Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion

(Redirected fromWikipedia:TfD)
"WP:TFD" redirects here. For the page used for TimedText or talk page deletion discussions, seeWikipedia:Miscellany for deletion.
This page is about discussion of templates. For a list of templates used for discussion, seeWikipedia:List of discussion templates.
Find this page confusing?Just use this link to ask for help on your talk page;a volunteer will visit you there shortly!
XFD backlog
V Nov Dec Jan Feb Total
CfD 0 0 3 33 36
TfD 0 0 1 5 6
MfD 0 0 1 0 1
FfD 0 0 5 5 10
RfD 0 0 18 60 78
AfD 0 0 0 2 2
Deletion discussions
Articles
Templates and modules
Files
Categories
Redirects
Miscellany
Speedy deletion
Proposed deletion

On this page, the deletion or merging oftemplatesandmodules,except as notedbelow,is discussed.

How to use this page

edit

Whatnotto propose for discussion here

edit
Shortcut

The majority of deletion and merger proposals concerning pages in thetemplate namespaceandmodule namespaceshould be listed on this page. However, there are a few exceptions:

Stub templates
Stub templates and categories should be listed atCategories for discussion,as these templates are merely containers for their categories,unlessthe stub template does not come with a category and is being nominated by itself.
Userboxes
Userboxes should be listed atMiscellany for deletion,regardless of the namespace in which they reside.
Speedy deletion candidates
If the template clearly satisfies acriterion for speedy deletion,tag it with aspeedy deletion template.For example, if you wrote the template and request its deletion, tag it with{{Db-author}}.See alsoWP:T5.
Policy or guideline templates
Templates that are associated with particularWikipedia policies or guidelines,such as thespeedy deletion templates,cannot be listed at TfD separately. They should be discussed on the talk page of the relevant guideline.
Template redirects
List atRedirects for discussion.
Moving and renaming
UseWikipedia:Requested moves.

Reasons to delete a template

edit
Shortcut
  1. The template violates some part of thetemplate namespace guidelines,and can't be altered to be in compliance.
  2. The template is redundant to a better-designed template.
  3. The template is not used, either directly or bytemplate substitution(the latter cannot be concluded from the absence of backlinks),and has no likelihood ofbeingused.
  4. The template violates a policy such asNeutral point of vieworCivilityand it can't be fixed through normal editing.

Templates should not be nominated if the issue can be fixed by normal editing. Instead, you should edit the template to fix its problems. If the template is complex and you don't know how to fix it,WikiProject Templatesmay be able to help.

Templates for which none of these apply may be deleted byconsensushere. If a template is being misused, consider clarifying its documentation to indicate the correct use, or informing those that misuse it, rather than nominating it for deletion. Initiate a discussion on the template talk page if the correct use itself is under debate.

Listing a template

edit
Shortcuts

To list a template for deletion or merging, adhere to the following three-step process.UtilizingTwinkleis strongly recommended as it automates and simplifies these steps. To use Twinkle, click TWin the toolbar (top right of the page), then select XFD. Donotinclude the "Template:" prefix in any of the steps, unless specifically instructed otherwise.

Step Instructions
I: Tag the template. Add one of the following codes to the top of the template page:

Note:

  • If it is an inline template, do not add a newline between the TfD notice and the code of the template.
  • If the template to be nominated for deletion isprotected,make a request for the TfD tag to be added, by posting on the template's talk page and using the{{editprotected}}template to catch the attention ofadministratorsortemplate editors.
  • For templates designed to besubstituted,add<noinclude>...</noinclude>around the TfD notice to prevent it from being substituted alongside the template.
  • Do not mark the edit as minor.
  • Use an edit summary like
    Nominated for deletion; see [[Wikipedia:Templates for discussion#Template:name of template]]
    or
    Nominated for merging; see [[Wikipedia:Templates for discussion#Template:name of template]].
  • Before saving your edit, preview your edit to ensure the Tfd message is displayed properly.

Multiple templates:If you are nominating multiple related templates, choose a meaningful title for the discussion (like "American films by decade templates"). Tag every template with{{subst:Tfd|heading=discussion title}}or{{subst:Tfm|name of other template|heading=discussion title}}instead of the versions given above, replacingdiscussion titlewith the title you chose (but still not changing thePAGENAMEcode).

Related categories:If including template-populated tracking categories in the TfD nomination, add{{Catfd|template name}}to the top of any categories that would be deleted as a result of the TfD, this time replacingtemplate namewith the name of the template being nominated. (If you instead chose a meaningful title for a multiple nomination, use{{Catfd|header=title of nomination}}instead.)

TemplateStyles pages:The above templates will not work onTemplateStylespages. Instead, add a CSS comment to the top of the page:

/* This template is being discussed in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy. Help reach a consensus at its entry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2025_February_17#Template:template_name.css */
II: List the template at TfD. Edit today's TfD logand paste the following textto the top of the list:
  • For deletion:{{subst:Tfd2|template name|text=Why you think the template should be deleted.~~~~}}
  • For merging:{{subst:Tfm2|template name|other template's name|text=Why you think the templates should be merged.~~~~}}

If the template has had previous TfDs, you can add{{Oldtfdlist|previous TfD without brackets|result of previous TfD}}directly after the|text=before the why (or alternatively, after the}}of theTfd2/Catfd2).

Use an edit summary such as
Adding [[Template:template name]].

Multiple templates:If this is a deletion proposal involving multiple templates, use the following:

{{subst:Tfd2|template name 1|template name 2...|title=meaningful discussion title|text=Why you think the templates should be deleted.~~~~}}

You can add up to 50 template names (separated by vertical bar characters|). Make sure to include the same meaningful discussion title that you chose before in Step 1.

If this is a merger proposal involving more than two templates, use the following:

{{subst:Tfm2|template name 1|template name 2...|with=main template (optional)|title=meaningful discussion title|text=Why you think the templates should be merged.~~~~}}

You can add up to 50 template names (separated by vertical bar characters|), plus one more in|with=.|with=does not need to be used, but should be the template that you want the other templates to be merged into. Make sure to include the same meaningful discussion title that you chose before in Step 1.

Related categories:If this is a deletion proposal involving a template and a category populated solely by templates, add this code in the|text=field of theTfd2template but before the text of your rationale:

{{subst:Catfd2|category name}}
III: Notify users. Please notify the creator of the template nominated (as well as the creator of the target template, if proposing a merger). It is helpful to also notify the main contributors of the template that you are nominating. To find them, look in thepage historyortalk pageof the template. Then, add one of the following:

to the talk pages of the template creator (and the creator of theother templatefor a merger) and the talk pages of the main contributors. It is also helpful to make any interestedWikiProjectsaware of the discussion. To do that, make sure the template's talk page is tagged with the banners of any relevant WikiProjects; please consider notifying any of them that do not useArticle alerts.Deletion sorting listsare a possible way of doing that.

Multiple templates:There is no template for notifying an editor about a multiple-template nomination: please write a personal message in these cases.

Consider adding any templates you nominate for TfD to your watchlist. This will help ensure that the TfD tag is not removed.

After nominating: Notify interested projects and editors

edit

While it is sufficient to list a template for discussion at TfD(see above),nominators and others sometimes want to attract more attention from and participation by informed editors. All such efforts must comply withWikipedia's guideline against biased canvassing.

To encourage participation by less experienced editors, please avoid Wikipedia-specific abbreviations in the messages you leave about the discussion, link to any relevant policies or guidelines, and link to the TfD discussion page itself. If you are recommending that a template be speedily deleted, please give thecriterionthat it meets.

edit

WikiProjectsare groups of editors that are interested in a particular subject or type of editing. If the article is within the scope of one or more WikiProjects, they may welcome a brief, neutral note on their project's talk page(s) about the TfD. You can use {{subst:Tfd notice}} for this.

Tagging the nominated template's talk page with a relevant Wikiproject's banner will result in the template being listed in that project'sArticle Alertsautomatically, if theysubscribe to the system.For instance, tagging a template with{{WikiProject Physics}}will list the discussion inWikipedia:WikiProject Physics/Article alerts.

Notifying substantial contributors to the template

edit

While not required, it is generally considered courteous to notify thegood-faithcreator and any main contributors of the template and its talkpage that you are nominating for discussion. To find the creator and main contributors, look in thepage historyortalk page.

At this point, you've done all you need to do as nominator. Sometime after seven days have passed, someone else will either close the discussion or, where needed, "relist"it for another seven days of discussion. (That" someone "may notbe you, the nominator.)

Once you have submitted a template here, no further action is necessary on your part. If the nomination is successful it will be added to theHolding Celluntil the change is implemented. There is no requirement for nominators to be part of the implementation process, but they are allowed to if they so wish.

Also, consider adding any templates you nominate to your watchlist. This will help ensure that your nomination tag is not mistakenly or deliberately removed.

Twinkle

edit

Twinkleis a convenient tool that can perform many of the posting and notification functions automatically, with fewer errors and missed steps than manual editing. To use Twinkle, click its dropdown menu in the toolbar in the top right of the page: TW,and then click 'XFD'.

Note that Twinkle does not notify WikiProjects, although many of them haveautomatic alerts.It is helpful to notify any interested WikiProjects that don't receive alerts, but this has to be done manually.

Discussion

edit

Anyone can join the discussion, but please understand thedeletion policyand explain your reasoning.

People will sometimes also recommendsubstorsubst and deleteand similar. This means the template text should be "merged" into the articles that use it. Depending on the content, the template page may then be deleted; if preserving the edit history for attribution is desirable, it may be history-merged with the target article or moved to mainspace and redirected.

Templates are rarely orphaned—that is, removed from pages that transclude them—before the discussion is closed. A list of open discussions eligible for closure can be found atWikipedia:Templates for discussion/Old unclosed discussions.

Closing discussion

edit

Administrators should read theclosing instructionsbefore closing a nomination. Note thatWP:XFDclosersemi-automates this process and ensures all of the appropriate steps are taken.

Current discussions

edit

February 17

edit

Template:2024 Joe McDonagh Cup Team of the Year

edit

No evidence that there even was a team of the yearThe Bannertalk02:23, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Mayo Hurling Team 2016

edit

WP:NENANThe Bannertalk02:19, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Mayo Hurling Team 2021

edit

WP:NENANThe Bannertalk02:18, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Mayo Hurling Team 2020

edit

WP:NENANThe Bannertalk02:18, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Mayo Hurling Team 2022

edit

WP:NENANThe Bannertalk02:18, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Mayo Hurling Team 2024

edit

WP:NENANThe Bannertalk02:17, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]


February 16

edit

Template:Editnotice birthdate

edit

Unused template; only linked from itself.MikeVitale22:17, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Colort/ColorShort

edit

Broken template that is unrelated toTemplate:Colortand used only in place ofTemplate:Color swatch.For some reason I cannot get this one to display correctly in dark mode. –LaundryPizza03(dc̄)21:48, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Cinema of the State of Palestine

edit

Only two links to articles. Minus the fact the main article linked as a redirect. Rest are for categories. No navigation is met with this template.WikiCleanerMan(talk)21:40, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

DeleteI don't think this TfD is subject toWP:ARBPIA.–LaundryPizza03(dc̄)06:23, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Pan American Games torch relays

edit

All redlinks or redirects. –Aidan721(talk)19:22, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Progressive groups in the US

edit

Template for a non-existing subject (Progressive groups in the US). And an overly broad scope.The Bannertalk14:45, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

the underlying focus is taken directly from the info sidebar for this topic.Sm8900(talk)03:21, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]


February 15

edit

Template:Judiciaries of Afghanistan

edit

Every single one of these supposed articles under "courts" is piped toJudiciary of AfghanistanorGovernment of Afghanistan,creating the impression that there are different pages that do not exist. The rest of the links are not judiciary articles.TEMPO156(talk)01:43, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

DeleteOnly the Supreme Court has its own article. The Commercial Court and the Juvenile Court are piped to "Judiciary of Afghanistan" but not even mentioned there. Misleading template.The Bannertalk18:39, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Conservatism in China

edit

I believe the Conservatism in China template should be deleted because its scope is already covered by more specific templates:

Redundant with "Neoauthoritarianism in China" – This template already addresses conservative ideologies in the PRC, which makes a separate Conservatism in China template unnecessary.

Hong Kong and Taiwan Have Their Own Templates – Since conservatism in Hong Kong and Taiwan has distinct characteristics, separate templates already exist for them. This ensures better clarity and avoids unnecessary overlap.

By keeping more specific templates, we maintain a clearer and more organized structure without duplicating content.Guotaian(talk)09:28, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose/Keep.This template covers various Chinese conservatives, including mainland ROC conservatism before 1949 and Falun Gong. The reason for the existence ofTemplate:Modern liberalism USis not the reason whyTemplate:Liberalism USshould be deleted.ProKMT(talk)10:01, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The difference betweenConservatism in China templateandNeoauthoritarianism in China templateis not the same as the distinction betweenModern liberalism in the United StatesandLiberalism in the United States.
In the case of China,Conservatism in China templatecovers the entire Greater China region, including thePRC,Hong Kong,andTaiwan,whileNeoauthoritarianism in Chinais specific to thePRC.Conservatism in China includes different political movements withingreater china.In Hong Kong, conservatism is closely tied to thepro-Beijing camp,while in Taiwan, it has historically been associated with theKuomintang(KMT) and its opposition to rapid political and social liberalization.
In contrast, the distinction between Modern liberalism in the United States and Liberalism in the United States is based on ideological differences rather than geographical scope. Modern liberalism refers to a specific branch of liberalism that emphasizes government intervention in the economy, social justice, and progressive policies. Liberalism in the United States, however, is a broader category that also includes classical liberalism, libertarianism, and other ideological traditions. Unlike the Chinese case, where Neoauthoritarianism is a regional subset of a broader ideology, Modern liberalism and Liberalism in the U.S. are conceptually distinct, justifying the need for separate classifications.Guotaian(talk)10:35, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Neoauthoritarianism in ChinaandTemplate:Conservatism in Taiwando not include thepre-1949 mainland Chinese conservatism.For example,pro-Qing royalism,Chiangismbefore 1945,Dai Jitao Thought,Western Hills Groupwas not related to Taiwanese conservatism or Neoauthoritarianism.ProKMT(talk)01:58, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The template is a random smorgasbord of amalgamated links based on seemingly nothing save the opinion of it's editor. Although I asked on its page, I'll ask again: what is Dong Zhongshu doing here? Confucianism was not dominant until it was established as a state orthodoxy. So how can he be a conservative? Because Confucianism claims to regurgitate the Zhou? Is that true? I don't know. Do you know? Does this guy know?FourLights(talk)13:00, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
what was "Legalism" Shang Yang and Han Fei conservative in relation to? Shang Yang was a radical reformer who attacked the aristocracy in favour of monarch and state. Is that conservative?FourLights(talk)13:22, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Neoconservatism is not "conservative" in the traditional sense, but it belongs to American conservatism. Confucianism and Legalism obviously belong to Chinese conservatism.ProKMT(talk)02:00, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep this but delete the Neoauthoritarianism template

This is the more general template. I recognize it's got scope overlap with HK and Taiwan but, if we're going to keep one, it shouldn't be the one pertaining to a single ideology.Simonm223(talk)02:46, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly oppose the deletion of the Neoauthoritarianism template in any case. In a similar case, there is aChinese New Left template.ProKMT(talk)03:02, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
New left make sense as there is no other template for left-wing ideology in China (PRC) but conservatism has 2 different templates.Guotaian(talk)11:51, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agreeSimonm223.However, we should instead rename the Neoauthoritarianism template to the conservatism in china template and remove the current conservatism in china template.Guotaian(talk)13:02, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That would be fine too. I just think the conservatism in PRC template should be appropriately named and not over-specific.Simonm223(talk)14:11, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Neoauthoritarianism does not represent all the conservatism in the PRC (seeCultural conservatism#China,Social conservatism#China;social/cultural conservatives are not necessarily neo-authoritarians). Also, I am strongly opposed to leaving out the entire Greater China area in the "Conservatism in China" template and only dealing with the neoauthoritarianism in the PRC. Pro-Beijing politics in Hong Kong / Macau / Taiwan (Pro-Beijing camp (Hong Kong)/Pro-Beijing camp (Macau)/ Taiwan's "far-right"Chinese Unification Promotion Party,Patriot Alliance Association) and Pro-ROC politics in Hong Kong / mainland PRC should also be included in the template "Conservatism in China".ProKMT(talk)10:13, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]


February 14

edit

Template:Sbwj-big

edit

Unused template; only linked from itself and other softball-related template documentation.MikeVitale20:40, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WikiProject MIT/Media Lab

edit

WP:WikiProject MIT/Media Labis an inactive task force, that while has 7 pages tagged, it has no categorization, so adding this task force to the parent banner while create dozens of empty categories for no reason. Delete this template and replace usages withTemplate:WikiProject MIT.Gonnym(talk)14:03, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WikiProject Articles for creation/redirect

edit

These wrapper banners used to set the class value of redirect or file. That was removed as it isn't needed anymore. As such these banners don't add or do anything unique and are redundant to the main template.Gonnym(talk)13:57, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Gonnym:Same withTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creation/category?Nobody(talk)14:30, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I didn't know about that one.Gonnym(talk)16:24, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Added /category. --Gonnym(talk)16:24, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed that these also automatically add the reviewer and timestamp while the main template doesn't, so probably if a subst version is wanted, then merge these into a single /subst template.Gonnym(talk)16:43, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WikiProject U.S. Roads/U.S. Route 66 task force

edit

Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads/U.S. Route 66is a task force ofWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads.Task forces shouldn't use a separate banner template and instead should use their parent project's banner. The banner already includes this task force parameter:{{WikiProject U.S. Roads|type=US66}}.Gonnym(talk)13:53, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose—there are articles that are only pertinent to the task force that are not pertinent to the rest of the project. For example, USRD itself will not assess/track/tag the historic sites along US 66 like gas stationsbecause they are not roads,but the US 66 TF would track thembecause they are related to the general history of US Route 66.It is for exactly that reason that the separate banner was created.Imzadi 1979→00:44, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't find that distinction compelling, given that this banner is used on less than 130 pages.Gonnym(talk)11:20, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The task force exists as a collaboration between USRD and the US History project. It needs a way to track its articles, and some of its articles are going to be outside of the scope of USRD, its nominal host project. Therefore, the banner exists. If the banner is deleted, the tracking capability of the task force will be affected when those 130 articles are removed from the task force categories. Those are simple facts. The banner has a use, and it does not violate policy. Therefore, there are no grounds to delete it. Thus, it should stay.Imzadi 1979→23:46, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2029 Indonesian local elections

edit

Unused and won't be in-use for years.Gonnym(talk)08:44, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Footer Asian Games Champions Shooting Mixed 10 metre air pistol team

edit

Created by a banned user, just connecting two links and not even updated. this template can be created if this event stays on the program for one or two more Games but for now it doesn't look necessary.Sports2021(talk)03:58, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]


February 13

edit

Template:Southern Sudan Civil War detailed map

edit

Long forgotten module for a war that ended five years ago. While very useful when it was created, it currently serves no other use besides snapshotting a specific date in the war, which is not what it was intended for. Cheers!Johnson52418:37, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Red brick powder

edit

Article in template namespace. Content duplicates2025 ICC Champions Trophy.Jfire(talk)14:58, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete- What was even the intention of this? Spam?Cric editor(talk)14:52, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
DeleteSpam as pointed out above.Johnson52418:16, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Friendly tournaments 2025

edit

Empty and unused navbox.Gonnym(talk)12:07, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

currently i'm using this templateTống Thành Hưng(talk)12:52, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Former AFI/auto-assess

edit

Unused sub-template after being removed from codehere.Gonnym(talk)12:04, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:ГВЗ

edit

Unused non-English table template with no documentation.Gonnym(talk)12:02, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:National team competitive record

edit

Unused Association football table templates.Gonnym(talk)12:01, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Attached KML/Schuylkill Expressway

edit

Unused after its article was merged. PingUser:Red0ctober22who merged the article in case this was unintended.Gonnym(talk)12:00, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2021 K3 League table

edit

Unused sports tables after being subst to their articles. Placing these in a batch after many nominations resulted in deletion, so hopefully this will make this easier to comment.

List of articles:2021 K3 League,2021 K4 League,2021 K League 2,2023 K4 League,2023–24 Ranji Trophy,2023–24 Syed Mushtaq Ali Trophy,2023–24 Vijay Hazare Trophy,2001–02 Celtic League.Gonnym(talk)11:51, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Words and phrases category

edit

Propose mergingTemplate:Words and phrases categorywithTemplate:Words and phrases.
90% similar text; the shorter template name is also older.fgnievinski(talk)04:01, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Concepts by language,mentioned in the text of only the latter template, is barely used. –LaundryPizza03(dc̄)05:28, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]


February 12

edit

Template:2020–21 European Rugby Challenge Cup table

edit

merged with the parent article (2020–21 European Rugby Challenge Cup)Frietjes(talk)16:17, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Blps

edit

Completely pointless template which is a wrapper of itself, which requires an additional bot edit to replace. Seeing that it still has the unsupported parameters in it, I don't think this is even used (haven't seen pages using this template added to the error categories recently).Gonnym(talk)12:36, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't pointless when it wascreated,except someone deleted the documentation. It was intended to be a shortcut for adding the WPBio with living=yes template. In any case, if no one is using it, feel free to delete it, but not because it's "completely pointless".Legoktm(talk)05:17, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It is completely pointless in its current state as it not only doesn't add anything of value, but it also places the pages in error categories. I didn't comment on how the template was in 2012, so you should stop being offended by something unrelated to you.Gonnym(talk)15:47, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Earth's location

edit

Propose mergingTemplate:Earth's locationwithTemplate:LocationOfEarth-ImageMap.
Not sure if this is the best template to merge to, but we already have many templates on this one here.Interstellarity(talk)00:10, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose,the text template seems much easier to understand and navigate. Keeping these templates separate presents two ways of processing information. Unless they are merged in a very good navigational manner.Randy Kryn(talk)01:00, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relistedto generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,✗plicit12:14, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Earth's location in the Universe

edit

Propose mergingTemplate:Earth's location in the UniversewithTemplate:LocationOfEarth-ImageMap.
Not sure if this is the best template to merge to, but we already have many templates on this one here.Interstellarity(talk)00:09, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relistedto generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,✗plicit12:14, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:OccupationNationality

edit

Single-use template which does no computation. Wikitext is more understandable if we don't use this template. Therefore, subst and delete this self-operating napkin.HouseBlaster(talk• he/they)07:11, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment:category namespace templates like this are actually much more useful then manual text, as it just requires copy/pasting these into new pages and everything is handled. This specific one is less helpful as it lacks documentation and features.Gonnym(talk)10:37, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree wholeheartedly that in general these templates are helpful. I think this specific one is not.HouseBlaster(talk• he/they)05:08, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]


February 11

edit

Template:InfoCard

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'stalk pageor in adeletion review).

The result of the discussion wasDelete;deleted asG7byExplicit(talk·contribs·blocks·protections·deletions·page moves·rights·RfA)AnomieBOT⚡13:10, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused template. Mirrored from meta equivalent by me for testing in my sandbox, should rather have put it in my userspace for such things but did not consider that, sorry.waddie96★ (talk)23:39, 11 February 2025 (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'stalk pageor in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:ContentGrid

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'stalk pageor in adeletion review).

The result of the discussion wasDelete;deleted asG7byExplicit(talk·contribs·blocks·protections·deletions·page moves·rights·RfA)AnomieBOT⚡13:10, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused template. Mirrored from meta equivalent by me for testing in my sandbox, should rather have put it in my userspace for such things but did not consider that, sorry.waddie96★ (talk)23:37, 11 February 2025 (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'stalk pageor in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Oslo tram icon

edit

No transclusions. This template's function has probably been subsumed intoModule:Adjacent stationsand its related, more modern pages, as inthis edit.–Jonesey95(talk)23:32, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deleteper nom. I've replaced usages with calls to the module.Gonnym(talk)09:26, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Bangladesh division

edit

No transclusions.{{Infobox settlement}}appears to work fine at the ten or so articles that might use this overly specific infobox template; seeBarisal Divisionfor an example. –Jonesey95(talk)23:28, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:1940 FEF President Cup table

edit

No transclusions. This wasarticle content used in only one article.–Jonesey95(talk)23:27, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deleteper nom.Gonnym(talk)09:37, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep.The template has been restored and is now used in two articles. It should therefore be kept.
Kind regards.Barr Theo(talk)14:06, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Nuclides

edit

No transclusions. No incoming links from discussions explaining why this template was created. This appears to be article content. Created in 2010. –Jonesey95(talk)23:19, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:MassMessage invisible

edit

No transclusions, categories, or incoming links from discussions. Created in 2022. –Jonesey95(talk)23:17, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2024 K4 League table

edit

I merged this withDraft:2024 K4 Leagueper consensus atWT:FOOTYFrietjes(talk)23:15, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deleteper nom.Gonnym(talk)09:36, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2015–16 Bundesliga table

edit

unused after being merged with theparent articleper consensus atWT:FOOTYFrietjes(talk)23:11, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deleteper nom.Gonnym(talk)09:36, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WikiProjects navigation

edit

Draft navboxdiscussed briefly in 2024but not adopted. No transclusions. –Jonesey95(talk)23:06, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Country data Luganville/doc

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'stalk pageor in adeletion review).

The result of the discussion wasDelete;deleted asG8byMaile66(talk·contribs·blocks·protections·deletions·page moves·rights·RfA)AnomieBOT⚡13:10, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Documentation page with no template.MikeVitale23:06, 11 February 2025 (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'stalk pageor in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Three Cheers for Sweet Revenge track listing

edit

Used in two articles, links to only four articles so as an album track listing template, navigation is incomplete. And as noted in thediscussion below,the navigation it does provide is redundant to{{My Chemical Romance}}.StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me19:11, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deleteper nom.Leafy46(talk)04:17, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WikiProject Pakistan Super League

edit

The defunctWikipedia:WikiProject Pakistan Super Leaguehas been consolidated intoWikipedia:WikiProject Cricket/Asia cricket task force.This template, as well asCategory:WikiProject Pakistan Super Leagueand its subcategories and templates are no longer necessary. —TAnthonyTalk18:21, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete.Completely pointless wrapper which is not even helpful. Wrappers are used to add task forces of the named template. This template does not add a "Pakistan Super League" task force.Gonnym(talk)22:12, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:I Brought You My Bullets, You Brought Me Your Love track listing

edit

Unused track list template.Gonnym(talk)17:43, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete.While there are candidates in which this template could be transcluded, the fact of the matter is similar navigation is served by both the{{My Chemical Romance}}navbox and theI Brought You My Bullets, You Brought Me Your Lovearticle itself. Also, there is precedent with the deletion of another unused My Chemical Romance track listing template atthis TfDfrom a few years ago.StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me18:20, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Deleteper Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars, though the fact that the template is unused is partially my fault; I've been removing them from the infoboxes as I worked through the articles of each song, given that I saw them as unnecessary for the reason above.Leafy46(talk)04:17, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Marquess of Donegall family tree

edit

Unused family tree.Gonnym(talk)17:06, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:MRT Sungai Buloh-Putrajaya Line mapframe

edit

Unused route image.Gonnym(talk)17:04, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Horse latitudes coordinates

edit

Thenavboxis only used on one page (Horse latitudes). The usefulness of this navbox since its creation in 2012 is questionable to where I don't think it can be merged to the horse latitudes article. –The Grid(talk)14:41, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep.These articles on latitudes usually show{{geographical coordinates}}.For theHorse latitudes,that template doesn’t show the article topic, so I made a special derivative template. What does the nom propose? To go back to the general template, or drop it completely? Their proposal doesn’t seem thought through.SmokeyJoe(talk)02:08, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
DeleteThe lead section and image are already clear enough. –LaundryPizza03(dc̄)22:00, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Attached KML/Manggarai–Padalarang railway

edit

Unused after being removedhere.Gonnym(talk)12:22, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Sydney Trains Line/Lidcombe & Bankstown Line

edit

Unused route template.Gonnym(talk)12:18, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep.My apologies, this template is meant to be used in the articleLidcombe & Bankstown Line;I have now transcluded it there. It forms part of a series of templates which are similarly used on other articles aboutSydney Trainslines.Tomiĉo(talk)03:20, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Pocklington Beck

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'stalk pageor in adeletion review).

The result of the discussion waswithdrawn.czar01:39, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused route template.Gonnym(talk)12:17, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies - this was supposed to be appended to the articlePocklington Beck.I have appended it now, so it is not now unused. Thanks for the heads-up. Regards.The joy of all things(talk)12:20, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nice. Withdraw.Gonnym(talk)22:13, 11 February 2025 (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'stalk pageor in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Northern Line (İZBAN)

edit

Unused route template.Gonnym(talk)12:16, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Greater Manchester bus route 43

edit

Unused route template.Gonnym(talk)12:16, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Basmane–Nazilli Regional

edit

Unused route template.Gonnym(talk)12:16, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Alsancak–Cumaovası

edit

Unused route template.Gonnym(talk)12:15, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:NYC meetup announcements/shell

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'stalk pageor in adeletion review).

The result of the discussion wasspeedy delete.czar01:38, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused project template.Gonnym(talk)10:45, 11 February 2025 (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'stalk pageor in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:NUMBEROF/basicdoc

edit

Unused doc page. If other wikis want a shorter doc, they can just remove whatever they don't want from the standard /doc page. We don't need to keep an unused page here for them.Gonnym(talk)10:41, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep(struck per below). What makes you say it's unused? I've used it when installing on other wikis, and very likely other people have as well. Your contention "They can just.." might be true, but it's also true having it pre-made is a lot easier to cut and paste. And for users trying to install it on a non-English Wiki, it is often hard enough even reading English, a simple document they can quickly and easily translate is very helpful. This is harmless page that reduces the friction to installing this template which is not easy, and probably should be on all 300+ wikis, it's core infrastructure, anything we can do to facilitate that is helpful. --GreenC16:39, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    En.wiki is not a code repository for other wikis. Itisunused here and serves no purposehere.As I said, any editors wishing to add this module to their wiki would be better served with the long one. If they wish to have anything short like this, then they can just cut the whole /doc. This isn't as helpful as you think it is.Gonnym(talk)22:15, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm curious what policy Gonnym is citing, that we can not do things that are helpful for other wikis, particularly related to templates. I have other points to make, but will hold off unless required. --GreenC20:07, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    There is no point arguing with people that have no interest in helping other projects. Perhaps just move this to a user subpage?Johnuniq(talk)06:19, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I did that, moved to userspace. I have struck the Keep vote, because it no longer matters. If Gonnym attempts to MfD my userspace page, I will of course pick up where I left off. I've said some things here already, and have more arguments (and evidence) in reserve if needed. --GreenC20:12, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Please understand any user is seeingno other pageslinked to this template. How can anyone see it's being used outside of this wiki? Couldn't this be something at the MediaWiki level? For instance,this pageexplains such configurations. I have no idea but it would be a nice educated process to understand. –The Grid(talk)13:56, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    GreenC has done a tremendous amount of work behind the scenes to provide a uniform and reliable method of providing statistics for all Wikipedia projects (I helped with the associated modules). GreenC copies the appropriate page from enwiki to other projects as required. That is, basicdoc is a template for use elsewhere. In the past, NUMBEROF was implemented by many klunky, inconsistent and plain wrong bots. They have been replaced with a new system that relies on GreenC's bot.Johnuniq(talk)20:15, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Can some examples be provided? My knowledge with templates and modules is limited, I'm curious to see the coding in action. –The Grid(talk)13:40, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Certification Table Entry/Authority

edit

Unused other than in an old copy of the main template.Gonnym(talk)10:26, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:CFB DII Yearly Record End

edit

Unused American college football table template.Gonnym(talk)10:15, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:CLE destinations map

edit

Unused image template.Gonnym(talk)10:14, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Broken ref/languages

edit

Unused sub-page which is not linked from anywhere and which hasn't been edited in 10 years.Gonnym(talk)10:13, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2020 K League 2 table

edit

Unused sports table as the content was subst into2020 K League 2.Gonnym(talk)10:08, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2020 K4 League table

edit

Unused sports table as the content was subst into2020 K4 League.Gonnym(talk)10:08, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2020 K3 League table

edit

Unused sports table as the content was subst into2020 K3 League.Gonnym(talk)10:07, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:BCNint

edit

Unused template; only linked from itself.MikeVitale03:50, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:BCSint

edit

Unused template; only linked from itself.MikeVitale03:49, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]


February 10

edit

Template:Metra (CUS South Approaches)

edit

(Template author) Segment has been replaced in its entirety in the one larger template that used this (Template:Metra (Western Yard to CUS)).Hotdog with ketchup(talk)23:12, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Local file

edit

Propose mergingTemplate:Local filewithTemplate:Keep local.
These seem to fit the same use-case, and the wordings are nearly identical. The only difference seems to be the rarely-used{{Local file}}"file mayor may notbe available on Wikimedia Commons "vs the widely-used{{Keep local}}"file may be..." (underlined words omitted). Doesn't the word "may" simply state a possibility (and therefore the opposite is also possible), as opposed to the definitely-true word "is"?DMacks(talk)22:21, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If they are both to be kept, then Local file needs specific documentation of its independent use-case, and I would also propose that it be renamed to clarify the difference.DMacks(talk)06:18, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
DMacks,I created it IIRC because I couldn't suppress the file link in{{Keep local}}.As the files didn't exist on Commons when I used the tag, I found it confusing to have the template link a non-existent file. Or worse, someone might upload a different file to Commons in the future with the same filename.
It seemed easier to just create a new template, but the functionality can indeed be merged. In{{Keep local/sandbox}}there's now a version that accepts "unknown" as the first parameter to suppress the file link and change the wording. Would you find that acceptable?—Alexis Jazz(talkor ping me)06:32, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Definitely no objection to a flag to change behavior if there really is a desired behavior variant. They seem so close, with minor wording differences that seem to have the same meaning to obscure what might be an actual difference of behavior. Doesn't what you want require manually keeping track of whether something of that name gets added or deleted on commons? The whole situation that someone might upload a different file to commons is an intractible result of having any local file, made possibly even more likely when the subject is one that does have free files (therefore made worse by keep-local of free files). It's a shame red-vs-bluelink doesn't work cross-site! I stumbled upon Local file while looking for a function to determine whether a file is local (I think we have threeish variants of that test in different places, so I was also looking for an obvious name to consolidate them). While it's not too hard to test whether a filename exists locally on enwiki, I don't see a way to test whether a filenameq that exists locally on enwiki also exists on commons.DMacks(talk)06:58, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see a way to test whether a filenameq that exists locally on enwiki also exists on commons.
To the best of my knowledge that's impossible in wikitext. Red-vs-bluelink not working cross-site is part of the reason I created this template. The blue link couldn't be suppressed, so users would expect to see a copy on Commons when clicking it.
This could maybe be somewhat improved by having the "unknown" parameter I proposed and the creation of a bot that inserts it in files with the template where the link to Commons is dead. In that case it could also adjust the categorization.
This being said: back when I created it, there was this file (File:Fred Ott Sneeze 1894 remastered.gif/File:Fred Ott Sneeze 1894 remastered.webm) that I thought I might improve further in the future, but I couldn't maintain it on Commons. As this is no longer an obstacle, I'll remove the template from those files.—Alexis Jazz(talkor ping me)13:51, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The template for files that should be kept locally and not moved to commons is{{Esoteric file}}.Does that cover your use case?Chew(V•T•E)20:43, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Chew,not really. The file is useful on other projects. Uploading improved versions ofthe file(+GIF) on Commons was not an option at the time, so I needed to have the file locally in case someone would copy the file to Commons. But it hadn't been copied to Commons (yet), nor could I do that, nor could I request that. So the file link from{{Keep local}}was inevitably a red link in disguise, which I found very confusing. So I created this new template. The situation has changed since and the template is no longer needed for my files.
Other files using{{Keep local}}with a red link in disguise probably exist, but looking at it now, the template I created is probably not the best way to handle those. So I don't oppose deleting{{Local file}}.—Alexis Jazz(talkor ping me)09:29, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Schools and colleges in Kanchan Rup Municipality

edit

Only one blue link, nothing to navigate.✗plicit11:16, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Nsb next line ny

edit

Unused Norway rail related template.Gonnym(talk)11:07, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Older AfDs/doc/small example

edit

Was linked to from parent doc, where I've added it directly. Now unused completely.Gonnym(talk)11:05, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:LaVeyan Satanism

edit

The implication that these other article subjects have anything to do withLaVeyan Satanismviolates BLP and NOR quite egregiously. DoPope Francis,Taylor Swift,andKarl Marxreally have that much in common? ―cobaltcigs20:17, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment:What is the deletion rationale here? If Taylor Swift doesn't belong in this navbox, editing the navbox is the next step. (From the TFD instructions above:Templates should not be nominated if the issue can be fixed by normal editing.). I have removed many links to people and concepts that do not fit the guidance atWP:NAVBOX.–Jonesey95(talk)01:11, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • Any such edit I might make would (incorrectly) suggest I know which links are appropriate to keep, and therefore has a 90% chance of also violating BLP. But I did briefly think about doing that first, yes. ―cobaltcigs17:21, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Old discussions

edit

February 9

Template:Editnotices/Page/Talk:One Direction

[edit]

I believe this template is no longer required because all 5 members of One Direction are now in the 'Past Members' section.MadGuy7023(talk)17:51, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Moldovan presidential elections

[edit]

To me it seems this could be merged intoTemplate:Moldovan electionsvery easily. The articles on Moldovan presidential elections currently have two election navboxes which are basically duplicate and are bloating the articles (example).SuperΨDro14:26, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • KeepThere is a longstanding consensus (see e.g.hereorhere) that indirect presidential elections are not included in the main national elections and referendums template (in this case{{Moldovan elections}}); the separate template was created as a result. If bloat is really considered an issue, the template could be pared down to the indirect elections only.Number5721:01, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Beyond the fact that it's been done seemingly for a long time, is there any real benefit to this practice? Because I see the opposite.SuperΨDro12:26, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
IMO yes; one of the main issues is false equivalence – these are not elections in which the public can vote, and listing them alongside/as equal to popular elections is misleading; in many cases these indirect elections are simply a vote in parliament. I think there is also a risk of a slippery slope, in that if votes by parliament are included, then why not the election of the Speaker of Parliament or other positions.Number5719:50, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The first issue had crossed my mind before, but I think it could have a much easier solution than creating a separate navbox, such as adding an asterisk for example next to the years of indirect elections, or creating a separate subgroup within the presidential elections group within the general elections navbox. The current arrangement does not seem practical to me.SuperΨDro21:04, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

February 8

Template:Assumed license

[edit]

As of last week, we are officially complete! All uploads without an explicit copyright license have been either claimed or deleted. Any new uploads fall after the cutoff date, so we are all set to delete this template.HouseBlaster(talk• he/they)05:47, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Are you SURE that no uploads prior to the cut-off date remain? If the template has completed it's function than I have no objections to redundant templates being archived. If deleted however, I would appreciate a "file copy" being retained in my userspace.ShakespeareFan00(talk)09:32, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
My understanding was that this was systemically added to any file which did not have an appropriate license. If this is a "add it when you find a problem" tag, then I would withdraw this nomination and request a bot add it everywhere to allow the cleanup to continue. Best,HouseBlaster(talk• he/they)23:14, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

February 4

Template:Flashman novels

[edit]

Propose mergingTemplate:Flashman novelswithTemplate:George MacDonald Fraser.
Huge overlap. I think there are only 3-4 articles here that aren't at the proposed target. I don't think we need two navboxes when one will do.--woodensuperman15:04, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relistedto generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,Primefac(talk)07:25, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

February 3

Template:100 most common surnames in mainland China

[edit]

A list of most common surnames is not a suitable topic for a navbox.There's no article corresponding article, andwhy would anyone need to navigate between unrelated surnames anyway?--woodensuperman11:34, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep.The corresponding article isList of common Chinese surnames,which is unreasonably big to dig through. We have a lot of articles on individualChinese surnames,which due to a relative distribution inverse to how forenames and surnames work in the West, are often independently notable. The idea that common Chinese surnames arenota suitable navigational topic displays a lack of understanding of this distribution: as of 2020, the five most common surnames accounted for 30.8% of the population, and the top 100 accounted for nearly 85%.
This template is a fine tool to navigate between individual surname articles (even if the surname articles themselves act as cruft magnets like many set index articles), and more relevant and objective than a navbox based on theHundred Family Surnameslikezh: Khuôn mẫu: Bách Gia Tính danh sách.
Also you should have nominatedTemplate:101–200 Most Common Family Names in mainland Chinaalongside this, which indicates to me you haven't looked into the navigational situation regarding this topic area at all. Both of these templates have 100 bluelinks, over 100 transclusions, and sources.
Surname frequency statistics are a topic of academic interest in China and have been for at least a millennium, so this is a reasonable set of articles for navboxes, and they reduce the burden of navigating through a giant list article orCategory:Individual Chinese surnames(271). Hopefully that answers all your questions.Folly Mox(talk)14:47, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, have included in nomination. The fact that there are two navboxes actually adds weight to my argument, as it shows that you cannot actually navigate from #98 to #104. Also, some of the names are on both navboxes, so the data is wrong. We should be using the articles here, not unnecessary navboxes.--woodensuperman14:52, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see how that adds weight to your argument, but I suppose since we disagree here that would be expected of me. No update to the incorrect assertion ofno corresponding article?And I take it I haven't satisfactorily answered your question as to why people would want to navigate between these articles easily?Folly Mox(talk)14:59, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Because it's pretty useless if you haven't even got the full list and the data differs between the templates. A few of the names are on both navboxes. And why stop the navboxes at 200? Why not 400? And no, you haven't answeredwhyanyone would want tonavigatebetween say #47 and #99 on the list. If someone was interested in the distribution or frequency statistics, they would be looking at an article, not a navbox. This isn't what a navbox is for.--woodensuperman15:11, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The two lists are what we have sources for, and there are overlaps and lacunae due to relative frequency changes between the datasets (and possibly methodology). Ftr, I'm kinda neutral on the second template: the most common 100 surnames is a topic with deep pedigree; the next-most common 100 are more of a niche interest area in demographics and anthroponymy.
I see navigating between related topics as the fundamental purpose of a navbox, but I understand your position from the assumption that the topics are not related (I assume the opposite, having some background in the subject).
Btw, I've notifiedWikiProject ChinaandWikiProject Anthroponymyusing the standard TfD notice.Folly Mox(talk)15:41, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
So are you really saying that multiple editors would find cause to navigate betweenDeng (Chinese surname)andJia (surname)using the navbox rather than actually see the names in context in an article? As far as I can see, your "keep"!vote justifies an article, it does not demonstrate the necessity for a template to navigate betweenunrelatedsurnames.--woodensuperman15:48, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That is because – as we've established – you see the bluelinks as unrelated, whereas I see them as related.Folly Mox(talk)21:49, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Can you explain why muliple readers would need to navigate between these articles in this manner? A navbox like this fails nearly all the points atWP:NAVBOX.This is a list article masquerading as a navbox.--woodensuperman14:05, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The basic answer to the question is§ Advantagespoints 2, 3, and 5. All three of the China-topic editors in this discussion have stated that it's preferable over less compact / less convenient navigation methods.
If you're asking for specific examples, it could be researching geographic distribution of the commonest surnames, or historical demographics to see how theHundred Family Surnamesare currently distributed (or the converse mapping: placement in the original text of surnames now most common), or when the most common surnames are attested earliest, or the relative proportion of subjects with a bluelinked Wikipedia biography relative to the most common surnames, or going through each of the surname articles to update the census data, or any of the use cases suggested in subsections ofbai xing.
I really can't stress enough howinconvenientList of common Chinese surnamesis as a navigational tool. Even just the table at§ Surname listis twenty scrolls tall! AndCategory:Individual Chinese surnames(271) is multiple pages in unhelpful Alpha betical order, with many member titles lacking their native rendering. By comparison, the templates are super compact and default toautocollapseat the bottom of articles. In fact, any time I've ever been looking into multiple Chinese surnames for research or cleanup, I just navigate directly to the template to start with. I even recommended it just a few days ago as a quick resource for gauging how to parameterise|last=and|first=in citation templates for sources with Chinese authors where their name order is ambiguous.
As to theWP:NAVBOXcriteria met, I'm perceiving these templates (or at very least the 1–100 one) as meeting numbers 1, 2, and 4. Maybe a little bit of 5, although certainly most bluelinked articles would not need to link all 99 others. Agree that 3 is not really applicable.
I'll repeat myself that Chinese surnames are a pretty constrained set. FromChinese surname:Around 2,000 Han Chinese surnames are currently in use, but the great proportion of Han Chinese people use only a relatively small number of these surnames; 19 surnames are used by around half of the Han Chinese people, while 100 surnames are used by around 87% of the population.They're a much bigger deal in their own cultural milieux than Western surnames in ours. As someone who has some background in some of this, I affirm that itfeels naturalto have a navigation tool for the top 100 most common as of some census date. It would be pretty weird not to have any navboxes for any Chinese surnames– kinda like needing to go back toChemical element § List of the 118 known chemical elementsto navigate fromMolybdenumtoProtactiniuminstead of via{{Periodic table (navbox)}}.100 may seem like an arbitrary cutoff for the general reader, but does have a history in common and academic use, as attested by the two articles linked in the second paragraph of this reply.
Lastly, I'll pose a counterquestion: how would the encyclopaedia be improved by deleting this template?Folly Mox(talk)20:46, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete 101-200as the article does not have that list, which means that this isWP:ORor non-notable and unencyclopedic.Gonnym(talk)19:03, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's certainly not OR (and is the topic of an academic study, its cited source). I think that makes it technically valid as an article topic, which I accept is a different type of object than a navigation box.Folly Mox(talk)21:47, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It isWP:ORin the wiki sense as the content isn't based on any sources (and navboxes should not have references). If the list is added as content to articles, then that is a different thing.Gonnym(talk)11:16, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I'm having quite a bit of difficulty locating the 2013 Fuxi Cultural Association (Trung Hoa Phục Hy văn hóa nghiên cứu sẽ) research that is claimed to be the basis for the101–200 template(maybe it should have been linked as a reference in the navbox 😉). Apart from the claimed source for the navbox, it appears in body text in a few articles – both here and on zh.wp – but I've yet to locate a link.
As with most content, I don't think being unsourced on its own is a great reason for deletion, but the case to remove the second template is there. I'll dig around some more.Folly Mox(talk)13:49, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not to belabour this point but I'm still not seeing how the 101–200 template is OR. That's ok though; I don't have to understand everything and I don't want to bludgeon this TfD. Mostly popping back in to note I successfully located and added the source, which turned out not to mention the Fuxi Cultural Association at all (probably one of those "published on behalf of" / "paid for by funding from" deals). In case the template is deleted, I'm dropping the cite here as well:
  • Yuan Yida;Qiu Jiaru ( Khâu gia nho ), eds. (2013).Trung Quốc 400 họ lớn.Jiangxi Renmin Chubanshe.ISBN9787210054610.OCLC910234509.
Folly Mox(talk)11:28, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 30

Template:Piechart

[edit]

Propose mergingTemplate:PiechartwithTemplate:Pie chart.
We should not have two templates with nearly identical names performing what appears to be identical functions.Primefac(talk)09:04, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. The syntax of parameters is different, but it should be possible to convert one syntax into the other. This could be done automatically by a bot, and would makeTemplate:Pie chartobsolete. Another option is integrating theModule:Piechartinto the olderTemplate:Pie chartand just refresh it a bit.
Wealready discussedsome options with @Rjjiii.I think he can say more. As I understand, he had some more concrete ideas.Nux(talk)23:24, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merging may be the best solution after Nux's recent improvements to the newer template. Anything{{pie chart}}can do,{{piechart}}andModule:piechartcan also do.{{pie chart}}is the older template; it is more limited and has several unresolved bugs. There are things the newer module-based template can do, that{{pie chart}}cannot. I started working on{{pie chart/sandbox2}}to convert the older template into a wrapper for the newer one, with examples atTemplate:Pie chart/testcases.I both transcluded and substed the sandbox2 templatein this demoto show the differences in syntax.
{{pie chart}}problems:
  1. On major browsers, the chart sometimes "is escaping" from the box.[1]
  2. On various browsers (more than mentioned on the talk page), the template renders a kind of crosshair graphical glitch.[2][3]
  3. "No labels can be put on the slices themselves." (Module:piechart has a tooltip.)[4]
  4. Errors occur when calculating the "other" value.[5]
  5. Accessibility problems are caused by the pseudo list (MOS:NOBREAKS).
There are several things to resolve before merging:
  1. Module:piechart and Template:piechart are currently set up to expect JSON, which will baffle some editors and will work oddly with the Visual Editor.
  2. Module:piechart does not seem to accept colors generated by templates, which editors are currently doing withTemplate:Pie chartonabout 600 pages.
  3. The footer parameter is not yet implemented.
  4. I recently added TemplateData to Template:Pie chart to see if some of the oddball parameters (like style) are being used in articles. This should generate a parameter usage report soon:[6]
Hope that helps!Rjjiii(talk)05:36, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As the creator ofTemplate:Pie chart(the older, much more widely used one), here's my perspective.Edited to add: I started writing this comment beforeUser:Rjjiiiposted theirs above.
About 14 years ago, about 44% ofpage requests from desktop browserswere from Internet Explorer (roughly one-tenth of which were fromIE6), so editors obviously would not adopt any graph-drawing template that did not support IE. Also, it would be another couple of years before Lua scripting became available through Scribunto, rather than having to rely on ParserFunctions for all calculations and logic. That, in my opinion, made it too complicated to support arbitrary starting angles.
IE8was the latest version at the time and did not support the standard CSS transforms. (Support was added inIE9,which was released for Windows Vista and 7 – not XP – about three months after I created the template.) Neither could the IE-specificmatrix filterbe used for rotating slices based on arbitrary values from wikitext, because aMediaWiki security patchearlier that year blocked the use of such filters. Hence the use of several workarounds in the original versions of the code:
  • The first was to use border widths to draw diagonally, which required splitting slices that spanned quadrants.
  • The second was to use animage overlayto work around the lack of border-radius or clip-path for clipping off the parts lying outside the circle. (Note that this worked for IE6 without additional hacks, provided that JavaScript was enabled.)
  • The third was toadd code to common.cssto work around the lack of transparent border-color support in IE6. (This could use the IE-specificchroma filterbecause the code did not go through Sanitizer.)
  • Also, if I remember correctly (and I may not), using tan in one place instead of sin and cos was yet another IE6 workaround.
Of course, thethird workaround was removed,andso was the second.If eliminating the first workaround can be done without introducing new problems or worsening existing ones, I think I would definitely support that. One possible problem area is printing. Currently,Template:Pie chart's legend does not print correctly without "Print backgrounds", becauseTemplate:Legenduses background-color. However, inTemplate:Piechart,this seems to be true for the actual slices as well.
My preference for the name of the merged template is "Pie chart", not "Piechart". It's two separate words, andPiechartdidn't even exist as a redirect at the time I started writing this comment. As for the syntax differences, I don't think converting the template to use JSON makes sense. JSON was designed as a serialization format that happens to be human-readable and human-writable, not primarily as a configuration language for use by non-programmers. Pie charts are relatively simple, so let's just use standard wikitext parameters, and save JSON for more complex things, such as map data (though if there are other significant existing uses of JSON in articles, I would like to see them, and I may change my opinion).
In summary,mergeTemplate:PiechartintoTemplate:Pie chartto make good use of Lua scripting and to eliminate the border-width workaround for drawing diagonally if possible. Continue using standard wikitext parameters unless there is a good reason to change.PleaseStand(talk)07:49, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Try printing or exporting a PDF fromTemplate:Pie chart/testcases.The Lua template (/sandbox2) should print the slice and legend colors now,Rjjiii(talk)07:03, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@PleaseStandFirstly, I want to say that I totally understand your template backstory:). I'm also a dev that worked with IE6, and I did workarounds for IE for years, and I've even run aIE-countdown pagefor a few years... So I created my module (and template) knowing that I don't really have to worry about IE at all:).
I want to use this opportunity to clarify why I used JSON. I like JSON for graphs because I don't have to worry about enumerating parameters. Wikitext, unfortunately, doesn't support repeatable parameters. It also doesn't support structure (logical grouping of parameters). Unfortunately, the VE template editor also doesn't support groups of parameters AFAIK, so it's also not well suited for editing graphs (for which you typically have rows of data). Probably one of the reasons whynew graphs/chartsdata will be in a separate space andearly example shows data will be in JSON.I'm assuming/hoping there will be a better editor for JSON in the future. We already have a JSON editor for structured templates and a JSON namespace; maybe, e.g., a JSON-line editor will be added to the valid types of template parameters. Hopefully.
Having said that, I am open to thinking more about input methods. I think it should be possible to work on supporting a more classical approach even in the module (not just mapping on the template side). I could try to add a second function that parses parameters into a structure that is now extracted from JSON. So both JSON input and enumerated parameters would be possible. Enumerated parameters could close the gap by not only providing a more VE-friendly input method but also solving some final problems Rjj described below too... if those are still a problem.Nux(talk)14:52, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've personally wondered why the options (|meta= parameter) is also JSON, when its keys are all unique.Aaron Liu(talk)03:51, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Here is a catch – I edit from mobile phone, and when i see{{Piechart}}it appear without any issue. On the other hand, rendering{{Pie chart}},Broken lines does appear on each 25% area.––kemel49(connect)(contri)06:40, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Following up:
    • Achmad Rachmani,Alexeyperlov,andKEmel49,you are seeing the lines onTemplate:Pie chart,right?
    • Both templates can print.
    • About a 100 pages have bogus parameters that can just be removed.[7]
    • 119 pages use|style=for what seem like odd reasons.[8]Sânnicolau_Mare#Demographics,Remetea_Mare#Demographics,and 110 other pages are trying to line up two floated pie charts on the same line but still allow text beside them, I think?
    • Only 491/9002 (5%) of the transclusions include an "other" slice.[9]This parameter only affects the legend; the slice size is always calculated as if each value is a percent. AtTemplate:Pie chart/testcases#Not_100_total_percent_without_otherthe older, more widely used template will give an "other" slice when the parameter is not used. The new template can theoretically be used with raw data (not percentages), and it will just do the math. Should the merged template retain the old limitation (at least for backwards compatibility in "thumb" form), or should it be allowed to accept any value?
    • Primefac,I think you have merged many templates. When it comes to the600 pagesthat are pulling colors from templates, does the merged template need to support these or does it make more sense to replace these with the color value emitted from the template?Rjjiii(talk)22:08, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      (To clarify, Rjjiii recently fixed the printing.)Aaron Liu(talk)22:31, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      I have not yet looked into how to implement the merge, but generally speaking the intention is to keep the output the same after a template merger, so if that can be done without replacing the other templates, that will likely be the method of updating.Primefac(talk)15:30, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      @RjjiiiI think I can implement a second input method in the module (not using JSON), which would work with templates. Or at least it works in my brief test:Template:Sandbox/Nux/enumParams/test.If that was the problem you mentioned I can integrate that into the pie chart module as a separate function that can be invoked with as many parameters as one wants.Nux(talk)16:32, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      (BTW please ping me if there is something I can help with; unfortunately topic subscriptions don't work here)Nux(talk)16:34, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      @NuxYes, that fixes that issue from template-defined colors. Thanks! I think there are two more things to implement in the module for backwards compatibility:
      1. The older template has a|footer=parameter that is dipslayed after the legend:<p style= "margin-bottom:0" >{{{footer}}}</p>
      2. The older template has a|style=parameter for the ".PieChartTemplate" class div. The equivalent for the newer template is the ".pie-thumb" class div. All of the uses seem odd; they useclear:noneto put two charts on a line, sometimes with body text. That does nothing on mobile. Maybe on the older desktop themes it made more sense? This would be easy to add, but also maybe should be deprecated.
      Neither of those parameters need any kind of support for the non-floated configurations. They're rarely used for the older template.Rjjiii(talk)20:05, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm done for the day. Let me know if I missed something inTemplate:Pie chart/sandbox2#TODO.Nux(talk)00:23, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Nux,the default colors for the older template were copied directly from color theoristCynthia Brewerto prevent issues for colorblind readers (Template_talk:Pie_chart#colors). Mostly, it is looking good.Rjjiii(talk)01:02, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't think it was implemented properly. There are dark colours side by side and then there is a sequence of pastel colours. This doesn't have enough contrast to my knowledge (and I do have a WCAG certificate and professional experience). As you can see on the actual page:https://colorbrewer2.org/#type=sequential&scheme=Greens&n=3single hue colour schemes are allowed. On the other hand using the same shade of red and green together is a weird and risky choice to me. There is explicitly a red-green colour blindness and you can easily find red-green images that testColor blindness.And default pie chart has those red-green stripes right there in the beginning...Nux(talk)10:48, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Nux(I'm on mobile rn.) Gotcha, then don't revert to those colors. There may be pushback to defaulting to shades of any one color. Would the previous colors be more accessible if the dark and pastel colors alternated? I don't personally have strong opinions on defaults. Thanks for the explanation and good luck,Rjjiii (ii)(talk) 00:47, 17 February 2025 (UTC) Edit: I've just changedTemplate:Graph colorto improve the contrast on the older template. I still don't have strong opinions on what the default colors need to be. On a technical note:838out of838mainspace transclusions of that template appear to be implementing default colors for the older template, so{{Graph color}}should be treated like a part of the older template.Rjjiii(talk)04:27, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Completed discussions

edit

A list of completed discussions that still require action taken on the template(s) — for example, a merge between two infoboxes — can be found atthe "Holding Cell".

For an index of all old and archived discussions, seeWikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/Archives.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion&oldid=1273714158"