Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2023 January 4

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< January 3 January 5 >

January 4

[edit]

Template:View all arch

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. ✗plicit 09:06, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Non-working template used in one experimental page from 2006 (also nominated for deletion). – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:45, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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:WatchOS versions

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. ✗plicit 09:06, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Single-article content with no template parameters. Subst into article and delete. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:37, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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:Mersin BB roster

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. ✗plicit 09:06, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Single-article content. Subst and delete. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:35, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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:Regular Issues of 1922–31 and Template:Regular Issue Coils of 1923–29

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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 author approval Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 15:52, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Single-article content with no template parameters, documentation, or categories. Subst into article. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:33, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • They are simple wikitables with no template code in them, and they are each used in just one article. In case I did not make it clear, the template namespace guidelines say that Templates should not normally be used to store article text, as this makes it more difficult to edit the content. That is what is happening in this case. Such tables should live in the article(s) themselves rather than in template space. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:29, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure what you mean about "template code". In any case, the tables don't contain article text really, while they do mention names of individuals depicted on the stamp, the charts only relate postage denominations and dates of issue, basic information which is fixed, will never change, and needs no future editing as narrative text might. Besides, templates can be edited if need be. The templates were also created to allow other editors to use them in articles without having to copy all that markup, or to link to them. Bear in mind also, that the Guideline you refer to is not a rigid WP policy, and says, "Templates should not normally be used to store article text...". "Normally" -- it doesn't say never. Since these templates only contain nominal information and have created no issues or inconvenience for anyone in twelve years, there is really no viable or pressing reason why they should be deleted at this late date. All things considered, editor discretion should prevail here. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 19:41, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Gwillhickers, who knows his stuff and is one of the major stamp editors working in Wikipedia's stamp-article collection. Didn't come only because of a ping, I had checked this discussion earlier and was waiting for more information, so would have come by anyway once Gwillhickers had commented. Randy Kryn (talk) 23:06, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
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).
Retrieved from "http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2023_January_4&oldid=1132924944"