Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Wikipedia:TFD)
"WP:TFD" redirects here. For the page used for TimedText or talk page deletion discussions, see Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion.
This page is about discussion of templates. For a list of templates used for discussion, see Wikipedia: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 55 58
TfD 0 0 1 1 2
MfD 0 0 0 1 1
FfD 0 0 0 11 11
RfD 0 0 8 88 96
AfD 0 0 0 24 24
Deletion discussions
Articles
Templates and modules
Files
Categories
Redirects
Miscellany
Speedy deletion
Proposed deletion

On this page, the deletion or merging of templates and modules, except as noted below, is discussed.

How to use this page

[edit]

What not to propose for discussion here

[edit]
Shortcut

The majority of deletion and merger proposals concerning pages in the template namespace and module namespace should be listed on this page. However, there are a few exceptions:

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

Reasons to delete a template

[edit]
Shortcut
  1. The template violates some part of the template 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 by template substitution (the latter cannot be concluded from the absence of backlinks), and has no likelihood of being used.
  4. The template violates a policy such as Neutral point of view or Civility and 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 Templates may be able to help.

Templates for which none of these apply may be deleted by consensus here. 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. Utilizing Twinkle is strongly recommended as it automates and simplifies these steps. To use Twinkle, click TW in the toolbar (top right of the page), then select XFD. Do not include 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 is protected, 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 of administrators or template editors.
  • For templates designed to be substituted, 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, replacing discussion title with the title you chose (but still not changing the PAGENAME code).

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 replacing template name with 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 on TemplateStyles pages. 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_23#Template:template_name.css */
II: List the template at TfD. Edit today's TfD log and paste the following text to 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 the Tfd2/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 the Tfd2 template 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 the page history or talk page of the template. Then, add one of the following:

to the talk pages of the template creator (and the creator of the other template for a merger) and the talk pages of the main contributors. It is also helpful to make any interested WikiProjects aware 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 use Article alerts. Deletion sorting lists are 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 with Wikipedia'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 the criterion that it meets.

[edit]

WikiProjects are 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's Article Alerts automatically, if they subscribe to the system. For instance, tagging a template with {{WikiProject Physics}} will list the discussion in Wikipedia:WikiProject Physics/Article alerts.

Notifying substantial contributors to the template

[edit]

While not required, it is generally considered courteous to notify the good-faith creator 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 the page history or talk 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 not be 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 the Holding Cell until 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]

Twinkle is 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 have automatic 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 the deletion policy and explain your reasoning.

People will sometimes also recommend subst or subst and delete and 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 at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Old unclosed discussions.

Closing discussion

[edit]

Administrators should read the closing instructions before closing a nomination. Note that WP:XFDcloser semi-automates this process and ensures all of the appropriate steps are taken.

Current discussions

[edit]

February 23

[edit]

February 22

[edit]

Template:Local file

[edit]

Propose merging Template:Local file with Template: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 may or may not be 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 (talk or 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 (talk or 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 of the 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 (talk or ping me) 09:29, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 15:34, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Horse latitudes coordinates

[edit]

The navbox is 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 the Horse 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]
Delete The lead section and image are already clear enough. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 22:00, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
So, should {{geographical coordinates}} be removed from other latitudes articles? SmokeyJoe (talk) 12:05, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 15:19, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 15:14, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Conservatism in Formosa

[edit]

The newly created Conservatism in Formosa template has no basis and should be deleted because it inaccurately groups together political movements that do not share a common conservative tradition. The term "Formosa" is rarely used in contemporary political discourse, making the template’s framing unclear and misleading. Additionally, lumping together pro-Beijing parties (such as the Chinese Unification Promotion Party) with Taiwanese nationalist parties (such as the Taiwan Statebuilding Party) ignores their fundamentally opposing ideologies, as mentioned in third opinion. Pro-Beijing groups seek unification with the PRC, while Taiwanese nationalist parties advocate for a distinct Taiwanese identity, often opposing both the PRC and the ROC frameworks.

Furthermore, a well-established Conservatism in Taiwan template already exists, accurately representing conservatism in Taiwan as aligned with the Pan-Blue Camp, which upholds the Republic of China (ROC) identity and has historically been anti-communist. This existing template correctly reflects the mainstream conservative tradition in Taiwan, which is rooted in preserving ROC institutions rather than promoting PRC-aligned or Taiwanese independence ideologies. Guotaian (talk) 09:39, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2023 GAA Rising Stars Hurling Team

[edit]

No idea where this team is coming from. No own article, no mention in the article about the Fitzgibbon Cup. The Banner talk 03:04, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]


February 21

[edit]

Template:2017 Rugby League Qualifiers table

[edit]

not needed, all articles are transcluding from the main 2017 Super 8s article Frietjes (talk) 22:12, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

[edit]

Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads/U.S. Route 66 is a task force of Wikipedia: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 stations because they are not roads, but the US 66 TF would track them because 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]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:14, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • comment: task forces are usually subgroups of a project, so it seems strange that there are task force articles which aren't of interest to the parent project. maybe there should be an additional parameter like |US66-non-road=y or |US66-only=y to prevent articles using |type=US66 from being categorized with the road articles? Frietjes (talk) 18:56, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Schizophrenic DALY Rates

[edit]

No longer used. (It is currently transcluded to one user page but predates that user's activity by 10 years.) – Fayenatic London 12:52, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Aviation accidents and incidents in Senegal

[edit]

Only two links to articles, not enough to merit a template. DemocracyDeprivationDisorder (talk) 12:37, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Historically female work

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was speedy delete per G5 SmartSE (talk) 15:14, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is at best going to be an unmaintainable mess with significant NPOV issues. The problem is what is considered historically female work is going to vary massively by area and time even within the same country. For example in some areas of the UK basically any non technical coal mining job other than getter would have been considered work for women and girls. In others women hardly featured underground. Then it was made literally illegal for women to work underground. So depending on the area hurrier historically female work, never female work or work up until it was made illegal.

This means there is a lot of stuff where its inclusion or lack of inclusion will create POV issues. Size is also an issue. Woman have done a vast range of work over the centuries. ©Geni (talk) 06:10, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't need to be derided by you! I welcome all contributions that better refine what is and what is not historically female work by area and time. I think the intention of the template is clear, cover work that is associated with womanhood, often stigmatisingly so. Réalgard (talk) 12:00, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think we should start with creating the article Historically female work to tie this navigation template together. With that article in place, we can start to talk about the content of the template. The Banner talk 13:38, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The creator is a blatant sock of Lau737 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) so I will G5. SmartSE (talk) 15:13, 21 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's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Full party name with color (parenthesis)

[edit]

Seemingly unused and invokes a function in a nonexistent module Module:Party name with color (parenthesis). Contacted creator of the page on their user talk and have not heard back after 3-4 days. ~ Rusty meow ~ 04:00, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Club Hurling Silver Jubilee Team

[edit]

No article about the team, so any navigation would hang in the air. The Banner talk 02:34, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]


February 20

[edit]

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]
@ShakespeareFan00: ping. Best, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:26, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 22:58, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Shooting down this template straight after it is supposed to have become superfluous is quite risky. Murphy's law and so. The Banner talk 02:02, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2024–25 Vijay Hazare Trophy Group tables

[edit]

unused after being merged with the parent article with attribution Frietjes (talk) 20:27, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2024 Chhattisgarh Cricket Premier League Points table

[edit]

unused, unclear if there is a parent article. Frietjes (talk) 20:26, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2021 NBL–Philippines season standings

[edit]

unused after being merged with the parent article with attribution. Frietjes (talk) 20:25, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2020 Philippines Football League table

[edit]

this was forked from the main article and subsequently merged back, so no longer needed as a separate template. Frietjes (talk) 20:24, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rugby League Four Nations Ladders

[edit]

these have all been merged with the parent articles with attribution. Frietjes (talk) 20:21, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

No transclusions. This tiny navigation helper is no longer needed after the linked templates were sensibly merged into {{WritersGuildofAmericaAnthologyAnyLength}}. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:02, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Use Bangladeshi English

[edit]
  1. This template claims that it is for "articles which have Bangladeshi English spelling", but the Bangladeshi English article says that "Bangladeshi English is an English accent" and makes no claims about any spelling differences between Bangladeshi English and English as spoken or written in other countries.
  2. Templates providing editing guidance should not make unsupported claims or recommendations.
  3. Even if there are differences in vocabulary or word usage in Bangladeshi English, we should not use these local terms, phrases, or constructions unannotated in English Wikipedia articles, per the MOS guideline about using vocabulary common to all varieties of English, so the template provides guidance that is contrary to MOS. As such, this template is not useful or usable on the English Wikipedia (this is WP:TFD#REASONS, number 3). – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:17, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Delete: I am unable to find any Bangladeshi English dictionaries or style guides. The closest I can find is Pocket Oxford English Dictionary South Asia Edition ISBN 9780198700982. Perhaps we should create a new template for South Asian English? ―Howard • 🌽33 20:08, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment: The same would likely apply to EngVar templates such as (I'm guessing) Template:Use Hong Kong English or Template:Use Antiguan and Barbudan English. Thus, I will suggest that, if such templates are deleted, they should be replaced with a new Template:Use Commonwealth English. It would make sense to me if we delete the templates for all English variants that do not have dictionaries or style guides. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 22:54, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Neoauthoritarianism in China

[edit]

The Neoauthoritarianism in China template should be deleted because it duplicates the Conservatism in China template, which already covers PRC conservatism since third opinion confirmed that "China" refers to the PRC. Guotaian (talk) 13:38, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Strong opposition and strong KEEP - A template to unite the 'pro-Beijing' political forces of Mainland China (PRC), Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan (ROC) is essential, and the "Neoauthoritarianism in China" template is currently in charge. ProKMT (talk) 07:45, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - The Neoauthoritarianism in China template is largely similar to the Conservatism in China template, which covers largely the same topics as the earlier template. HarukaAmaranth 08:31, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If Guotaian promises never to remove non-Beijing camp conservatives (pro-ROC camp and conservative localists) from the "Template:Conservatism in Hong Kong", he may not oppose deletion. ProKMT (talk) 10:20, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:The NFL on NBC pregame show

[edit]

WP:PERFNAV --woodensuperman 13:08, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:TheEarlyShowAnchors

[edit]

WP:PERFNAV --woodensuperman 13:03, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:ABC News personalities

[edit]

WP:PERFNAV --woodensuperman 12:57, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:NBCEveningNewsAnchors

[edit]

Textbook WP:PERFNAV --woodensuperman 12:56, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Fox News personalities

[edit]

As presenters on a news channel, this fails WP:PERFNAV. --woodensuperman 12:55, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Quinn Martin shows

[edit]

Per WP:FILMNAV, only shows where he was the primary creator should be included. I have trimmed the ones where he was executive producer, which leaves two entries. WP:NENAN --woodensuperman 09:57, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2023 Joe McDonagh Cup Team of the Year

[edit]

No article on the team, seems to be another "fantasy" team. --woodensuperman 09:04, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP: Far from being a "fantasy" team as you call it, this is actually the official team of the year as announced by the Gaelic Athletic Association (see link here to the official GAA website: Carlow to the fore in Joe McDonagh Team of the Year). While not everything needs a navbox, not every navbox needs an article. Reference to the Team of the Year could be added to the existing 2023 Joe McDonagh Cup page if you think that would help? --CorkMan talk 23:54, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You are wrong. Every navigation template needs an article to show where this is about. And the "team of the year" of a second tier tournament? The notability of that team is highly questionable. The Banner talk 01:58, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Mount Leinster Rangers Hurling Team 2014

[edit]

Mostly redlinks, and not a winning team, so not navbox-worthy. We can't have navboxes for every team. --woodensuperman 09:02, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Ireland composite rules shinty team 2008

[edit]

No article about this team. No mention of the team in Composite rules shinty–hurling The Banner talk 00:14, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. We can't have navboxes for every permutation of a team.
--woodensuperman 08:50, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]


February 19

[edit]

Template:Ireland composite rules shinty team 2006

[edit]

No article about this team. No mention of the team in Composite rules shinty–hurling The Banner talk 23:48, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:All-Ireland Senior Hurling Championship Final Man of the Match

[edit]

Nothing available about the Man of the Match. No article, no mentions in the article All-Ireland Senior Hurling Championship. Relevance doubtful. The Banner talk 22:57, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Hurry Up Tomorrow track listing

[edit]

Navigation is redundant to {{The Weeknd songs}} as it as well links to all the songs from the album that have articles. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 20:34, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, just here to say about the template; I was merely taken in by the previous template made by someone for Kamikaze (Eminem's studio album) and I had thought about replicating it for other albums (so I went on to make just that; for Eminem's The Marshall Mathers LP 2, and now this; The Weeknd's Hurry Up Tomorrow. Well in hindsight, me purely wanting to add something just werent able to establish myself the realization that it was wholly redundant because... yes, I just added navigation on the infobox itself... Was about to plan on making this template for Eminem's recent album, The Death of Slim Shady, until I received word that all my work was nothing but redundancy.
So if there's anything I can do, well I can make it right (you can ask me to blank it), otherwise, anyone who has the power to delete pages, they have my blessing to remove it. ROBLOXGamingDavid (talk) 03:47, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Fx Goby

[edit]

Two films. WP:NENAN. --woodensuperman 14:33, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2024 GAA Rising Stars Hurling Team

[edit]

No article about this team. Not mentioned in the given backlink (2024 Fitzgibbon Cup) The Banner talk 14:19, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP: I have added a Team of the Year section (see 2024 Fitzgibbon Cup#Team of the Year) and put in a suitable link on teh Template.CorkMan talk 16:35, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you create low-quality templates about teams without own article or mention, to improve them only after you are called out on it? I leave it to the admins to decide if this team (with no own article) is relevant enough for its own template. The Banner talk 16:48, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, admittedly, many of the templates are low quality or attract a niche level of interest. Not every template on Wikipedia has a corresponding article of its own. Many templates link to a broader article, particularly when it comes to sporting articles. This has been the case with many of the templates that I created. Over the last few months you have proposed the deletion of many of the templates that I have created over the years. The reason I improved these templates after "being called out" is because I have an interest in preserving these templates. Many have been in existence for many years and offer vital information, albeit to a niche audience. Rather than being "called out", I am merely offering an alternative view to yours as to why the template should not be deleted.CorkMan talk 00:12, 20 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]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:16, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Neither Neddyseagoon nor CJLL Wright have edited in years. If they were the only ones who used it, it can safely be deleted. Best, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:36, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Monarch of the Glen

[edit]

Only three articles outside of the subject. WP:NENAN. --woodensuperman 13:53, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Bad (album)

[edit]

All the articles in this template can already be found in Template:Michael Jackson songs and Template:Michael Jackson, making this template unnecessary. TenthAvenueFreezeOut (talk) 09:54, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This template provides a better navigation to the songs of the album "Bad" than the listing of songs organized by decade. The Banner talk 21:35, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Laois Hurling Team 2024

[edit]

Losing finalist on second tier competition The Banner talk 02:45, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]


February 18

[edit]

Template:Guangzhou F.C. squad

[edit]

Club went defunct, thus no current players IDontHaveSkype (talk) 21:34, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Cangzhou Mighty Lions F.C. squad

[edit]

Club went defunct, thus no current players IDontHaveSkype (talk) 21:33, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pilipinas Super League templates

[edit]

these were all single-use templates, so I have merged them with the parent articles (with attribution). Frietjes (talk) 20:10, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Bonded By Blood

[edit]

Only three links which all navigate directly and clearly to each other. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 19:19, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox translation

[edit]

Unused but also shouldn't be used. One of the written-works related infobox should be used instead. The example uses Odyssey (George Chapman translation), which works completely fine with {{Infobox book}}. If anything is missing from that template, it should be proposed on its talk page. Gonnym (talk) 17:35, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I personally don't think the infobox needs the many additional parameters this one added, such as text examples. The infobox summarizes the article, it's not meant to replace it. Gonnym (talk) 17:38, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not done creating this template yet, it's still a work in progress, and I intend on removing the unnecessary params. ―Howard • 🌽33 17:41, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Tipperary Minor Hurling Team 1945

[edit]

Losing finalists The Banner talk 16:49, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Westmeath Hurling Team 2019

[edit]

Losing finalists The Banner talk 16:47, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Donegal Hurling Team 2023

[edit]

WP:NENAN The Banner talk 16:40, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Full Bible family tree

[edit]

No transclusions, documentation, or incoming links. This is clearly a labor of love, but it does not belong in template space. I recommend moving to User space. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:58, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:The countrysides of amarlu

[edit]

Navbox with no transclusions and just one blue link. {{Rudbar County}} seems to do the job fine. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:51, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2027 Indian Premier League Points table

[edit]

No transclusions. Too soon. The main article for 2026 was deleted as too soon. OK to userfy. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:45, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Editors should stop creating these years in advance just for them to be empty and unused during all that time. Gonnym (talk) 17:39, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify Way too early. The Banner talk 12:42, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Night Court

[edit]

Only three articles outside the title link. Not enough to navigate with. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:25, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:GMMTV Shows (current and upcoming)

[edit]

Propose merging Template:GMMTV Shows (current and upcoming) with Template:GMMTV filmography.
Seems redundant --woodensuperman 13:24, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:AKB48 Team TP

[edit]

Any links are not to en-Wikipedia. Useless. --woodensuperman 13:15, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 22:05, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:AKB48 Team SH

[edit]

No links. Useless. --woodensuperman 13:01, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 22:04, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Coord/doc/Transwiki guide

[edit]

This doc sub page hasn't been updated since it was wrote in 2014 and is very much out of sync with the code. If this is still something that is wanted, it probably better fits as a Help: namespace page. Gonnym (talk) 10:04, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It should just be written to not mention any line numbers, which has now been done. Snævar (talk) 15:24, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Forbes Korea Power Celebrity

[edit]

This "top 10" is an unsuitable topic for a navbox. Copyright issues aside, we don't need to be navigating between people in this way. See Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2025 February 3#Template:Forbes China Celebrity 100 for a similar recently deleted navbox. --woodensuperman 09:54, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:LaVeyan Satanism

[edit]

The implication that these other article subjects have anything to do with LaVeyan Satanism violates BLP and NOR quite egregiously. Do Pope Francis, Taylor Swift, and Karl Marx really have that much in common? ―cobaltcigs 20:17, 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 at WP: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. ―cobaltcigs 17:21, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:05, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NAVBOX provides guidance about which links to keep. I have followed it, reducing the bloat in this navbox quite a bit. Do you still think this navbox should be deleted? If so, please provide a rationale. – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:42, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]


February 17

[edit]

Template:Pete Hegseth

[edit]

Very similar to the sidebar that was deleted from this January 26. Contains only links to two articles outside the main subject. Everything else is to an article of little relevance or article sections. Not useful for navigation. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 19:30, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This navbox was not previously deleted. Two different templates. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 19:34, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The navbox was proposed to be deleted on Jan 26, but was not until Feb 2. Rochambeau1783 (talk) 19:38, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Pete Hegseth series is not Template:Pete Hegseth. Template:Pete Hegseth is the current nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 19:42, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It appears their content + reason for deletion would be the roughly same? (Does g4 not apply there as well?) Tule-hog (talk) 20:07, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No. It says "as a page that was previously deleted via a deletion discussion, is substantially identical to the deleted version, and any changes do not address the reasons for which the material was deleted." This navbox was not nominated before. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:31, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Only two unique links. Gonnym (talk) 20:10, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Warren Doane

[edit]

Contains no links to articles. A complete sea of red. Very unuseful. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 19:26, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Are two blue links enough (for another template)?Maher27777 (talk) 20:26, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:EXISTING implies red links are somewhat acceptable for filmographies. Just taking recent ongoing TFDs Pete Hegseth and Footer Asian Games Champions Shooting Mixed 10 metre air pistol team, it seems 2 links is generally not enough. Tule-hog (talk) 21:05, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NENAN suggests a "rule of five" articles before a navbox is appropriate. --woodensuperman 08:55, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2000 UCI Track Cycling World Championships

[edit]

Only one transclusion on the topic article. WP:NENAN. Provides no navigation. –Aidan721 (talk) 18:44, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Robot City

[edit]

It is supposed to navigate on novel series. No items to navigate: all novels arenonnotable and. either no link, or redirect to authors --Altenmann >talk 16:52, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Dontmerge

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was Delete; deleted as G7 by Pppery (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 20:14, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No longer used and I believe it does not serve any purpose any more as all usages were substituted (WP:TFD#REASONS, "[t]he template is not used, ... and has no likelihood of being used."). ~ Rusty meow ~ 16:49, 17 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's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:American Bandstand

[edit]

Hosts fail WP:PERFNAV, nothing left really. --woodensuperman 15:36, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2024 Joe McDonagh Cup Team of the Year

[edit]

No evidence that there even was a team of the year The Banner talk 02:23, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP: A quick Google search of "2024 Joe McDonagh Cup Team of the Year" resulted in a link to the following article - Joe McDonagh Cup Team of the Year 2024. Thus proving the existence of the Team of the Year in question. I have added reference to the template.CorkMan talk 11:19, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A template is not an article. But there is no article 2024 Joe McDonagh Cup Team of the Year nor does the article 2024 Joe McDonagh Cup mentions the team in any shape or form. The Banner talk 12:37, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please click on these external links... Joe McDonagh Cup Team of the Year 2024 and Offaly and Laois dominate Joe McDonagh Cup Team of the Year with 12 players selected between them. One of these is an online report on the GAA's own website actually announcing the Team of the Year in 2024. The team can be added to the 2024 Joe McDonagh Cup page if it helps?CorkMan talk 23:02, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Mayo Hurling Team 2016

[edit]

WP:NENAN The Banner talk 02:19, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:11, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - This is a team that won an inter-county championship. The problem appears to be that the players have not yet been created. Did the nominator, or anyone, think of suggesting to the creator (who is so prolific on this subject that he will probably get round to making them eventually) that he could keep the template outline as a subpage in his userspace until that happens? That way the effort put into compiling the template is not lost and it is still possible for the creator (or even other editors) to view the template if he wants to use them to work on a player's biography. I note that NENAN, which is the only rationale offered by the nominator, states the following on the "rule of five": "are there presently at least five articles (not counting the primary article) on which your navbox will be used? (For instance, five books or films in a series; five singles or albums for a music article; five products by a common company; five members of a common group such as a band, comedy troupe, etc.) If not, then you probably don't need a navbox just yet.". This template does not have enough articles, yet. But there is potential for others. --Gaois (talk) 00:35, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Mayo Hurling Team 2021

[edit]

WP:NENAN The Banner talk 02:18, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:11, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - This is a team that won an inter-county championship. The problem appears to be that the players have not yet been created. Did the nominator, or anyone, think of suggesting to the creator (who is so prolific on this subject that he will probably get round to making them eventually) that he could keep the template outline as a subpage in his userspace until that happens? That way the effort put into compiling the template is not lost and it is still possible for the creator (or even other editors) to view the template if he wants to use them to work on a player's biography. I note that NENAN, which is the only rationale offered by the nominator, states the following on the "rule of five": "are there presently at least five articles (not counting the primary article) on which your navbox will be used? (For instance, five books or films in a series; five singles or albums for a music article; five products by a common company; five members of a common group such as a band, comedy troupe, etc.) If not, then you probably don't need a navbox just yet.". This template does not have enough articles, yet. But there is potential for others. --Gaois (talk) 00:35, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Mayo Hurling Team 2020

[edit]

WP:NENAN The Banner talk 02:18, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Mayo Hurling Team 2022

[edit]

WP:NENAN The Banner talk 02:18, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Mayo Hurling Team 2024

[edit]

WP:NENAN The Banner talk 02:17, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]


February 16

[edit]

Template:Editnotice birthdate

[edit]

Unused template; only linked from itself. MikeVitale 22:17, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment Template was created at a time of seeing several unref/unjustified birth date changes. It seems less critical now, as it is probably more effective to rely on such actions as page protection, user warnings/blocks, reverts. BLP editnotice option also seems a good approach; but what would be the corresponding editnotice for a "BDP"? Dl2000 (talk) 22:56, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Colort/ColorShort

[edit]

Broken template that is unrelated to Template:Colort and used only in place of Template: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]

Template:Pan American Games torch relays

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was withdrawn. (non-admin closure) –Aidan721 (talk) 20:02, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

All redlinks or redirects. –Aidan721 (talk) 19:22, 16 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's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Progressive groups in the US

[edit]

Template for a non-existing subject (Progressive groups in the US). And an overly broad scope. The Banner talk 14:45, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Are you referring to {{Progressivism sidebar}} here? Tule-hog (talk) 19:09, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
actually it is Template:New Democrats Sm8900 (talk) 20:08, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Should the template instead be named {{New Democrats navbox}}? Otherwise the current name implies a focus on the blanket topic Progressivism in the United States. Tule-hog (talk) 21:10, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
ok, sure i can rename it to {{New Democrats topics}}.is that ok with everyone? by the way, the word "topics" is a consistent term to use in a navbox title; the word "navbox" would generally not be in the title. Sm8900 (talk) 03:42, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As long as it refers to an existing article, it is fine to me. The Banner talk 12:55, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Old discussions

[edit]

February 15

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 of Template:Modern liberalism US is not the reason why Template:Liberalism US should be deleted. ProKMT (talk) 10:01, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The difference between Conservatism in China template and Neoauthoritarianism in China template is not the same as the distinction between Modern liberalism in the United States and Liberalism in the United States.
In the case of China, Conservatism in China template covers the entire Greater China region, including the PRC, Hong Kong, and Taiwan, while Neoauthoritarianism in China is specific to the PRC. Conservatism in China includes different political movements within greater china. In Hong Kong, conservatism is closely tied to the pro-Beijing camp, while in Taiwan, it has historically been associated with the Kuomintang (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 China and Template:Conservatism in Taiwan do not include the pre-1949 mainland Chinese conservatism. For example, pro-Qing royalism, Chiangism before 1945, Dai Jitao Thought, Western Hills Group was 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]
After third opinion was provided on the overall topic Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_China#Political_ideology_templates, this template has been changed and there is no need for deletion. However, the neoauthoritarianism template should now be considered for deletion. Guotaian (talk) 13:04, 20 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 a Chinese 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 agree Simonm223. 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 (see Cultural 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]

January 30

Template:Piechart

[edit]

Propose merging Template:Piechart with Template: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 make Template:Pie chart obsolete. Another option is integrating the Module:Piechart into the older Template:Pie chart and just refresh it a bit.
We already discussed some 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}} and Module:piechart can 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 at Template:Pie chart/testcases. I both transcluded and substed the sandbox2 template in this demo to 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 with Template:Pie chart on about 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 of Template:Pie chart (the older, much more widely used one), here's my perspective. Edited to add: I started writing this comment before User:Rjjiii posted theirs above.
About 14 years ago, about 44% of page requests from desktop browsers were from Internet Explorer (roughly one-tenth of which were from IE6), 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.
IE8 was the latest version at the time and did not support the standard CSS transforms. (Support was added in IE9, which was released for Windows Vista and 7 – not XP – about three months after I created the template.) Neither could the IE-specific matrix filter be used for rotating slices based on arbitrary values from wikitext, because a MediaWiki security patch earlier 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 an image overlay to 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 to add code to common.css to work around the lack of transparent border-color support in IE6. (This could use the IE-specific chroma filter because 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, the third workaround was removed, and so 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", because Template:Legend uses background-color. However, in Template: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, and Piechart didn'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, merge Template:Piechart into Template:Pie chart to 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 from Template:Pie chart/testcases. The Lua template (/sandbox2) should print the slice and legend colors now, Rjjiii (talk) 07:03, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@PleaseStand Firstly, 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 a IE-countdown page for 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 why new graphs/charts data will be in a separate space and early 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]
That was just out of convenience in implementation. I think I can support both methods in meta too.
BTW. When doing new test cases I remembered how hard it is to change anything in enumerated parameters (e.g. you have to change numbers of all parameters to insert anything on top)... So I will keep the ability to use JSON-like value-label-color triplets at least. Nux (talk) 23:52, 17 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, and KEmel49, you are seeing the lines on Template: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. At Template:Pie chart/testcases#Not_100_total_percent_without_other the 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 the 600 pages that 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]
      @Rjjiii I 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]
      @Nux Yes, 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 use clear:none to 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 in Template: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 theorist Cynthia Brewer to 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=3 single 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 test Color 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 changed Template:Graph color to 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: 838 out of 838 mainspace 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]
    I've created shorter groups of colors so that will be more colorful. A full display of colors is here: pl:Module:Piechart/test.
    Graph color template is not needed as the module has this built color function. Examples: pl:Module:Piechart/test#Color_function. Nux (talk) 01:24, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    No issue with those colors. Replying again to add a note for the closer: Template:Pie chart/sandbox2 should be deleted as it is no longer used or needed. From the page's history, it may look like there are multiple contributors (in which case it would be kept for attribution), but in this edit it was completely rewritten, so it's not needed for attribution either. Rjjiii (talk) 16:27, 21 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 at the "Holding Cell".

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

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