Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2024 November 25
EYOF figure skating templates
[edit]Despite having the word "Olympic" in the name, this is not in any way a major skating competition. We also do not have templates for all skating disciplines at this event. As it is, many figure skating articles have become excessively cluttered by a voluminous number of templates at the end, such that it's difficult to see the forest through the trees. We really need to be more judicious in terms of which templates are truly the most beneficial. Bgsu98 (Talk) 21:17, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 03:00, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
template's are not used for other rugby union seasons. SimplyLouis27 (talk) 21:00, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- Oh dear. Then I guess the likes of the URC template for the season, Template:2024–25 United Rugby Championship table, the Super Series Template:2023–24 Super Series league table etc. must be figments of my imagination. Aedis1 (talk) 21:45, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 03:00, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
Template is not used for other rugby union season's so not needed for this one SimplyLouis27 (talk) 20:59, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 03:00, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- delete after updating to use WP:LST like the other seasons. Frietjes (talk) 16:58, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
Template:Book Marks
[edit]- Template:Book Marks (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Book Marks2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Book Marks2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Module:Book Marks2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
New template with only two uses that generates article text. Using templates to generate article text is generally discouraged. * Pppery * it has begun... 20:34, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- Template:Book Marks2 should be deleted. the other two are required. What do you mean "text is generally discouraged". you gave no substantive evidence of this. provide specific policy or guideline citations that outline this. While it's true that templates generating article text can sometimes be problematic, they are not inherently "discouraged". There are many widely used that generate consistent, reusable text without issue. and even parallels to this like RT already exist and are not being discussed for deletion. In this case, just like the one I just indicated, the template promotes accuracy and uniformity for articles discussing reviews aggregated by Book Marks, which benefits both readers and editors.
- And it only has two uses because I just made it. naturally the template has limited usage at the moment because it is newly created. Deletion based on current usage isn't a fair metric for assessing its utility. Templates often start small before wider adoption. If this template is retained, I plan to integrate it into relevant articles to demonstrate its potential.
- template streamlines and standardze how we represent Book Marks review data across articles. It reduces the likelihood of inconsistencies, ensures grammatical correctness, and simplifies future updates to format or wording. Editors can still adjust the parameters for flexibility. Create a template (talk) 05:03, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- update:
- 1. I'm using only Template:Book Marks and Module:Book Marks now. The others are unnecessary.
- 2. I've provided substantive edits to the Template:Book Marks/doc to demonstrate not only usage and flexibility; also defending its utility, potential, and overall benefits to wiki community — both editors and readers. Create a template (talk) 06:56, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- I was actually curious about the guidelines here as well. Just from the Rotten Tomatoes template you linked, I looked at the talk page, which linked to two TfDs: one in May 2021 with result "keep" and one in March 2022 with result "no consensus". Within the second discussion, I found a clear guideline citation: WP:TMPG (permalink) guideline #1 which says
Templates should not normally be used to store article text, as this makes it more difficult to edit the content. They should also not be used to "collapse" or "hide" content from the reader.
Retro (talk | contribs) 11:47, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- I was actually curious about the guidelines here as well. Just from the Rotten Tomatoes template you linked, I looked at the talk page, which linked to two TfDs: one in May 2021 with result "keep" and one in March 2022 with result "no consensus". Within the second discussion, I found a clear guideline citation: WP:TMPG (permalink) guideline #1 which says
- I support deletion here. Even if using templates to generate article prose was a norm, there is no consensus that this specific text belongs in articles at all. To the contrary, two different discussions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Novels were very skeptical of drive-by citations to review aggregators. In my view, those who wish to cite Book Marks ought to write sentences like normal, and ideally write a meaningful book reception section while they’re at it. ~ L 🌸 (talk) 07:29, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- On reflection, I worry that my comment was too harsh. I do think the specific sentence generated by this template is acceptable. However, when the sentence is generated by a template, it becomes harder to integrate into the rest of the reception section, and thus hinders the development of the article into its best form. So I still support deletion. ~ L 🌸 (talk) 01:06, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. Οἶδα (talk) 09:18, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Template:How-to (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages) - 324 transclusions
- Template:Manual (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages) - 547 transclusions
Propose merging Template:How-to with Template:Manual.
These seem to say the same thing, in different words ("contains instructions, advice, or how-to content"/ "written like a manual or guide").
Reducing the number of available duplicative templates makes it easier for editors to find the template suited to an issue which they wish to flag. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:48, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- Template:IranNCSGN (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
No point in external link template for a dead link. * Pppery * it has begun... 17:06, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 03:00, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
Incomprehensible and unwieldy. I would like to clarify that this template features five separate tables, some very large, while one features only one person, and no explanation as to what the differences are between the five. Additionally, all tables feature all four skating disciplines. As it is, many figure skating articles have become excessively cluttered by a voluminous number of templates at the end, such that it's difficult to see the forest through the trees. We really need to be more judicious in terms of which templates are truly the most beneficial. Bgsu98 (Talk) 01:27, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- I guess I've never heard these terms used in figure skating (as opposed to tennis). I watch a lot for decades and decades and tv never used it. Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:59, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 03:00, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
Figure skating scores templates
[edit]- Template:Record scores in figure skating (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Historical record scores in figure skating (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Incomprehensible and unwieldy. As it is, many figure skating articles have become excessively cluttered by a voluminous number of templates at the end, such that it's difficult to see the forest through the trees. We really need to be more judicious in terms of which templates are truly the most beneficial. Bgsu98 (Talk) 01:24, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 03:00, 27 November 2024 (UTC)