/parameters that I'm relating to are:

  • The LEA to display as Local Authority in the infobox, or an option to have it displayed as this rather than LEA (currently named as this in the Infobox school template), the UK Government website, DfE now calls it Local authority
  • dfeno (previously dcsfno) - "The 7-digit DfE number of a school in England or Wales, available from the DfE EduBase website. A slash should separate the first three digits, identifying the local authority, from the last four, identifying the establishment within the LA."
  • urn (previously dcsfurn) - "The 6-digit DfE Unique Reference Number (URN) of a school in England or Wales, available from the DfE EduBase website and the Ofsted website. The field generates a link to the school's page on EduBase."
  • old_urn - possibly the ability to also add a second or third old urn should a school have been established from a merger of two or more schools - field produces a link to the text of 'Pre-Academy Reports'
  • ofsted - aware this field is already present in the Infobox school template but should be removed, and changed so that "Any non-blank text in this field signifies that the school's teaching is inspected by Ofsted, and causes a link to the current Ofsted reports page for the school to be generated from the value of the urn field."
  • capacity - the schools capacity, in terms of the number of pupils
  • predecessor - this field isn't on the infobox UK school template, but I was thinking this field should be created, as there are schools around the world, including the UK that have been established from a merger of two or more predecessor schools - would be ideal to have this field situated after the other name and former name fields, and before school type field on the Infobox school template
  • trust - "If the school is a sponsor led academy or a foundation school it maybe be part of a trust or foundation." - many schools in the UK have become academies, some have become part of a 'trust'. It would be ideal to have this field situated just after the school type field on the Infobox school template

It would be a good idea to have a look at the Infobox UK schools template example to see what the above fields look like in the infobox and that this can be replicated for the Infobox school template. I can see that 11 infobox school-related templates were merged into Infobox school (I'm aware the majority were American-related). But why does the UK have its own? It is evident that the Infobox school template is better and if you look at them side-by-side, you'll see; its design and fields/parameters are also applicable to UK schools. When adding the Infobox school template to a UK school article, only the parameters applicable to UK schools would be used (already applies to schools in other countries using this template). I had a look at the TfD, the second reason under 'reasons to delete a template' is "The template is redundant to a better-designed template". In this case, the Infobox school template is the better-designed, it just lacks the fields/parameters I mentioned that would allow the template to better-suit UK school articles. I can see that short discussions regarding a merge were previously discussed; one over 10 years ago and another 2 years ago, but I think at these times, the Infobox school template was not as well developed as it is now. In some cases, consolidation (see also Wikipedia:Infobox consolidation) can be a good thing and the majority of the fields/parameters in the Infobox school template are generic to schools around the world. What do you think? :) Steven (Editor) (talk) 19:15, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • No- very worried I have spent considerable time this last month- trying to build up a the structure for a few exemplar article on representative state schools. I am not there yet, but that job concluded I would make some changes to Infobox UK school. I have collected together a useful list of varied types of stateschools that will act as test data for any proposed changes. User:ClemRutter#Making sense of schools
Lets dive in, Kidbrooke school Greenwich, the LCCs first purpose built comprehensive school, was reopened as Corelli College, a cooperative type academy (convertor academy) run by the Corelli College Co-operative Academy Trust. On the 1st March it closes and reopens as The Halley Academy, an academy within the Leigh Academy Trust multi-academy trust, a not-for profit trust. As a Leigh Academy, it will have board of trustees, with a registered address at the Strood Academy, Medway- and a local board of governors. There is an Executive principle, who has an office at Stationers' Crown Woods Academy, and a principal who I believe is not Head of School, but is based at Kidbrooke. All this is infobox stuff, and hopefully can become wikidata maintained. (I haven't bolded 16 or so fields that I would need to store this data)
So far this is fairly simple, the 1200 pupil school teaches NC KS3-KS4-KS5, there are 207 in the sixth form, what could happen next is that the sixthform will be become shared with another school or schools in the MAT- I predict Crown Woods. This allows for the DFE statistics to me massaged and blows our capacity field. Rochester Girls Grammar School, is a girls school- that takes boys into the sixth form. It runs a MAT and imports and exports its sixthformers. There is of course a cost saving as it allows sixth form courses to continue when a key member of staff resigns and goes to teach overseas. Capacity is a moving feast. Now we come back to the questions of site- many (convertor academy) run on multiple sites, these are usually close enough to walk but far enough apart to require two geo-tags. However Tonbridge's Weald of Kent Grammar School has built a £19m "annexe" in Sevenoaks, 10 miles from its main site. If you look at Weald of Kent Grammar School's UK infobox it can't cope.
Now the Nottingham Academy is a 3900 student school across multiple keystages (1-5) on multiple sites with multiple histories and multiple headteachers and multiple associated schools. And we must remember Whitehaven Academy and the Wakefield City Academies Trust fiascos
I dismissed the US specific Schools template as it failed to have the right terminology, and encouraged the sort of 2004 type trivia- mascots, songs! Instead I used the UK infobox which is not very pretty- and now too dated to really function. I suggest/propose that {{Template:Infobox school/UK schools sandbox}} is created and we can work there to see what is possible. My initial thoughts are that do need the facility to embed collapsible subpages within the template. I am thinking of a template with details of the trust or MAT (with link to their current Report and Financial statement- it is a goldmine of a source for wikipedians). I am thinking of see also links to schools in the same MAT. I am thinking of a page for each major site that has been incorporated into the school- this can have an address, a OSM map of the site at max zoom and list of facilities etc.ClemRutter (talk) 01:36, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, ClemRutter, thanks for your response. First of all, thank you so much for mentioning the multi-academy trusts, I forgot to mention the trust field in the list above (now added) which is important to UK schools. The other problem would be over complicating the infobox - the trust field for example would state the name of the trust the school is part of and would be linked to either a section on the school page where an Academy has established its own MAT (The Fallibroome Academy for example has their own trust known as The Fallibroome Trust) or a page of that MAT/independent MAT (E-ACT for example which also has its own template; Template:E-ACT schools that is displayed at the bottom of its Academies respective articles) with a list of the schools - could even link to a trust/sponsor section on a school page that would provide a description and a link to the dedicated MAT section/page.
The use of a predecessor field mentioned above and the former name(s) field already present in the Infobox school template would help regarding the various name changes of the school, and what is was and what it became after. These names can also be linked to the relevant school articles should those schools have a reputably long history. Also the history section on the present school would be very important in describing these changes. It would be best to keep the infobox simple and it would suffice to mention just the different names and date of establishment next to the name in brackets. You're right regarding multiple sites, and there are schools in the UK (not just Academies), around the world too, that have more than one site. The Infobox school template has a campus/campuses field that can be used to mention these multiple sites (brackets can be used to mention the year-to-year the site was operated if no longer used), it may be a good idea to also have the option to be able to change this so that it displays school site(s)/site(s), as some schools may refer to them as sites rather than campuses. I'm currently working on The Winsford Academy (still much work needed and copyvio) but this school has gone through numerous name changes and sites/buildings, also due to the changes of education in England. First it operated in one building on the High Street (later extended, initially Verdin Technical School), then operated on two campuses/sites (High Street-the building next to this building eventually became part of the school and Grange Lane), Woodford Lodge High School was eventually established on the outskirts of Winsford. The High Street building later closed, all students moved to the Grange Lane site. It then Federated with Woodford Lodge for 2 years before the two schools amalgamated to form an Academy, operating on the two school sites (the Grange Lane buildings known latterly as Verdin High School and Woodford Lodge became 'Town Site' and 'West Site'), before moving all students to one site on Grange Lane (Town Site), and then into a new building on this site. I've mentioned all this in the history section, then provided brief description in the introduction text and a list of the different school names in the infobox (due to lack of sufficient parameters, had to display them next to Established).
Associated schools could be a field that can be made, but may not be needed or this could be mentioned in a section on the school article. If a school has multiple buildings, it may be a good idea to have a 'Buildings' section that would describe each of these buildings. The same can be done if the school has multiple sites. I've seen some school/college articles on Wikipedia that have done this. Regarding sixth forms, could develop a sixth form field that could say boys or girls only or a link to its sixth form section/article. There is a field to describe the number of sixth form students on the Infobox school template. But on UK school articles, we would input the age range, such as 11-16/11-18 in the infobox. Then on the article, we would write an introduction that provides brief information about the school, and we would mention the age range and it has a sixth form etc. It would also be ideal to create a Sixth Form section on the article that would provide a description about the sixth form, and whether its for boys or girls only and so on. Regarding terminology, only the fields/parameters applicable to UK schools would be used. Steven (Editor) (talk) 04:23, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Steven (Editor): Thanks for the early morning response. I have had a look again at The Winsford Academy and though it is huge there is a long way to go. There is an awful lot of material that needs to be culled and a lot of essential material missing. I would assess it as a 'C'. Do you want me to come in and do a little editing- or do you prefere to work on your own? Can I reiterate my suggestion that you demonstrate your suggestion by working it up in a sandbox, and then testing it out for the schools I have named- then we can see if it is viable.
I see that the infobox has two functions- a way of rendering basic information so it look goods- but also as a repository of structured data- a halfway house to Wikidata- each field should have very precise contents, open text is really the last resort. At the moment we have to accept redundancy, so the associated schools have to be entered manually-(it would be better if we could import them from a existing navbox template) in future there will be a live link- the MAT named in the |trust field, will pick up the list of schools from a property field in the Wikidata item, and this will also be responsible for naming the Chair of the trustees. ClemRutter (talk) 11:16, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, ClemRutter, thanks for the response. Definitely more work needed on The Winsford Academy article - I did test the Infobox school template on this article to see how well it works with this UK school (this school has numerous name changes and changes to its education, merged with another school and different sites and buildings), its works very well, I was able to add further information with the other fields/parameters that are available and not to mention that the Infobox school template supports the variations (as mentioned below) and better-designed that the Infobox UK school template. The only thing missing were the fields/parameters mentioned above. Another reason for the merger is consistency across schools on Wikipedia and a template that already acts as a 'standard' school template. Any school around the world can already use this template because of the generic fields/parameters that are available. In order to provide more information that would cater for a school in a specific country, additional fields/parameters that are applicable to those schools would need to be used. If the same approach was to be adopted like the UK, where each country would have its own infobox school template, I think this would eventually cause a mess and it would also mean more infobox school templates to maintain (don't forget the benefits associated with consolidation and consistency - works well with schools, as the generic fields/parameters such as name, established, type etc. would apply to all schools, but you'd just need to add additional fields/parameters in order to cater and provide further information for schools in different countries). You know how you mentioned associated schools and I replied with "associated schools could be a field that can be made, but may not be needed or this could be mentioned in a section on the school article" - I just had a look at the Infobox school template again and there is an affiliations field/parameter and this is for "any of the school's affiliations (or affiliation)". So this can be used to list the associated schools or link to a section within the article or a separate article that contains further information. The other thing is the problem of over complicating the infobox - improvements can always been done, and we can still suggest ideas and work on improvements. But this merge does make sense - Steven (Editor) (talk) 20:22, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Merge Because all of the functions of the UK infobox can be incorporated into the general one, but please ensure that all functionality remains as the merge occurs. WhisperToMe (talk) 11:25, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
User:PC-XT, could you please clarify that? Do you actually use the template and find it confusing to use, or is there something about the way it displays that confuses you, or is it that you are confused by the different terminology between (say) the US and some other countries? If the last, how would that confusion be resolved by merging the templates? Moonraker (talk) 04:12, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, I don't mind clarifying. I haven't used it recently, but I have worked on articles with it before my wikibreak. My opinion is that the UK one is harder to remember, when editing articles for various countries. (parameters, and the name by which to look up documentation, if I remember that UK has this exception instead of trying to use infobox school) The display and terminology are fine. I'm talking about usage by editors. As a coder, I also know of benefits like consolidation to reduce maintenance, but didn't really assess that benefit yet for this code. —PC-XT+ 03:13, 15 January 2018 (UTC) 03:31, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Moonraker: The confusion is to as why the UK is the only country that has its own school template, when there is an Infobox school template that acts as a 'standard' school template; better-designed and comprehensive. Please see my responses above and response to your comment below as to why the merge makes sense and why I think they should be merged. Steven (Editor) (talk) 15:42, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose merge This is a useful template, developed for the circumstances of schools in the British tradition. The "one size fits all" approach is often misguided, as it is here. The merged template would no doubt continue to develop, with the emphasis on functionality in the United States and Canada. And at the end of the day what good purpose exactly would be served? Moonraker (talk) 03:53, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    @Moonraker: There's a few things to look at as to why the merge makes sense. Obviously the Infobox school template is used for schools around the world and acts as a 'standard' school template. Even though the majority of the templates that were merged into it were American-related, initially the template was most likely used for schools in the United States and Canada. However, there are fields/parameters that are generic and apply to schools around the world, such as name, established, type, the map function and so on. Then to provide further infobox information for a school in a specific country, at present, the Infobox school template has fields/parameters applicable to US, Canada, Australia and New Zealand schools. There's also a few for UK schools, but these need updating as mentioned above and there's a few missing (also listed above). There are many benefits associated with merging the UK one into the standard one, and I don't see how this would be a problem. It is required for schools in other countries using the Infobox school template to use only the fields/parameters applicable to that school. The same is and would be applied to UK schools. If you look above at one of my responses to ClemRutter, you can see that I've tried the Infobox school template with a UK school article I'm working on, which worked very well, I've also talked about another reason for the merger, including consistency across schools on Wikipedia, consolidation and the disadvantages associated if the same approach was to be adopted like the UK, where each country would have its own infobox school template. Ultimately, the merger does make sense Steven (Editor) (talk) 15:42, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Steven (Editor) I see I was mentioned but not pinged. You don't need to give detailed explanations to every experienced editor, who adds his considered opinion. It is clear that after working on one article you came up with an idea that you believe would add consistency to WP. The article you are working on has Winsford Academy is a rather simple case, and has significant problems- It is not even assessed yet, and there are open maintenance tags even has potential copyvios. Kudpung suggested you should look at HCGS for an example of a GA. You say you have run a test of your proposal- but you have not given us a link so we can see the result. I have asked you to run the test on a I have a list list of schools- can you please do that and give us a link to those results. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ClemRutter (talk • contribs) 10:33, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Notifying Steven (Editor). Jc86035 (talk) 12:36, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Notifying Kudpung. Jc86035 (talk) 12:37, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
ClemRutter Hi, sorry for not pinging you, I forgot to tag your name when I was writing the response. I'm just trying to show how the merge would address a problem that an editor mentions. The reason for mentioning the article I'm working on when replying to you above (I've already mentioned above that there is much work to do on it, including copyvio. Kudpung has already addressed this problem on mine and the article talk page - I'm here to discuss regarding the potential merger of the infobox templates, not the article I'm working on) was because it happened to conveniently match some of your problems. There will be schools where only some or one of these factors would apply. Plus, I mentioned that I test the Infobox school template on this article to see how well it works with this UK school. But the thing to look at is making use of the additional fields/parameters that are already available in the Infobox school template. I have already looked at your schools you've mentioned in your talk page, but if you look at all the fields/parameters in the Infobox UK school template, you'll see that they are all already present in the Infobox school template (excluding the ones listed above) - its just a case of using the same fields/parameters that you're using for a UK school, but you'd be able to take benefit of the additional fields/parameters available, a template that's better-designed and again acts as a 'standard' school template and helps with consistency across schools on Wikipedia. Steven (Editor) (talk) 17:58, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
ClemRutter As we are here to discuss a merger proposal and not article improvements, you mentioned improvements to an article I'm working on. I was looking at the "Kidbrooke School + Corelli College + The Halley Academy" you have listed. I see you created a new article for The Halley Academy. For this situation, a separate article won't be needed. It would be best to remove this article and mention on Corelli College in the introduction text that it will become The Halley Academy from 1 March 2018, as part of the Leigh Academies Trust. Once this date has passed, you would then simply move Corelli College to The Halley Academy and update the information on the article, such as the introduction text, history section and infobox. A similar situation happened with the article I'm working on where its name and logo changed slightly due to a change of sponsor/trust (the sponsor/trust name was used in the schools name). Steven (Editor) (talk) 18:39, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Bellezzasolo, the reason the field/parameter image2 is not listed because it is already there in the Infobox school template. The Infobox UK school template has image which is for the logo and image2 which is to add a secondary image. In the Infobox school template, there is logo which is for the logo and image which is to add a secondary image. Steven (Editor) (talk) 22:09, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Bellezzasolo, there's also picture and picture2 on the infobox school template which can be used to add images that would be displayed at the bottom of the infobox. But all the fields/parameters excluding the ones listed above are already there Steven (Editor) (talk) 23:21, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Steven (Editor): yes, however that would mean a significant trawl of the existing UK School articles. Certainly, I think the issue needed noting here, as if it had been missed there would have been problems. ∰Bellezzasolo✡ Discuss 16:32, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose for several reasons. First, this TfD is developing into the discussion that should have been held Template_talk:Infobox_UK_school with notifications to WP:WPSCH and other interested parties, but wasn't. Secondly, there are some very good reasons for maintaining a separate infobox for UK schools as discussed elsewhere, and finally: it's a solution looking for a problem and all it's doing is causing a huge thread in the wrong venue. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 22:29, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Kudpung: May I ask where these discussions are? WhisperToMe (talk) 09:38, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Men's rights article probation (portions)

per the rationale provided by Noyster and Jc86035 in the Community article probation discussion. Frietjes (talk) 15:10, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Knowledge Fund

Other than 2 links there is no apparent purpose for this template. – S. Rich (talk) 07:19, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WebSlice-begin

Web Slice technology is only supported in Internet Explorer 8 and 9, so no longer a need for these templates. WOSlinker (talk) 12:13, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:37, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Languages of Tamil Nadu

unused Frietjes (talk) 14:20, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:33, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Have to disagree with the above user. This template would be very difficult to add to articles, most of the languages are not endemic to Tamil Nadu and if we had templates like this for other locations, articles would be swamped with them, making them rather pointless. Ajf773 (talk) 09:45, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • To me, this resembles "current" templates, which need maintenance, plus some kind of inclusion criteria deciding how many speakers live there to qualify to be listed —PC-XT+ 01:37, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2018_January_9&oldid=820787733"