Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 April 16

April 16

Template:Str index code

• Template:Str index code (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused, not sure why you wouldn't use {{str index}}. User:GKFX^talk 21:50, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

• Delete. No reason for this to exist. --Guy Macon (talk) 04:08, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Template:P3

• Template:P3 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused (besides a demo on a talk page). P1 and P2 are needed by Template:Ifeq but this isn't. User:GKFX^talk 21:42, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Template:Lastbut1

• Template:Lastbut1 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused; the more capable Module:Pn is available. I substed it on Help:Parameter defaults which is a "historic" help page and so shouldn't change over time. User:GKFX^talk 21:28, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

I honestly cannot remember why I brought it over from Meta Wiki. If it’s not used, then its deletion cannot have too many consequences. — SpikeToronto 07:12, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Template:16TeamBracket-2legs-with final four

• Template:16TeamBracket-2legs-with final four (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to {{16TeamBracket|legs=2/2/1/1}} Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 16:44, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Template:Isle of Wight Railway diagram

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 speedy delete. Template deleted by Athaenara per CSD G7. (non-admin closure) – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 23:03, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

• Template:Isle of Wight Railway diagram (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Duplicate of existing (and much better) template Template:Isle of Wight Railway Laplorfill (talk) 16:28, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

• Note the (only) author blanked the page shortly after it was nominated for AfD, so I have requested its speedy deletion under G7. Laplorfill (talk) 18:23, 16 April 2021 (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:4RoundBracket-Byes-NoSeeds-2Legs

• Template:4RoundBracket-Byes-NoSeeds-2Legs (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused, redundant to {{4RoundBracket|byes=2|seeds=no|legs=2}} Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 16:18, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Template:Prima J

• Template:Prima J (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

I've just redirected the first song in this navbox for lack of notability, and while I realize that redirecting articles and then nominating the template for deletion is frowned upon, the truth is that this would still fail WP:NENAN even without my actions. The second song in the navbox, "Nadie (No One)", is a cover of the Alicia Keys song, and the Prima J version isn't mentioned anywhere in the No One (Alicia Keys song) article. The third song was redirected by another editor as far back as 2008 for lack of notability, and the tour article again doesn't mention the group anywhere in it – I assume they were the opening act on one or more of the dates, but as neither the tour article nor the group article mentions it at all, it's impossible to say. So even if I hadn't redirected the first song article, this navbox would still only contain one album and one single that mentioned the group in any capacity. As the duo have long since given up their musical careers, there's no chance this navbox can be added to in the foreseeable future. Richard3120 (talk) 15:07, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Template:Pst name

• Template:Pst name (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Not transcluded outside a couple of userspace test pages. Modern complicated templates should be done in Lua so there is no need to keep this around in case of someone wanting it. User:GKFX^talk 11:58, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

• Regardless of the merits of using Lua versus Wikitext for this, Delete due to lack of use. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 14:00, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
  • My point about Lua was just that someone who woild have wanted this in 2010 is much less likely to want it now. User:GKFX^talk 15:59, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Template:Expand language

• Template:Expand language (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This template is a violation of namespace guidelines – articles are not meant for communication between editors – talk pages are. Cleanup templates are an exception because they warn of clear issues – but this is not a cleanup template, simply a "this article could be better" template – and therefore belongs on talkpages. I propose redesigning this template as a talkpage banner, and disallowing its transclusion in articles (or failing that, the template be deleted). Elli (talk | contribs) 11:19, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

• Disagree strongly - the "expand language" tag is also very useful for a reader, because it points to a more detailed account of a subject in another Wiki. The language links in the sidebar only indicate the existence of an equivalent article in another language, not whether or not it's worth looking at. Ingratis (talk) 12:38, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
• Disagree I've been working on reorganizing this template on articles tagged with it in the Articles needing translation from French Wikipedia category for a while now, and was unaware it did run against any guidelines, and are not completely opposed to it becoming a talkpage template, but I would suggest that the guideline present on the template page itself be followed and any instances of the "expand language" template be replaced with the intended subtemplate such as "Expand French" or "Expand German". Sadenar40000 (talk) 12:45, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
  • I'm referring to all subtemplates in this nomination too. Elli (talk | contribs) 12:48, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
    • In that case, they should probably be tagged with this TFD then. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:24, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
      • It is present on those subtemplates currently Sadenar40000 (talk) 13:32, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
• Strong support, this template is unnecessary and unactionable clutter for the vast majority of readers, and it has a tendency to remain on top of articles for decades. The talk page is the correct location to point editors to material that they can use, just like {{Refideas}}. In most cases where this template is used it's obvious that a sister project likely has a longer article, such as with French municipalities or Swedish poets. – Thjarkur (talk) 13:09, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

• In a lot of cases where it's used, it's not obvious which language has best content to translate. For example many non-Europeans sportspeople have articles which can be expanded from French or German Wikipedia, but without the expand language tag, users would have to scroll through every language's page to see if one language has content to use. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:33, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Oppose this template is another way to attract new users to the project. Stub templates also serve the same purpose and are not cleanup templates either. – SD0001 (talk) 13:19, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

• Oppose this template is useful in article space to encourage users to expand articles, same as how stub tags are in article space. Possibly they should be moved to bottom of the article (like stub tags are) to be less prominent, but the tag is way less useful if on the talkpage. I've frequently found these tags on articles and then improved the article as a result, but there's no way users would go looking for this template on talkpages. Thus, moving it to talkpage would inhibit article expansion from other languages in my opinion. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:24, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
• Disagree. It's a useful pointer to more information, and is thus relevant to general readers as well as editors. However, the preferred location for the banner should be at the bottom of the article, below any "stub" template, like in this recent article: |Ángel León (chef). Locating this template at the top of an article is a distraction. Hallucegenia (talk) 13:45, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose. This is indeed a cleanup tag, as it links to foreign wiki pages with potentially useful information to add in. It should be kept at the top of the article so editors can help out. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 16:47, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose. It would do very little good on talkpages.★Trekker (talk) 19:24, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
• Support. Less is more. The reader has come there to read about Ivan Vejeeghen or whatever in English. If she's Russian or can read Russian well, she would probably be at the Russian article in the first place. Let's not clutter the reader's experience by shouting at them, at the very top of the page, about stuff that has nothing to do with the actual subject of the article. It they can read the other language well and want to, savvy readers will know about the language links at the left of the page anyway. Herostratus (talk) 22:01, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

• With all due respect this makes little sense. If that Russian language article were a featured article and our English one a stub then wouldn't it make sense to help improve the English one as well? I can't read or understand Russian... why should I have to miss out on a FA? - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 23:11, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

• Support. I've seen way too many stub or start-class articles with this templates pinned to the top for more than 10 years.--Darwinek (talk) 23:22, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
• Disagree - this is a rather important and useful template, and having suggested steps for improving an article right in front of browsing editors/readers who might want something to do is in my opinion a good way to get people to contribute and make said articles better. I'd also argue it counts as a cleanup template in a sense, as it is a notice for editors and readers (editors see what to do, readers know that the articl has flaws and have a good alternative). Remagoxer (talk) 23:25, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
• Support This is a call to action for editor to improve the article, not a warning to readers, the majority of whom will not have the ability to read the foreign language article in question. As such, this is a project-oriented message and should not be the first thing a reader sees on an article. SFB 23:31, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
• Strong support. This huge and ugly template on the top of the page creates the false impression for the reader that something is wrong with an article. It often points at articles in Wikipedias where the quality is not very strong. This template does enormous disservice to Wikipedia! As the nominator points out, it conflicts with our guidelines. Thank you, Elli, for nominating! gidonb (talk) 01:51, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
• Strongly oppose. When was the last time you checked a talk page for a template like this, or in general? Might as well move a majority of templates to talk then, and watch constructive edits plummet. While I understand the supporters in a way, this is an absurd proposal, even as someone who cares about pages being "pretty" than most; it's not even "ugly" (there have been far worse aesthetic decisions in past years). And I can't recall one person who's been dissuaded from an article because of this template - in other words: WP:AINT.--~Sıgehelmus♗_(Tøk) 03:43, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
• Keep The gist of the template is that more information about the article subject may be found in a different language edition of Wikipedia. I find it informative as a reader. Nardog (talk) 05:02, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
• Keep. this is useful for readers as well, to alert them that the other language WP may be more extensive. Many of our readers are to some degree capable of reading other languages than English, and to a certain degree the available translation can also supply information. It also lets people capable of doing translations immediately spot the article if they come across it.In fact, seeing this on the article page is how I usually find articles I can at least partially improve from the other versions (most commonly by adding references) DGG ( talk ) 06:59, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Template:Millionaires (group)

• Template:Millionaires (group) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only one navigable link; the rest were redirected for failing notability and being unsourced or containing one source for a decade. Doesn't need to still exist. Ss112 06:20, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

• Delete Provides no useful navigation. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 14:00, 16 April 2021 (UTC)