Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2024 October 9

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< October 8
October 10 >

October 9

[edit]

Template:Kickers Offenbach squad

[edit]

WP:TFD#REASONS #2: redundant to template:Kickers Offenbach, which was created in 2016, a few weeks after this one was WP:XNRed to Kickers Offenbach. Paradoctor (talk) 16:32, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Redshirt

[edit]

This template is used less than 250 times in {{Infobox college football player}} and in-article tables, where it does not align with the bullet points at MOS:APPROPRIATEICONS. You can see an example of its typical use at Quinn Ewers. This usage could be easily replaced with the word "redshirt". Ed [talk] [OMT] 21:28, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is a good solution 136.58.84.30 (talk) 21:34, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Leave the redshirt icon. Not sure about the reference to only being used 250 times. Perhaps I'm missing something. I see it all the time. 2601:5CF:4200:67A0:3725:A2C8:5E0C:E182 (talk) 00:54, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is used 236 times per [1]. Thetreesarespeakingtome (talk) 02:42, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It looks fine. I think the redshirt icon should stay too. 66.215.49.212 (talk) 19:55, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think the icon is a simple way to represent the concept and should stay as well.
Now that the 1-year transfer sit-out is over (and once the entire COVID class with extra eligibility leaves), it will be a helpful and straightforward designation. 2601:280:5D02:37B0:8D7F:AED0:5BD8:1C10 (talk) 05:41, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It looks fine. It is only used around 250 times because after graduating/going professional it’s no longer used on their page. I’d imagine it was used on 1000+ pages over last 5 years — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.133.66.120 (talk) 09:10, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 13:14, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think the icon looks good, and is a concise way to show a redshirt player. As someone else mentioned, the reason it’s only used 250 times because it doesn’t apply after they finish their college career, but hundreds of new redshirts happen every year.
Perhaps a solution would be to make the icon clickable, and direct visitors to a page explaining the redshirt process. 67.245.18.115 (talk) 13:12, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Clickable doesn't solve the accessibility problem, nor does it satisfy MOS:ICONS#Do not distort icons. Ed [talk] [OMT] 21:35, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
He is actively starting this year and is no longer considered a red-shirt. This should be removed from his page. 2607:9B00:5612:2D00:2F9A:3193:9B87:CAF5 (talk) 01:17, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
He absolutely still is a Redshirt Senior playing or not and Redshirt status is relevant for followers of college football. 107.220.89.156 (talk) 01:53, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Whether or not the template remains in place, the information should be communicated using text for greater accessibility, both to those who browse without the benefit of images and those not familiar with the term in the context of U.S. college sports. (I know the image is linked to the appropriate page, but there's no visual indication of this, and it's not a typical use of links for images on English Wikipedia.) Using an icon could be an additional way to convey the info in the infobox. isaacl (talk) 16:05, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above. Its use is consistent and useful. --Bobak (talk) 15:41, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 14:23, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

No transclusions or incoming links. Created in 2023. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:57, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Chapter disambiguation pages

[edit]

Since this navbox template is intended to link disambiguation pages and to be transcluded in the article namespace, there's an issue with this template because it will have to violate at least one of the following two guidelines at any given time: WP:BRINT and WP:INTDABLINK. At the present time, the template violates WP:BRINT since there are piped links to redirects instead of linking directly to some of the respective disambiguation pages in order to meet WP:INTDABLINK, but in the process violates WP:BRINT since direct links to pages should be used (so that the viewed page appears as unclickable bold in the navbox when currently viewing that page.) In order to fix this issue, the only resolution I see is to delete this template and replace their transclusions on each page with respective {{Intitle}}, {{Lookfrom}}, or similar templates. Steel1943 (talk) 20:12, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Upon further review, the current setup of the template also violates WP:INTDABLINK since the links to the disambiguation page redirects are piped, but not in hatnotes; If the link is not in a hatnote, then the redirect is supposed to be linked to directly without link piping. Steel1943 (talk) 20:34, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think this is a somewhat reductive reading. The template is a navigation template, it's not performing a disambiguation function itself. Therefore:
Keep. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 22:14, 28 September 2024 (UTC).[reply]
PS I fixed the BRINT issue. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 22:20, 28 September 2024 (UTC).[reply]
Okay, but your edit introduced additional/different WP:INTDABLINK issues since you directly linked to disambiguation page titles that do not include "(disambiguation)" in them, and since this navbox is transcluded on pages in the article namespace. Again, this proves that it is impossible for this navbox to not have any WP:BRINT or WP:INTDABLINK issues, and I would not be surprised if an editor who watches WP:DPL or WP:TDD reverts your edit. Steel1943 (talk) 22:35, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sure enough, the edit was reverted by The Banner: [2]. Steel1943 (talk) 14:38, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. If the issues are with WP:BRINT and WP:INTDABLINK then just fix it. The template is useful in offering navigation between related pages, which otherwise requires additional wasted editorial time. I see no real argument here other than WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Gonnym (talk) 09:45, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"If the issues are with WP:BRINT and WP:INTDABLINK then just fix it." My argument here is that they can't be fixed. Fixing one breaks the other. In fact, I don't recall ever seeing a navbox on a disambiguation page until I ran across this template, and this problem probably explains why. Steel1943 (talk) 14:16, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The template isn't what's broken, it's the bot that is malfunctioning. The bot should be fixed. Or, the links that work perfectly fine with "(disambiguation)" at the end, can continue doing so. I fail to see how that was an issue. Gonnym (talk) 19:21, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
...Maybe WP:BRINT??? Steel1943 (talk) 19:38, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete What purpose does this template serve? I can see no meaningful use of this template. The Banner talk 18:27, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Navbox can help you see what purpose a navigation template serves. Gonnym (talk) 19:23, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I know that. But this is a template to "navigate" among a certain type of disambiguation pages. Not based on content, but on the type of links. The Banner talk 19:27, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think there is a reasonable likelihood that someone wanting to look at one chapter disambiguation page might want to look at others. I'm not 100% convinced by navboxes, but given that we have them, this is not a bad use case. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 10:05, 30 September 2024 (UTC).[reply]
It sounds like an otherstuff-argument, but the next step will be an navigation template for all surname-disambiguation pages? The Banner talk 11:54, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's a good point right there: This navigation template should probably be replaced with a category my originally-proposed "from title" search templates. Steel1943 (talk) 13:13, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Updated stance per comments after the relist convincing me a category is not the way to go. Steel1943 (talk) 20:53, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The template is clearly a useful navigation template, and none of the TFD reasons appear to apply. If there are problems with the content of the template, they should be fixed (the link to Chapter Eight stands out as different). If two guidelines are in conflict with each other, deleting this useful template will not fix that problem. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:05, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I really don't think we should be encouraging navboxes of disambiguation pages. You could sell me on succession boxes for this specific case, or the suggested intitle etc as in the OP. Izno (talk) 17:35, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There's some good discussion here, but at the moment there is not yet a consensus as to what to do.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 13:00, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Epic Rap Battles of History

[edit]

Now the cast have been purged (per WP:PERFNAV), there is not enough here to warrant a navbox. WP:NENAN --woodensuperman 09:42, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:IOS versions

[edit]

A regular table used only in one article. Should be subst there and the template deleted. Gonnym (talk) 09:36, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This template and the other two templates are too large to comfortably move to live within the article, plus this is a siilly reason to delete in my opinion. Templates can exist and only live on one article. Usually templates should only be deleted if they're completely unused, or violate a Wikipedia policy. - Evelyn Harthbrooke (leave a message · contributions) 11:50, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Templates that hold article content and are used in one article are a missue of template space, see the first bullet point at the guideline Wikipedia:Template namespace#Guidelines: Templates should not normally be used to store article text, as this makes it more difficult to edit the content. So this might be a silly reason to delete in your opinion, the community guideline says otherwise. Additionally, if we look at the page information for both pages. The template has Fewer than 30 watchers (which does not mean 29, and can also mean 0), while the page itself has 585, which makes these content pages more vulnerable to vandalism. Finally, too large to comfortably move to live within the article, it's not, it's fine. Gonnym (talk) 12:19, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The templates don't store article text though, they store information that can be moved to other articles when deemed necessary. That is why they were originally moved to template space in the first place. - Evelyn Harthbrooke (leave a message · contributions) 13:52, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and subsequent comments. Ed [talk] [OMT] 16:19, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but merge with Template:IPadOS versions and include this template on the iPadOS version history article in its place (then delete the iPadOS versions template, if the conclusion is to delete de iOS versions template, the iPadOS versions template should probably be deleted by the same reasoning). It's odd in the first place that an entire different template and table was created just for this one to say "go look at that template" instead of just including the 3 cells that are different. If there really was a need to hide extra rows on the iPad article, then that could have just been a parameter for the template, although I'd discourage that. YannickFran (talk) 21:15, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This does not address the fundamental issue this template has vs. Wikipedia:Template namespace#Guidelines. Ed [talk] [OMT] 21:48, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This template is arguably closer to a navigation then it is article text. The Wikipedia:Template namespace article itself uses a template for a similar purpose. Regardless, the comment was only meant to address the concern raised by Gonnym that the template is single purpose. YannickFran (talk) 22:29, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If it's navigation, it goes at the end of the article. But we both know it's not navigation. Gonnym (talk) 12:39, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That is literally not how it works and you know it. Navigation can be placed wherever is deemed adequate, as very clearly shown by the multitude of templates that are primarily navigation focused, such as templates that deal with subjects related to the United States, or even the template used on the iPhone articles that link to other iPhone models. Please stop the disinformation. - Evelyn Harthbrooke (leave a message · contributions) 12:56, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No matter what terminology we choose to use, this is neither a navbox or a sidebar. See Wikipedia:Navigation template. Ed [talk] [OMT] 19:45, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They were separated because of the fact that iPadOS is not iOS anymore and hasn’t been since 2019. They are not the same operating system. Therefore it doesn’t make sense to use the same template for two completely different operating systems. It’d be similar to if we put tvOS versions in the table…it wouldn’t make a bit of sense. - Evelyn Harthbrooke (leave a message · contributions) 12:59, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:IPod Touch supported OS release

[edit]

A regular table used only in one article. Should be subst there and the template deleted. Gonnym (talk) 09:36, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:IPhone models minimal

[edit]

A regular table used only in one article. Should be subst there and the template deleted. Gonnym (talk) 09:35, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep but change. Arguably the table in this template should be replaced with the one over at List of iPhone models and then replace the use of that table with this template. A change in name is probably also appropriate at that point though, because this isn't "minimal". YannickFran (talk) 21:10, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Formula Kite World Championship medallists

[edit]

Unused as Formula Kite uses a different table. Gonnym (talk) 09:07, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox UK place/height

[edit]

Unused sub-template. Can't find it used also in an insource search. Gonnym (talk) 08:58, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Judo at the 2024 Summer Paralympics

[edit]

Unused sidebar as all links redirect to the same article. Gonnym (talk) 08:46, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Cobaltore Onagawa squad

[edit]

Delete. This is a Japanese fifth tier team, where nearly all of the players will be, and currently are, non-notable. There is therefore no point in a navbox. Geschichte (talk) 07:46, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:LDS Temple list/size-floor

[edit]

Unused probably since this edit. Gonnym (talk) 06:56, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2024_October_9&oldid=1250553279"