December 2
- 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 merge both anime templates together and separately merge {{
Video game release}} into {{
Video game release new}}. The result should be one template for anime and one template for video games, not one combined template, to be clear. There's clear support for consolidating these templates within each individual topic area, but there's no consensus for merging beyond that. It makes sense to start consolidating and then, if necessary, revisit. Taking this first step will make it easier to compare only two templates in any future discussions about a merge, rather than trying to cross-reference between four distinct templates. ~
Rob13
Talk 10:38, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
Propose merging
Template:Video game release,
Template:English anime network and
Template:English anime licensee.
Use one template for releases in particular regions, can be used for international releases of films, TV series and products, should be merged into a template like "Release regions" or "Release list" or something, or it can be merged into their respective infoboxes. ∼∼∼∼
Eric0928
Talk
22:50, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Can something be done about the "considered for merging" message? It is quite disruptive, see for instance the infobox in
Apollo Justice: Ace Attorney. (I'm not watching this page, so please ping me if you reply)--
IDV
talk 23:04, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- @
Izno: Oh, I fully understand and appreciate the usefulness of that link, just saying that it currently stretches the infobox, making (almost) all video game articles look absolutely awful. For something that is inside another template like this, I would prefer to use the "tiny" setting.--
IDV
talk 00:53, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- I agree, the message is relatively disruptive. In
Monogatari (series), the infobox becomes longer than even the entire article, thanks to the message on the English anime licensee template (although that infobox is pretty long to begin with).
JaykeBird (
talk) 10:19, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- No, why should we combine anime into video games, when the majority of games have nothing to do with anime? ~
Dissident93 (
talk) 23:56, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- @
Dissident93: Please review what the templates do and verify (or not) for yourself that their functionality is very similar. --
Izno (
talk) 00:44, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Would this simply be changed into "Release" then? If so, then I'm fine with it as long as it includes the updated code that "Vgrelease new" does (specifically "Regions and dates appear in the order in which you input them.") ~
Dissident93 (
talk) 01:58, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- I'd recommend something a little more specific, like
Template:Media release. Including {{
Video game release new}} will take a little more work since the syntax differs, but should be looked into bringing the full functionality to all four forms. --
ferret (
talk) 02:36, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- I'd recommend to merge
{{
Video game release}}
into {{
Video game release new}}
at least, accessibility of {{Video game release}}
is
so horrible. --
A Sword in the Wind (
talk |
changes) 03:31, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Agreed, this is what we should do with this template at the very least. ~
Dissident93 (
talk) 19:18, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- I like the idea of merging the two anime templates, and calling the result
Template:Anime licensee, and then merging
{{
Video game release}}
and {{
Video game release new}}
. However, the anime templates are about listing the companies that licensed/aired an anime in different regions, and the video game release template is about a game's release dates in different regions. The anime/manga articles honestly don't really have any need for the feature of regions and dates appearing in the order they're written, so merging all four together would be rather unnecessary.
JaykeBird (
talk) 11:08, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Vgrelease is often used for publishers and distributers as well. It is not always used for dates. --
ferret (
talk) 16:10, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Actually, no, I was thinking of merging this into a single general-purpose template for releases of anything, my thought was that all three templates generated a list of regions/countries in a similar style, here is an example. I actually used the template intended for video games on a film infobox. Also, the film was actually released in the US and China, not North America and Japan, so I would recommend adding more codes from
ISO-3166, and also, NA is the code for
Namibia. Also, we should see if we can merge
Template:Video game release new into this.
- 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) 19:22, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
non-professional teams, templates can be replaced by standard sports table which doesn't require them.
Frietjes (
talk) 19:29, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Keep All. I created most of these for use in league tables in leagues' season articles. I have some plans to do with these templates in the future, like adding these templates to the
2016–17 Egypt Cup,
2016–17 Egypt Cup qualifying rounds and the previous seasons of the
league.
Ben5218 (
talk) 21:53, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- why would you add them to pages that don't need them?
Frietjes (
talk) 22:37, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Delete all. It seems completely unnecessary to use these in regular article text, as that substantially obscures the source code for inexperienced editors. They're useful in some of our more complicated templates, but not much else, and it's clear there is no intention to use these in such templates. ~
Rob13
Talk 02:09, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Delete all. These templates seem to be an extra, unnecessary complication. These individual templates are too specific to really justify their existence; since they all tie back into
Template:fb team, simply using that in the prospective articles should be the preferred option, if we must use templates. As suggested above, simply using wikilinks is probably satisfactory enough too.
JaykeBird (
talk) 10:48, 4 December 2016 (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 ~
Rob13
Talk 10:34, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
unnecessary copy of
template:Navbox Canada
Frietjes (
talk) 16:01, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- It's not a copy of {{
Navbox Canada}}, or at least it's definitely not intended as such. I don't think it's a good idea to nominate for deletion templates so soon after they're created, especially if they're drafts. But it's equally not a good idea to create such unfinished drafts directly in the template namespace. –
Uanfala (talk) 12:03, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
-
Uanfala
see this diff, clearly someone copied Navbox Canada and changed the colour and icon. they didn't even bother to create the necessary subpages.
Frietjes (
talk) 13:43, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Yes, they've adopted the code of one template without fully modifying it for the purpose they had in mind. But now I see that this user has just been topic banned from the Punjab area, so I don't expect they're likely to be able to finish the template. So yeah, delete. –
Uanfala (talk) 13:55, 3 December 2016 (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 soft delete.
WP:REFUND applies. ~
Rob13
Talk 10:29, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
unused. should be added to articles or deleted.
Frietjes (
talk) 14:17, 2 December 2016 (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 soft delete.
WP:REFUND applies. ~
Rob13
Talk 10:30, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
unused and generally duplicates
Template:Ethnic and social groups of the Punjab
Frietjes (
talk) 14:06, 2 December 2016 (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 soft delete.
WP:REFUND applies. ~
Rob13
Talk 10:30, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
unused
Frietjes (
talk) 14:05, 2 December 2016 (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 soft delete.
WP:REFUND applies. ~
Rob13
Talk 10:30, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
unused
Frietjes (
talk) 14:04, 2 December 2016 (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 soft delete.
WP:REFUND applies. ~
Rob13
Talk 10:31, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
unused
Frietjes (
talk) 14:04, 2 December 2016 (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 soft delete.
WP:REFUND applies. ~
Rob13
Talk 10:31, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
unused and out of date
Frietjes (
talk) 14:03, 2 December 2016 (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 soft delete.
WP:REFUND applies. ~
Rob13
Talk 10:31, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
unused and out of date
Frietjes (
talk) 14:03, 2 December 2016 (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).
More unused fb team 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) 19:21, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
unused, list generated from
Wikipedia:Database reports/Unused templates. for the "Fb team Al-Jaish" template, please salt after deleting to avoid recreation.
Frietjes (
talk) 13:45, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- I created seven of these for use in league tables in leagues' season articles. Now that the Sports Table templates are used for the relevant leagues, these templates (along with some others that I see in this list) have now become redundant. I therefore have no objection to the templates being deleted. However, should results grids ever be created for these leagues, the templates would then be required again, so I would recommend that no action is taken to avoid recreation.
Drawoh46 (
talk) 16:42, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
-
Drawoh46, I created
Module:Head to head, so you don't need them for results grids either.
Frietjes (
talk) 20:52, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Keep. I created some of these for use in league tables in leagues' season articles. I have some plans to do with these templates in the future, like adding these templates to the
2016–17 Egypt Cup,
2016–17 Egypt Cup qualifying rounds and the previous seasons of the
league.
Ben5218 (
talk) 21:55, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- none of these templates are used on those pages.
Frietjes (
talk) 22:27, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- I said i have some plans for it in the future, i didn't say that i've added to the articles yet.
Ben5218 (
talk) 22:53, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Delete. Unused and we're trying to move away from the use of these templates, not expand them. ~
Rob13
Talk 02:09, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Delete all. These are a lot of very specific templates that don't really make editing that remarkably easier.
Template:fb team or standard wikilinks are enough to cover these usage cases.
JaykeBird (
talk) 11:16, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Delete – We are supposed to use less of these, not more, which is one of the reasons for
Module:Sports table and
Module:Sports results for making tables with wikilinks instead of creating thousands of templates.
Qed237
(talk) 21:43, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Delete. Having had a look at
Module:Head to head, which is being merged into
Module:Sports results, I'm happy that they all go.
Drawoh46 (
talk) 23:05, 4 December 2016 (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 ~
Rob13
Talk 10:32, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
This template about a rather small Mexican media company is no aid to navigation.
Raymie (
t •
c) 08:02, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- delete, mostly redlinks and redirects.
Frietjes (
talk) 16:05, 2 December 2016 (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).