Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019 January 30

< January 29	January 31 >

January 30

Template:Infobox lacrosse team

Template:Infobox lacrosse team (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Infobox sports team (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Template:Infobox lacrosse team with Template:Infobox sports team.
The only 2 parameters that I see being an issue at all would be |steinfeld_cups= & {{{plpa}}}. Everything else should be included in {{Infobox sports team}}. Those 2 params can easily be added. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 23:58, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Can the proposer(s) comment on justification / benefit of merging, please? Thanks. Dmoore5556 (talk) 00:44, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Dmoore5556: Wikipedia:Infobox consolidation should provide all the info you need, but basically the template is a duplicate with only 2 unique parameters. --Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 00:51, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Might consider giving editors a way to specify the display name of a championship (e.g. Steinfeld Cup, Stanley Cup, etc.) rather than adding field(s) unique to one sport or league. Dmoore5556 (talk) 01:07, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Dmoore5556: absolutely! One common way this is dealt with is to add some custom fields to the template. So for example you would have {{{championship_label_1}}}, {{{championship_data_1}}}. --Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 18:17, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That would be quite useful and something I'm very supportive of. Thanks. Dmoore5556 (talk) 03:38, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As the creator of this template, I'm in favour of merging. :-) --Doradus (talk) 01:30, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Doradus: thanks! Hope you don't take this nomination as me questioning you as the creator... --Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 19:41, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Newcastle Vipers

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).

The result of the discussion was delete. — JJMC89 (T·C) 02:24, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Newcastle Vipers (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Navbox with zero links. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 10:04, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as a non-navigational navbox. Yosemiter (talk) 15:55, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom --Tom (LT) (talk) 03:39, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Nigej (talk) 17:38, 2 February 2019 (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).

Template:SITribe

Template:SITribe (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:SPTribe (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template is definitely not used that can be seen at {{Stribe}} and its document files. ApprenticeFan work 11:03, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Note that I have combined two nominations into one given the similarities between templates and identical nomination rationales.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 03:56, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete SITribe - couldn't find any uses of it. These should probably be deleted with it {{SITribe/color}}, {{SITribe/name}} and {{Survivor India colorbox}}. {{SPTribe}} is used on only one article and could probably be replaced and deleted as well. --Gonnym (talk) 21:26, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:KOGL-type2

Template:KOGL-type2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Inappropriate license tag which appears to permit "free" files with an NC restriction FASTILY 20:46, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019 January 11#Template:KOGL-type4 and Template:KOGL-type1 can go too. Nigej (talk) 09:10, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and repurpose. If a license would count as free except for a single restriction, it still helps to have a template for it, since "the owner has published it under a license that permits this specific use" is solid evidence that the file passes NFCC #2 and #4. I'm not sure how to repurpose it; we could just redirect it to {{Non-free with NC}}, or we could transclude that template onto this one, but best to run it by template experts to ensure that this isn't transcluding any categories that would lead bots to interpret it as a free-license template. Nyttend backup (talk) 15:48, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 03:51, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:KOGL-type3

Template:KOGL-type3 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Inappropriate license tag which appears to permit "free" files with an ND restriction FASTILY 20:47, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019 January 11#Template:KOGL-type4. Nigej (talk) 09:10, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and repurpose. If a license would count as free except for a single restriction, it still helps to have a template for it, since "the owner has published it under a license that permits this specific use" is solid evidence that the file passes NFCC #2 and #4. I'm not sure how to repurpose it; we could just redirect it to {{Non-free with ND}}, or we could transclude that template onto this one, but best to run it by template experts to ensure that this isn't transcluding any categories that would lead bots to interpret it as a free-license template. Nyttend backup (talk) 15:48, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 03:51, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Hover title

Template:Hover title (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:H:swl (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Span title (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Template:Hover title, Template:H:swl and Template:Span title.
They are all redundant to each other and provide the same functionality. {{Span title}} is basic and has not additional parameters. {{H:swl}} and {{Hover title}} have the same parameters (|dotted= and |highlighted= are the same). We should keep {{Hover title}} due to the higher usage count. – BrandonXLF (t@lk) 02:13, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — JJMC89 (T·C) 05:26, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Given the fact that the latter two are so little used, seems sensible to merge them. Nigej (talk) 11:20, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom and Nigej. --Tom (LT) (talk) 00:55, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Two of these templates were discussed here half a year ago: Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2018 June 29#Template:H:title. Noting also that there isn't a tfm notice on any of the three templates. – Uanfala (talk) 12:44, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Done All tagged now. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:13, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting given the previous discussion and the lack of on-template notification until (relatively) recently.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 03:51, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]