Test

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019 May 14

Loading...
Jump to navigation Jump to search

May 14[edit]

Template:Gregorian chants of the Roman mass[edit]

Propose merging Template:Gregorian chants of the Roman mass with Template:Mass of the Roman Rite of the Catholic Church.
While destination template is already quite populated, you could argue that in some techninal topics still offered as an overview, some maximalism tend to occur here on Wikipedia. Though, if insisted upon, some contents in the destination template may perhaps be moved to the more general scope of Template:Sacraments, rites, and liturgies of the Catholic Church, and some calender-related stuff to Template:Liturgical year of the Catholic Church? PPEMES (talk) 11:21, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't even understand the request. Why would you want to merge chants here, and liturgy there? Apples and pears, it seems, common noun only that they have to do with the Catholic Church. What I'd suggest is getting rid of "Roman" in the titles, - our prime topic for Catholic Church is that one. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:20, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
Having looked closer, I don't understand "Gregorian" in this template title, because Kyrie is chanted many melodies in today's Catholic mass, not only Gregorian, - and perhaps that way - just as part of the mass - a merge might make sense. On the other hand, Kyrie is also part of Lutheran masses, it's more general than merely Catholic. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:55, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Comments The "Roman" in the titles refers specifically to the Roman Rite, which is the most common form of liturgy in the Catholic Church, but not the only one, and omitting it would render the names of the navboxes inaccurate. That said, I think we can leave out the "of the Latin Church" part as overly wordy and unneeded. As for the second template, it's purpose is to highlight the parts of the mass that have standard Gregorian Chant settings. But those are just the parts of the Mass and already included in the more general template (indeed, I don't think there's any link in the Gregorian Chant template that is not in the Mass template. I don't really think we need both. More than a merge, should just delete the Chant template as a redundant template. oknazevad (talk) 18:00, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Merge (as creator of chant template). Per Oknazevad, I think they all appear in the Mass template, but you should verify (there might be ones that have text and music as separate articles, in which case the template should have both). But I do think the Mass template is a bit unwieldy, so I agree with moving some of the content less directly related to the mass (particularly the calendar). Rigadoun (talk) 17:14, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Papacy[edit]

Propose merging Template:Papacy with Template:Holy See.
Not sure myself, but perhaps arguments could be evaluated. There's arguably a significant content overlapping. The thing is, part of what's confined to the Papacy template might as well be included in the Holy See template, and the other way around to some extent. If merged, indeed a section "Papacy" with subsections pretty much (merged) retained from the previously merged Papacy template would probably be needed. Again, not sure, though. PPEMES (talk) 00:22, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

  • Oppose. The boundaries between the temporal and spiritual aspects of the papacy can be unclear to non-experts, so a merged navbox would probably muddy the waters even further.
The overlap isn't that great. I just checked using AWB's list- comparison tool. I found 98 links on Template:Papacy and 80 links on Template:Holy See, including 25 links common to each page. so
I also just spotted Portal talk:Popes#Requested_move_12_May_2019, which was proposed by @PPEMES and rejected. After reading both proposals, I very much doubt that this topic is PPEMES's greatest area of expertise. I suggest that it would be wiser to leave these matters to those who do have some specialist knowledge. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:57, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Reach of the European Union[edit]

Propose merging Template:Reach of the European Union with Template:European Union topics.
Might as well keep this in one, collected overvew? PPEMES (talk) 23:49, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Substantive human rights[edit]

Propose merging Template:Substantive human rights with Template:Human rights.
Might as well keep this in a one glance template? PPEMES (talk) 23:47, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Culture by religion[edit]

Propose merging Template:Culture by religion with Template:Culture.
Might as well incorporate this to keep it in a collected overview? PPEMES (talk) 23:44, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Periods of the History of Europe[edit]

Propose merging Template:Periods of the History of Europe with Template:History of Europe.
Redundancy. Better keep it simple and collected? PPEMES (talk) 23:41, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:U.S. space program sidebar[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was Delete; deleted as T3 by Athaenara (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT 11:05, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

Redundant copy of Template:United States space program sidebar. -- Beland (talk) 22:02, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

  • No need for a discussion, the template was a direct copy of the older template. --Gonnym (talk) 07:55, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Infobox Province TR[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was delete. After replacement with {{Infobox settlement}}, that is Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:54, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

Replace and delete

Province-specific wrapper for {{Infobox settlement}}, with limited transclusions, on pretty stable sets of articles. Subst:itution will reduce the maintenance overhead, reduce the cognitive burden for editors, and enable articles to benefit more immediately from improvements to the current parent template.

Note: Despite being named "Infobox settlement" the template is not only used for settlements. Per its documentation, Infobox settlement is "used to produce an Infobox for human settlements (cities, towns, villages, communities) as well as other administrative districts, counties, provinces, et cetera—in fact, any subdivision below the level of a country". TerraCyprus (talk) 16:10, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Faryl Smith[edit]

Not enough links to warrant a navbox. WP:NENAN --woodensuperman 13:36, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

  • Delete per nominator....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 12:09, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Keep. No reason based on a policy or guideline presented. This did at one time have other links, but they were removed. One of them was removed by Woodensuperman without comment, which is exceedingly bad form generally, but especially as (s)he then went immediately on to nominate this for deletion. Whether this is relevant or not I don't know, but: This navbox links together the articles contained in a featured topic, which is something favoured by the featured topic criteria. Josh Milburn (talk) 09:29, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
Per WP:NAVBOX, this is unnecessary, as the articles are already well linked, and you can already navigate between the two albums by the infoboxes on the articles. There is no place for an album in a navbox on which she made a guest appearance on one song, which is why that was removed. --woodensuperman 08:12, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Could you please quote the passages of WP:NAVBOX that you are referring to when you say that the article is "unnecessary" and there's "no place" in the navbox for the link in question? I have read the page, and I am seeing nothing supporting what you are saying. Josh Milburn (talk) 09:01, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Buffyverse[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was delete. — JJMC89(T·C) 03:04, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Just a collection of all the other navboxes. There is no article where it would be appropriate to place every single one of these navboxes on per WP:BIDIRECTIONAL, so this should never be used. --woodensuperman 10:06, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

  • Delete - it's also placed on the top of talk pages for some reason. Never seen a navbox placed like that. --Gonnym (talk) 07:57, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Gauri Khan[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was delete per prior discussion at TfD and elsewhere Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:32, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Not primary creator per WP:FILMNAV --woodensuperman 10:01, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:C. V. Kumar[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was delete per prior discussion at TfD and elsewhere Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:33, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Not primary creator per WP:FILMNAV --woodensuperman 10:00, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Dinesh Vijan[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was delete per prior discussion at TfD and elsewhere Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:33, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Only primary creator of one film in the list. See WP:FILMNAV. --woodensuperman 09:59, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Capitals of provinces of Thailand[edit]

There is no such thing as the concept of a province "capital" in Thailand. Originally, this listed the towns/cities the provinces were named after (and which served as the seat of the provincial offices), but as the offices of some provinces have moved location, this has morphed into an WP:OR listing of municipalities in which the offices are located, labelling them as "capitals" where no reliable source does. It's absurd to say Ban Tom is the capital of Phayao Province and Bang Rin of Ranong. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of capitals in Thailand. --Paul_012 (talk) 05:46, 14 May 2019 (UTC) Paul_012 (talk) 05:46, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

  • Keep (I've copied and pasted this from the List of Capitals in Thailand AfD) for now, at least procedurally. For instance, searching "Phetchaburi" "capital" brings up a number of sources which cite it as a provincial capital. For instance, [1] lists several regional cities as capitals. The infobox for each province lists a capital as well. If we take the nom at face value, there's going to be a fair bit of cleanup required, but considering there's evidence of provincial "capital"s existing in English, I think this list is valid until otherwise shown. SportingFlyer T·C 06:02, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
    • I haven't researched this yet but just a comment on your last statement. There is no such thing as evidence of provincial "capital"s existing in English - either Thailand has provincial capitals or doesn't. --Gonnym (talk) 09:21, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
  • The AfD has been closed as redirect to Provinces of Thailand (which I've adjusted to use "Namesake town/city" instead of "capital" to avoid confusion). User:SportingFlyer, does this affect your !vote? --Paul_012 (talk) 22:24, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:DART RR infobox header[edit]

There's a couple issues with this template. For one, orange/yellow text on a white background is hard to read (officially fails WCAG 2.0 AA contrast, but even as a sighted person it's indistinct). Beyond that, the presentation bears no resemblance to actual Dallas Area Rapid Transit station signage. Per the Design Criteria Manual (scroll down to Appendix E, page 307 or so) the station font is some variation of ITC Avant Garde. You can see it in File:DART Parker Road Station 2009-11-25.jpg; black text on a silver-gray background. The default text in {{Infobox station}} is a good deal closer to that presentation than this template. If there's a need for custom styling it can be achieved through the existing {{DART style}}. Mackensen (talk) 02:06, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Province Spain[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was delete. And replace with {{Infobox settlement}} Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:05, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Replace and delete

Province-specific wrapper for {{Infobox settlement}}, with limited transclusions, on pretty stable sets of articles. Subst:itution will reduce the maintenance overhead, reduce the cognitive burden for editors, and enable articles to benefit more immediately from improvements to the current parent template.

Note: Despite being named "Infobox settlement" the template is not only used for settlements. Per its documentation, Infobox settlement is "used to produce an Infobox for human settlements (cities, towns, villages, communities) as well as other administrative districts, counties, provinces, et cetera—in fact, any subdivision below the level of a country".

Regions, municipalities, parishes, towns, villages etc. already transclude {{Infobox settlement}} directly.

Visualisation of Spain place infobox usage
Infobox usage on articles about places in Spain

77.183.15.167 (talk) 00:13, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

  • Replace and delete per nom. Simplify editing and maintenance. TerraCyprus (talk) 16:13, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Replace and delete per nom.--Darwinek (talk) 22:22, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).