Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 July 25: Difference between revisions

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Line 51: Line 51:
::::::For an example, see the 1953 election. [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:1953_Philippine_presidential_election_results&oldid=139869802 This was the first revision in 2007]. [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:1953_Philippine_presidential_election_results&oldid=370095081 Edited in 2010 to include "Total" column]. [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:1953_Philippine_presidential_election_results&oldid=697740552 Edited in 2016 to include valid and invalid votes]. [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:1953_Philippine_presidential_election_results&oldid=1003158859 Updated in 2021 to use Election results template]. So, when I changed it in 2010, I thought, this would be the last time I'd edit this template... guess I was wrong lol. Who know someone else would be changing this in 2025? [https://templatecount.toolforge.org/index.php?lang=en&namespace=10&name=1953_Philippine_presidential_election_results#bottom He'd have to change 5 articles?] Such wasteful use of time! [[User:Howard the Duck|Howard the Duck]] ([[User talk:Howard the Duck|talk]]) 15:55, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
::::::For an example, see the 1953 election. [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:1953_Philippine_presidential_election_results&oldid=139869802 This was the first revision in 2007]. [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:1953_Philippine_presidential_election_results&oldid=370095081 Edited in 2010 to include "Total" column]. [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:1953_Philippine_presidential_election_results&oldid=697740552 Edited in 2016 to include valid and invalid votes]. [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:1953_Philippine_presidential_election_results&oldid=1003158859 Updated in 2021 to use Election results template]. So, when I changed it in 2010, I thought, this would be the last time I'd edit this template... guess I was wrong lol. Who know someone else would be changing this in 2025? [https://templatecount.toolforge.org/index.php?lang=en&namespace=10&name=1953_Philippine_presidential_election_results#bottom He'd have to change 5 articles?] Such wasteful use of time! [[User:Howard the Duck|Howard the Duck]] ([[User talk:Howard the Duck|talk]]) 15:55, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
**These templates were converted to use {{tl|Election results}} just recently. If we'd transclude these and in the future, a better template is made, I don't want to edit the 2-4 articles the transclusions are saved at to make sure everything is the same. [[User:Howard the Duck|Howard the Duck]] ([[User talk:Howard the Duck|talk]]) 15:09, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
**These templates were converted to use {{tl|Election results}} just recently. If we'd transclude these and in the future, a better template is made, I don't want to edit the 2-4 articles the transclusions are saved at to make sure everything is the same. [[User:Howard the Duck|Howard the Duck]] ([[User talk:Howard the Duck|talk]]) 15:09, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
* '''Keep'''. The practice of using section transclusion with onlyinclude tags to transclude a table is inferior to using a template, because it prevents the use of VTE links and is confusing for less experienced editors. As a best practice, section transclusion should be used when the purpose is to transclude the section, not as a workaround to avoid a template. --[[User:Bsherr|Bsherr]] ([[User talk:Bsherr|talk]]) 00:22, 2 August 2021 (UTC)


====[[Template:1935 Philippine vice presidential election results]]====
====[[Template:1935 Philippine vice presidential election results]]====

Revision as of 00:22, 2 August 2021

< July 24 July 26 >

July 25

Weather templates

Delete per consensus at WPTC's talkpage. All templates have been changed over to WP Weather and have zero transclusions. NoahTalk 23:16, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:1897 Philippine presidential election results

The 1897 template is single-use and should be substituted on the election article it is used on. The rest should be substituted on the respective presidential articles and transcluded where else used using the #section-h function. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 19:01, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose increased use of section transclusion of articles in article space (should be portals only). Per what @Johnuniq said here, this is too likely to break. —Kusma (talk) 08:43, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Withdraw and hold a central discussion on how to handle the many situations where this arises. These nominations might not be the major problem I was referring to in the above link mentioning my username, but editors experience template transclusion all the time, so why complicate matters with tricky section transclusions? Have a look at Help:Labeled section transclusion including its "Dealing with stray whitespace"—why do that? Are we trying save server disk space? Section transclusion is bound to break or at least give undesirable side-effects when people edit the source section without knowing or caring about where the section is used. By contrast, editors know that editing a template is going to affect wherever the template is used. For anyone interested, my major concern is with {{excerpt}} and the attempts to rewrite the MediaWiki parser such as at Module:Transcluder. Johnuniq (talk) 09:26, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Then we can just substitute if doing the section transclusion will cause trouble. Then for every template below the 1897 election, the section for the respective election can be a link to the section of the election article for the results on the Presidential elections in the Philippines. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 13:59, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    What's the problem with leaving as is? —Kusma (talk) 14:02, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Because they won't be used often outside their current use. Templates in table format should have multiple uses on pages. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 13:38, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Why? One use is enough if you ask me, and two are plenty. Subst loses the author attribution and delete breaks old revisions. I'd like to see a stronger case for deletion to counter these downsides. —Kusma (talk) 15:09, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In the past weeks, when a user subst the templates I nominated, the user credits the original author or authors in the edit summary. So attribution can still be given. As I've been going through these election templates, they were created for one purpose. Normally templates are supposed to have multiple uses. Navboxes are not created for say one article, but multiple articles. But with the information that's presented here should be part of the article as a standard table. Why would there need to be election information from two centuries ago on a separate template when it can be easily be included within the article it was created for. It's not like the results from 1897 are going to change 124 years later. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:18, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Results can still change, and their presentation might. For 1897's case, I don't think it's used in plenty of articles but for post- and including 1935, these results are transcluded in multiple places. If a better template is created, or we'd need to change something (like somebody dug up stats for blank ballots!) someone would only have to change just one page, and it is guaranteed to affect all transclusions. Let's say we section-transclude (is there a name for this process?), there's no guarantee all transclutions will be updated; some may have screwed up coding so it won't be affected. If we wholesale substitute, someone has to keep track where it was substituted, then change every substitution to what the new version is... this isn't the best use of time in Wikipedia.
For an example, see the 1953 election. This was the first revision in 2007. Edited in 2010 to include "Total" column. Edited in 2016 to include valid and invalid votes. Updated in 2021 to use Election results template. So, when I changed it in 2010, I thought, this would be the last time I'd edit this template... guess I was wrong lol. Who know someone else would be changing this in 2025? He'd have to change 5 articles? Such wasteful use of time! Howard the Duck (talk) 15:55, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The practice of using section transclusion with onlyinclude tags to transclude a table is inferior to using a template, because it prevents the use of VTE links and is confusing for less experienced editors. As a best practice, section transclusion should be used when the purpose is to transclude the section, not as a workaround to avoid a template. --Bsherr (talk) 00:22, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:1935 Philippine vice presidential election results

All are used on the presidential election articles and should be substituted on there and usage outside the main election article should be transcluded using the #section-h function. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 19:01, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose increased use of section transclusion of articles in article space, too complicated for users, likely to break and too costly. —Kusma (talk) 08:46, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2010 Philippine Senate election results per party

All single-use and should be substituted where used on the Philippine Senate election articles. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 18:51, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:1941 Philippine Senate election results

Used on two election articles. Should be substituted on the senate election articles and on the general election articles for these years should be transcluded using the #section-h function. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 18:42, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose increased use of section transclusion of articles in article space, too complicated for users, likely to break and too costly. —Kusma (talk) 08:46, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:1912 Philippine Assembly election results

All should be substituted on the respective election articles. And usage outside the main election articles should be transcluded elsewhere using the #section-h function. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 18:30, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:1980 Philippine gubernatorial election results per party

All single-use and should be substituted where used. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 17:44, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Region economic history

Unused template apparently trying to make sidebars for Economic history of country pages. It has several issues, such as being an infobox wrapper and being completely unfinished. --Trialpears (talk) 17:41, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Sri Lanka Central Provincial Council election result, 2009

The first two 2009 and the Sri Lanka North Western Provincial Council election result, 2009 templates should be substituted on the two election articles it is used on. The rest are single-use and should be substituted where used. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 17:28, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:South Korean legislative election, 2004

All unused as the legislative and presidential election articles use different tables for the results. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 16:55, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2018 Busan metropolitan election

All should be substituted where used as there exists no proper mainspace for these templates to be used. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 16:55, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

2008 Nepalese Constituent Assembly election templates

Not used anywhere and redundant for the purpose of being classified as election templates. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 16:20, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

1999 Nepalese legislative election templates

Not used anywhere and redundant for the purpose of being classified as election templates. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 16:20, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nepal 1994 and 1999 election templates

Not used anywhere and redundant for the purpose of being classified as election templates. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 16:20, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

These templates are all signifiers on if an article was or is "featured" on a portal. Talk pages are designated for discussing improvements to articles, things like this are complete cruft; what use does a reader or editor have in knowing that Frog is a selected article on the Amphibians Portal? Aza24 (talk) 16:10, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Talk pages are also our pages where we store all meta cruft (dozens of WikiProject templates etc.) While the majority of these are probably historical, they could be useful warnings that an article appears elsewhere via section transclusion, which is useful for editors to know so they know what they'll break if they change anything about the sectioning of the lede. —Kusma (talk) 08:51, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Johor state election, 2013

All single-use Malaysian State elections and should be substituted where used. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:57, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Malayan general election, 1955

The 1955 template is unused as the article uses a different table. The rest are single-use and should be substituted where used. The 2008 template is used on two other articles and should be transcluded elsewhere the #section-h function. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:57, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Uw-hatespeech

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 merge to Template:Uw-derogatory. (non-admin closure) ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 19:14, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Uw-hatespeech with Template:Uw-derogatory.
This user warning template, created last month, seems to be redundant to the established uw-derogatory user warning template. Bsherr (talk) 01:59, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Merge per nom. Hate speech is derogatory by definition. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 05:01, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do not merge - Although similar, the two templates are geared to somewhat different audiences. While Uw-derogatory is more general in nature, Uw-hatespeech is focused on Nazism and fascism. I believe it is important to have a template which specifically deals with that sort of editing, which unfortunately is a serious problem on en.wiki, and therefore would prefer that the templates not be merged. Beyond My Ken (talk) 19:00, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge. Though correct, WP:NONAZIS is an essay, not a policy, and it's not even on the project space. WP:HARASS, however, is a policy. Also the language is a bit sub-optimal. What does edits that reflect the views of neo-Nazis mean? If I write that Henry de Lesquen considers Africans to be inferior to Europeans am I reflecting the views of a Neo-Nazi? JBchrch talk 22:47, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 14:11, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Suggest keeping both, and using uw-hatespeech as the "polite" warning (can't think of a better word, sorry) and uw-derogatory as the "stronger" warning? Patient Zerotalk 02:12, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    We usually employ four-level user warning templates when the conduct at issue can arise from good-faith and bad-faith motivations. There's a case to be made for that here, and I would be supportive of that outcome. But I don't think uw-hatespeech as currently written is the softer version of uw-derogatory, and I don't think that was the intent of its creators for it to be so, so I think we will need to resolve that issue first. --Bsherr (talk) 15:45, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 15:55, 25 July 2021 (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:Largest cities of the United States

Previously deleted. It's not currently used on any article. Catchpoke (talk) 13:36, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not seeing this as valid reasoning:
Recently you replaced a list of 20 entries with a template with 10 entries.
On Geography of Tunisia you replaced the template with {{Largest cities of Tunisia}} and added {{Largest cities of Tunisia}} to Tunisia. This was similarly done with Template:Largest cities of Syria.
The same problem occurs with oman where you added {{main list|List of cities in Oman}}. How is this preferable to integrating the link into the text?
For the Estonia, Malawi, Mali, Malta, and Mauritania articles you made similar edits. Am I the only person to see that having a section devoted to these templates from a design standpoint is unattractive?
On india you added {{Largest cities of India}} but it was removed; note it hasn't had this template for years.
On your talk page you say "U.S. is a notable exception, where it was included once but later was dropped off, therefore I assumed it was voted out for some reason." Catchpoke (talk) 16:44, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Not actually addressing the issue at hand by using Other stuff exists argument. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:50, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 15:54, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. My opinion remains that these navigation templates, with an arbitrary number of constituents as the inclusion criterion, are inferior to the list article as a means of navigation, and fail WP:NAVBOX because the constituent articles, like other superlative sets, necessarily do not refer to each other. --Bsherr (talk) 04:19, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Komae city assembly election, 2007

All single-use templates that should be substituted where used. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:11, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Tokyo prefectural election, 2001

2001 to 2013 should be substituted where used and 2017 is unused as the article uses a different table for the results. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:11, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Japanese House of Councillors election, 1986

All unused as the general election articles use different tables for the results. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:11, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:1979 Japanese general election

All unused as the general election articles use different tables for the results. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:11, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2014 Super Rugby Standings

Single-use template. Izno (talk) 14:46, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

EuroCity templates

{{s-line}} templates for EuroCity services in Switzerland. Replaced by various Module:Adjacent stations/EuroCity. All transclusions replaced. There are 2 dependent s-line data modules that should also be deleted. Mackensen (talk) 13:58, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lower Saxony Regionalbahn templates

{{s-line}} templates for Regionalbahn services operated by various companies in the German state of Lower Saxony. Replaced by various {{Adjacent stations}} modules. All transclusions replaced. There are 34 dependent s-line data modules that should also be deleted. Mackensen (talk) 13:58, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2021_July_25&oldid=1036663600"