Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2024 May 12

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< May 11
May 13 >

May 12[edit]

Template:NHL team abbreviations[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 move to project space. Perhaps to a subpage of the relevant hockey WikiProject. I'd probably also recommend removing the navbox shell wherever it gets moved. Izno (talk) 16:57, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, no clear purpose. If need be, it can be substed on some project page but this is not a template or used as a template in any meaningful way. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:07, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 18:55, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I don't know if necessarily a "Template" is the best version of this, per se, and maybe a better solution is to include it on a project page, as suggested, but the information is certainly helpful, as a sort of guideline, manual of style, or "template" on the abbreviations that should be used throughout the rest of the site (often you seen things like WAS or NAS being included for Washington and Nashville, respectfully, and it is nice to have the template to point to.--–uncleben85 (talk) 19:22, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Clarkson, Hammond & May[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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. Izno (talk) 05:12, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Over saturated template combining three navboxes. The title of this navbox implies that James May, Jeremy Clarkson, and Richard Hammond are a group that works together, which they have on the original Top Gear show, but are not a performing trio. Clarkson, Hammond & May are not a group. Just three individual people. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:36, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The template is work in progress, which is why it's not used anywhere currently. The navboxes are sort of by necessity, to avoid information here becoming out of date when the individual navboxes get edited, though its not particularly elegant, partly because I'm not too familiar with the coding for templates. I'd prefer to have them indented within the people section instead of at the bottom.
On the last part, Clarkson Hammond and May are absolutely a group, that's why I even made the template. In the past Top Gear was their main show, with each having a number of side projects they presented alone. After the switch to Amazon this still continues.
Previously, there only was the main Top Gear template, which considers Top Gear until 2015 and the one since then, with different hosts, the same show (which it technically is). Therefore, other projects related to the three can't be put in the Top Gear template (like DriveTribe, or people like Andy Wilman that started out on Top Gear but left with the trio and now runs The Grand Tour). The fact that Grand Tour even exists, and took with it a large part of the Top Gear audience away from the actual Top Gear should show that they are in fact a trio and no three people who just happened to host the same format for 20 years. There are dedicated articles about performing duos that spend less time actually making things together than them (see Fry and Laurie, or Please Don't Destroy for a trio).
Overall, I think it can provide useful navigation, especially because the Top Gear template isn't used on any of their articles, which would introduce a lot up redundancy. I'm open to suggestions for improving it, but when the main argument is that the three aren't a group I'll have to disagree. -- jonas (talk) 01:51, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Navboxes being out of date has no relevance to this discussion. All it requires is simply editing to remove or add relevant links for the subject of the navbox. But all you did was add links from their navboxes to this one which makes it even more redundant. Duplication is what you ended up creating which is something we have to avoid with templates. And if they're a group, you should provide evidence and as you say, "In the past Top Gear was their main show, with each having a number of side projects they presented alone." The latter doesn't support your case. If they have had projects on their own, then that doesn't make it a work of the group. A solo project is not a collaboration. Now there are only three links in the navbox following the removal of unrelated links. This navbox no longer has any useful navigation. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 14:31, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Absolutely. No existing article for the "trio". Should be dealt with in the templates for the individuals, and also relevant navboxes like {{Top Gear}} etc. Creator doesn't seem to understand the principles of WP:FILMNAV and WP:PERFNAV, and the individual navboxes need trimming also. --woodensuperman 07:40, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Have trimmed this and the individual navboxes now to meet WP:FILMNAV and avoid redundancy with {{Top Gear}}. --woodensuperman 08:05, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for doing so for the other two navboxes. I was going to do that today but now the nominated has only three links following your cleanup. It serves no navigational purpose. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 14:31, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 23:41, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment The navbox now has two links. Another relist wouldn't do anything for this discussion as there is no longer a benefit with the navbox following the removal of unrelated links and top of there being no main article which would support the need for such a navbox. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:38, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Noting to Jonas1015119 and Randy Kryn in case they were unaware the template has been significantly trimmed, and whether that will impact their decision(s) in this discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 18:18, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: per woodensuperman and WikiCleanerMan Muhandes (talk) 17:44, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:TRK[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 G5 by Izno (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 04:06, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Navbox with no blue links. Unclear if any of these things are even real. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:54, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Nord Anglia Education[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 keep. (non-admin closure) Queen of Hearts (talk) 23:49, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Promotional template for a school group for whom half of these are going to end up redirects to Nord Anglia Education Allan Nonymous (talk) 13:03, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I created the template in 2019 to link schools operated by the same company (there are similar templates about American public school districts that I've created). This does not have to be promotional template so long as the articles within are kept at bay so that they are descriptive and not promotional. WhisperToMe (talk) 22:44, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:47, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, this is a navbox I would expect to exist. I've done the cleaning to remove non-links, redlinks, and redirects per WP:NAV/WP:NAVBOX that clearly establishes that this has a reasonable number of links to meet our expectations for navigation (e.g. WP:NENAN). Izno (talk) 04:29, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:51, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Certification Table Summary[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 no consensus. I would encourage folks to have a discussion about the accessibility issues; it is possible that something can be done to mitigate them. If reasonable attempts at resolution have failed there is NPASR. Primefac (talk) 09:37, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just a violation of MOS:COLHEAD. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:14, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please clarify your suggested alternative? See my query at the other nomination as similar questions arise. The function of {{Certification Table Summary}} is to add sourced certifications which are summaries of other sourced certifications which are used in the same table. An illustrative scenario (and the primary use case) might involve a European certification alongside separate certifications for specific European countries. MOS:COLHEAD recommends using separate tables instead, with explanatory sub-headings for each table. Are you proposing to split each of the 1,500 tables where this template is utilized and add a separate single-line table with a heading for the summary? Are you suggesting to add {{Certification Table Bottom}} to each? Can you give an example of how it would work? The same practical questions also arise. Muhandes (talk) 08:51, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To clarify, it may seem obvious, but the statement above explains why it's necessary to distinguish between what appears above and below this template. That's why we're asking for clarification about what will take the place of this template if it's removed, while still keeping that distinction intact. --Muhandes (talk) 15:39, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 23:40, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:48, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep (author). The usefulness of the template was explained and no practical alternative was proposed. See also the other nomination. Muhandes (talk) 15:00, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The other alternative is separate tables. How do you propose we overcome the accessibility problems? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:52, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't oppose the use of separate tables, but I don't find it to be a practical solution. Specifically, as I hinted, {{Certification Table Bottom}} would need manual adjustments for each table, which is impractical. A solution to the accessibility problems would involve rewriting the entire template set in a manner that doesn't necessitate manual adjustments to {{Certification Table Bottom}}. Perhaps 13 years and one (ongoing) battle with cancer ago, I could have undertaken that task, but not now. Muhandes (talk) 05:39, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh wow. Be well and take care. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:49, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Certification Table Separator[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 no consensus. I would encourage folks to have a discussion about the accessibility issues; it is possible that something can be done to mitigate them. If reasonable attempts at resolution have failed there is NPASR. Primefac (talk) 09:37, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just a violation of MOS:COLHEAD. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:14, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please clarify your suggested alternative? The primary function of {{Certification Table Separator}} is to distinguish streaming certifications from other types of certifications. This distinction became necessary due to the significantly higher number of units required for streamed certifications, which caused confusion when both types were mixed together. MOS:COLHEAD recommends using separate tables instead, with explanatory sub-headings for each table. Are you proposing to split each of the 2,600 tables where this template is utilized into separate tables for streaming and other certifications and add explanatory sub-headings? Would {{Certification Table Bottom}} be added to both tables? Considering specifically that you also nominated {{Certification Table Summary}}, which pertains to both types of certifications, how would the summary be applied? Can you give an example of how it would all work? Practically speaking, would it be done by painstakingly editing the 2,600 articles? I don't see how breaking {{Certification Table Bottom}} can be done automatically. Muhandes (talk) 08:35, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The alternative is just remove it. I don't know how "painstaking" that is: seems like it could be done in seconds by a bot. They should never have been added in the first place, so I don't see why they are necessary. Who needs these? They are inaccessible and directly contradict best practices. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:03, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why the separation is necessary has already been stated: This distinction became necessary due to the significantly higher number of units required for streamed certifications, which caused confusion when both types were mixed together. (I took "they" to refer to something that splits the data. If you only meant the column headers in the middle of the table, I apologize. Should it be possible, I have no issue with the suggestion of having a bot split the tables, but I think a distinction between streaming certifications and other types of certifications is needed.) ayakanaa ( t · c ) 02:49, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As ayakanaa noted, I have previously elucidated the rationale for the necessity of this distinction. To illustrate, examine the history of the {{Certification Table Separator}}: it was added in 2020, nine years subsequent to the creation of other relevant templates. This period coincided with confusion among editors, leading to requests for its implementation. Consequently, though not mandatory, editors have included it in approximately 2,600 articles, underscoring its recognized significance. Muhandes (talk) 17:21, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 23:40, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:48, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. The separator is useful to distinguish between retail sales, streaming figures, and groups of country sales as seen in the pan-Europe certification. Binksternet (talk) 19:43, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Binksternet: How do you propose we overcome the accessibility problems? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:51, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep (author). The usefulness of the template was explained and no practical alternative was proposed. Muhandes (talk) 14:58, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The alternative is separate tables. How do you propose we overcome the accessibility problems? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:51, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't oppose the use of separate tables, but I don't find it to be a practical solution. Specifically, as I hinted, {{Certification Table Bottom}} would need manual adjustments for each table, which is impractical. A solution to the accessibility problems would involve rewriting the entire template set in a manner that doesn't necessitate manual adjustments to {{Certification Table Bottom}}. Perhaps 13 years and one (ongoing) battle with cancer ago, I could have undertaken that task, but not now. Muhandes (talk) 05:39, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Netflix Christmas films[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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. Izno (talk) 06:34, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary intersection. We already have way too many Netflix navboxes as it is, we should not have them by genre also. --woodensuperman 13:55, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep, "unnecessary" for what? Christmas? Please read the Christmas article, it is about a major yearly December holiday which is featured in many films and literature. Netflix seems to have focused on this holiday for featuring in its programming, and the navbox creator has done the encyclopedia a service by providing it. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:45, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Theres no article for List of Christmas films produced by Netflix though, is there? Why not a navbox for {{Netflix comedy films}}, {{Netflix drama films}}, {{Netflix action films}}? Why specifically Christmas? It's total overkill. We do NOT need navboxes like this. --woodensuperman 12:20, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree. When an article on the subject does not exist it's usually a telling sign that the navbox should not either. Gonnym (talk) 19:19, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:46, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 23:40, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:48, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Next Indian elections[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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. Izno (talk) 20:38, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The majority of links with articles for an election by year or in a state of India are being transcluded by their respective state election navboxes. And those navboxes are enough to link the respective election articles. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 13:37, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 23:39, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:46, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: Not required for such templates which next GE might happen even before time and may get replaced with, once their current elections are over. ☮️Counter-Strike:Mention 269🕉️(🗨️ ● ✉️ ● 📔) 13:01, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2024_May_12&oldid=1225092136"