Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019 July 30

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Sbb1413 (talk | contribs) at 07:39, 10 August 2019 (Template:Artemis program). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

July 30

Propose merging Template:Artemis program with Template:Orion program.
Since the two templates share mostly the same list of wikilinks, I think it'd be ideal to have them more efficiently listed in the one navbox, as displayed below!

PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 22:51, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Jadebenn: Do you have a source to prove the Orion program is a sub-program of Artemis? NASA has explicitly stated that CLPS is part of Artemis, though I am unaware of times when they've said the same for the Orion program. – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 13:08, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@PhilipTerryGraham: I said "parts of Artemis", not "sub-programs of Artemis." I mean that in the same way that the SLS is part of Artemis, but it's managed separately.- Jadebenn (talk) 21:09, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Jadebenn: I may need clarification on what you mean by "part of Artemis", if not a subset, sub-program, sub-project, ect.? – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 21:48, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@PhilipTerryGraham: Like I said, I mean it in the same way that SLS is a part of Artemis. It's a component. - Jadebenn (talk) 22:09, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Jadebenn: I apologise Jade, but I'm really struggling to understand how "component" is not just another synonym... – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 22:31, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This template would really cover 3 programs: Orion, Artemis and CLPS. As CLPS is officially part of Artemis I have no problem leaving that out of the title, while Orion is not and therefore should be in the title. Just my 3 cents --Trialpears (talk) 22:41, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Right, but the fact that they're not the same program is, if anything, an even stronger reason to keep the templates seperate. - Jadebenn (talk) 22:44, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - @PhilipTerryGraham: I have taken the liberty of going through the relevant pages and changing them to demonstrate what I believe the appropriate use of these two templates are. I do not mean for this to be seen as "going behind your back," but rather, a rectification of a miscategorization of missions. As you can see, with these changes, there's not a whole lot of overlap. - Jadebenn (talk) 07:12, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: Orion program is a set of missions that uses at least one Orion spacecraft. The Artemis 7 does not carry Orion and is NOT part of the Orion program. —Yours sincerely, Soumyabrata TS 07:40, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Jadebenn, Soumya-8974, and Trialpears: I think we’ve gone incredibly off track here. The point of this merger is to have what will essentially be the same set of wikilinks in the one navbox. It makes no sense to have two seperate navboxes for what will mostly be the same list of articles. Nobody here is proposing to merge the two programs or present the programs as a subset of the other. We’re only trying to have the same set of wikilinks presented more efficiently through one navbox instead of two. Please, please, please understand this. – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 09:08, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I think it is stable to have the same set of wikilinks presented more efficiently through one navbox instead of two. However, what about 2033, when NASA will be ready to send people on the Mars!? It is NOT an objective of the Artemis program. —Yours sincerely, Soumyabrata TS 14:02, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
But that's the thing: when used properly (IMO), there's not actually that much overlap. - Jadebenn (talk) 19:35, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Opposed They are different programs. What is next, merge SLS rocket, CLPS, Artemis, Gateway, and The Moon? Rowan Forest (talk) 18:12, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, but Orion is now a component of the Artemis program, it does not need its own title and logo in the combined navbox. — JFG talk 22:40, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - 1) There is no such thing as "Orion missions" as indicated in the template. It redirects to Artemis missions. It only adds confusion. Orion is a supporting hardware used for Artemis missions: Artemis 1 through 8; absolutely nobody refers to the missions as Orion 1 through Orion 8 missions. Do not merge! Especially not under such format and redirects. 80% of the Orion template is about how they developed the capsule and its tests; how is that different from the development of the SLS, which is not proposed to be merged. A single link to Orion in the Artemis template suffices. 2) Artemis 7 mission will not use Orion, what then? Make another section titled "Orion Missions without Orion"? Orion is not a sequence of missions, just hardware! Rowan Forest (talk) 23:15, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with you. —Yours sincerely, Soumyabrata TS 06:53, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Move "Orion program" to "Orion spacecraft" —Yours sincerely, Soumyabrata (contributionssubpages) 07:39, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

TVB Year templates

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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 13:05, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NOTTVGUIDE The Banner talk 20:52, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I do not know how to merge them. Could someone be so kind? Thanks in advance. The Banner talk 21:01, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Merged per request. BLAIXX 23:53, 30 July 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).
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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:09, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

unused after being merged with the parent article per consensus at WT:FOOTY Frietjes (talk) 17:39, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 07:44, 31 July 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).

GO Transit s-line templates

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 -FASTILY 00:54, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

s-line data modules

{{S-line}} templates for lines of GO Transit. Superseded by Module:Adjacent stations/GO Transit. All transclusions replaced. There are 16 dependent s-line data modules which should also be deleted. I'd also suggest that the contents of Template talk:GO Transit color be moved to Module talk:Adjacent stations/GO Transit for archival purposes. BLAIXX 17:25, 30 July 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).

Union Pearson Express s-line templates

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 -FASTILY 00:54, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

{{S-line}} templates for lines of the Union Pearson Express and Metrolinx. Superseded by Module:Adjacent stations/Metrolinx. All transclusions replaced. There are two dependent s-line data modules which should also be deleted. BLAIXX 13:19, 30 July 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).
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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:08, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The band's navigational template consists of two links: the band's article and a member's redirect back to the band article. Since it is only used in one article, the band has no notable releases, it navigates nowhere and WP:NENAN. Aspects (talk) 04:39, 30 July 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).
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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:08, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The band's navigational template consists of two links: the band's article and an album that redirects back to the band articles. Since it is only used in one article, the band has no notable releases, it navigates nowhere and WP:NENAN. Aspects (talk) 04:42, 30 July 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).