Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:24, 15 August 2014

August 13

Template:YSG Entertainment

Template:YSG Entertainment (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Navigation template for YSG Entertainment, an article deleted at AFD. It has only five links, four of which are redlinks and three are deleted articles. There is only one remaining blue link. Created by User:Coal Press Nation now indef blocked for as promotion only account. SpinningSpark 23:31, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

• delete, no parent article. Frietjes (talk) 14:57, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
• Delete: No parent (and it failed at AfD, so unlikely that another one'll be created) and mostly redlinks. Supernerd11 _{Firemind ^_^ Pokedex} 04:06, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Template:Lang-en-GB

Template:Lang-en-GB (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

It was used in Apheresis (linguistics) and Caramelization. I replaced them with plain link, "British English", so this template is no longer used in mainspaces, rendering it near-useless. George Ho (talk) 17:24, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

• Keep and reverse the WP:FAITACCOMPLI actions aimed at rendering it useless. Under-utilized templates are not useless, simply under-utilized.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ≼  19:33, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
• Keep and restore per SMcC -- 65.94.169.222 (talk) 08:02, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
• Keep and restore per SMcCandlish and IP comments.Skookum1 (talk) 08:57, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
• Delete Unclear why it is particularly relevant whether the template is unused or massively under-utilized - six of one, half a dozen of the other. The issue should be whether it makes sense to have the template. Maybe I am missing something (and please tell me if I am), but it is not evident to me that this template accomplishes anything that a simple wikilink doesn't more simply accomplish. No wonder Misplaced Pages is having trouble keeping and attracting editors -- everything is becoming so damn overly-technical, including the use of templates instead of simple wikilinks. Maybe the ship on this has already sailed, so to speak, if the project is already littered with crappy templates like this one, but in my own opinion we should strive to keep things simple where we can. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 13:21, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

I would just add that this template was created almost 6 years ago (as was the US version - Canadian and Australian versions were created 2 years ago). Given how under-utilized the templates all are after that many years, I think the project has made clear that the task in question is better handled through a simple wikilink. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 13:27, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Yes, you are missing something. Having the ability (note: not requirement) to metadata-tag something as a specific variety of English, in cases where this may be especially relevant (e.g. articles on differences between English dialects) is useful, and I at least was actually using it for this purpose. It appears that the nominator and someone(s) else in two cases have been removing the templates where ever they were being used. They are not supposed to be used frequently, by design. The idea that these four templates, which are for very specific uses in very narrow circumstances, and won't be used or even noticed by anyone but gnomes, is somehow related to people quitting wikipedia is patently absurd psychodrama. You're abusing XfD processes to take an anti-template, anti-metadata WP:ADVOCACY/WP:SOAPBOX/WP:GREATWRONGS stand.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ≼  10:31, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

I would ask that you review WP:CIVIL and WP:AGF and please knock it off with your condescending/insulting replies like this one and the ones below.

When you are done accusing me of psychodramas or abuse, and are ready to discuss like a grown-up, please let me know. Thanks. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 13:17, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

• Delete I understand the need to categorize for foreign languages, but is it really necessary for broad language variations (not even distinct dialects!) to carry this template? You're telling me that aside from the two articles George Ho linked, there were zero articles using this template? Zero, zip, zilch, after six years? I agree wholly with Skeezix about this being one of Misplaced Pages's biggest current issues: we need to aim our efforts in simplifying the process and trimming useless fat like this. This one is a no-brainer. - SweetNightmares 14:52, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
  • The first half of your rant, I addressed in reply to Skeezix1000 immediately above. As to the other half, what on earth are you on about? There is nothing "technocratic" (see definition here) about these templates, or about using language metadata in general (entirely voluntarily - there is no policy requiring their use, and their own documentation discourages their use except where especially pertinent. There are zero present uses of the template because the nominator and others have been removing it to make it seem unused. These templates have nothing at all to do with any "process" that needs to be "simplified"; see response to Skeezix1000 again; I don't like to repeat myself. The only "no-brainer" here is that your !vote here raises no cognizant policy issues and can safely be ignored by the closer.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ≼  10:31, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

SMcCandlish, I urge you to remain WP:civil when debating. Resorting to passive-aggressiveness, condescension, and personal attacks does nothing to contribute to the debate at hand or WP:RETENTION and only serves to discourage users from becoming active editors. Please consult the following links for more information Also, please do not strike out and insert text from other users' comments as you did when you moved the section here. Finally, I know what the word "technocratic" means, do you? The answer can be found on this page under the "What is a technocrat" section. - SweetNightmares 16:24, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

• Delete per Skeezix. It wasn't a fait accompli that rendered it useless. It was its lack of purpose that rendered it useless. The complaint above about a supposed anti-metadata position being problematic begs the question in its assumption that the existence of this metadata is actually beneficial. And with respect, SMcCandlish, you should not be browbeating others for apparently failing to provide policy based reasons to delete when your reasons to keep amount to nothing more than WP:ILIKEIT and WP:ITSUSEFUL. Resolute 14:44, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Template:Lang-en-CA

Template:Lang-en-CA (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Absolutely useless, as "]" is more memorable and familiar to type than this template. George Ho (talk) 17:16, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

• Keep and reverse any WP:FAITACCOMPLI actions aimed at rendering it useless. This was definitely used before. Under-utilized templates are not useless, simply under-utilized.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ≼  19:33, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
• Keep and restore per SMcC -- 65.94.169.222 (talk) 08:01, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

I forgot to tell you; this template has been unused before I nominated this template. --George Ho (talk) 08:22, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

So what? If you're so concerned about that, then get to work applying it. Deletion is not a solution.Skookum1 (talk) 08:58, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

• Keep and restore per SMcC.Skookum1 (talk) 08:58, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
• Delete for the same reasons set out in the identical deletion discussion at the Lang-en-GB template - trying to consolidate the discussion. Skeezix1000 (talk) 13:22, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
• Delete per above argument about British English. This template is two years old and nothing linked to it. Let's stop turning this website into a technocracy. - SweetNightmares 14:58, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
  • How about you stop trying to turn XfDs into WP:SOAPBOX platforms for whatever on earth you're talking about with regard to "a technocracy"?  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ≼  10:18, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
• Delete per my comment in the British English template discussion above. Resolute 14:45, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Template:Lang-en-emodeng

Template:Lang-en-emodeng (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This template was used in only Glossary of nautical terms, Builder's Old Measurement, and English wine cask units. I replaced it with HTML formatting, like "Early Modern English". Now it's nearly useless. If that link is not always memorable, at least a reader can click or type "History of the English language" to search for past English languages, like Early Modern one. The template's redirect is {{lang-en-em}}, and it must be also deleted. George Ho (talk) 17:50, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

• Keep and reverse the WP:FAITACCOMPLI actions aimed at rendering it useless. Under-utilized templates are not useless, simply under-utilized.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ≼  19:33, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
• Keep and reverse per SMcC.Skookum1 (talk) 09:00, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
• 'Delete for the reasons set out at the discussion involving the Lang-en-GB template. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 15:08, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
• Delete per discussion at lang-en-GB. WP:Overcategorization and too technocratic. - SweetNightmares 16:13, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Having the ability (not requirement) to use language metadata is not "technocracy"; I don't think that word means what you think it means. Also, you've not cited anything relevant in WP:OVERCAT that could apply here (hint: nothing does). I.e., your !vote here raises no policy-based arguments at all.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ≼  10:20, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
• Delete per comments at the British English discussion above. Resolute 14:46, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Template:Lang-en-AU

Template:Lang-en-AU (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This template is not at all used by pages. It is useless, as "]" is easier to memorize and to type than just... {{lang-en-AU}}. George Ho (talk) 17:13, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

• Keep and reverse any WP:FAITACCOMPLI actions aimed at rendering it useless. This was definitely used before. Under-utilized templates are not useless, simply under-utilized.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ≼  19:33, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
• Keep and restore per SMcC -- 65.94.169.222 (talk) 08:02, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
• Keep and restore per SMcC.Skookum1 (talk) 08:59, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
• Delete for the same reasons set out in the identical deletion discussion at the Lang-en-GB template - trying to consolidate the discussion. Skeezix1000 (talk) 13:22, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
• Delete per above argument about British English. The fact that this template is "under-utilized" is evidence that this type of overcategorization is getting to be too technocratic to be useful. - SweetNightmares 15:01, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Already addressed above with regard to both this absurd abuse of the term "technocracy" to push an anti-template, anti-metadata soapboxing position, and the fact that these templates seem to be unused because people have been deleting them to make them seem unused. They would never be very frequently used, and you (and Skeezix1000) cannot, with any hope of being taken seriously, simultaneously maintain that they should be deleted because they are not being used enough for whatever arbitrary amount of use you'd like to see, yet also be deleted because you don't think they should be used, because they're part of some kind of "technocrat" conspiracy. Even a small child could see through a Catch-22 that silly.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ≼  10:34, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
• Delete per comments at the British English discussion above. Resolute 14:46, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Template:Lang-en-US

Template:Lang-en-US (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This template was used in moustache and bachelor griller. I replaced them with the link (American English). Therefore, this template may be useless because it's no longer used in mainspace pages. George Ho (talk) 07:21, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

• Keep and reverse the WP:FAITACCOMPLI actions aimed at rendering it useless. Under-utilized templates are not useless, simply under-utilized.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ≼  19:33, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
• Keep and restore per SMcC -- 65.94.169.222 (talk) 08:02, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
• Keep and restore per SMcC.Skookum1 (talk) 08:59, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
• Delete for the same reasons set out in the identical deletion discussion at the Lang-en-GB template - trying to consolidate the discussion. Skeezix1000 (talk) 13:22, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
• Delete per above arguments about UK English. Overcategorized, too technocratic. - SweetNightmares 15:02, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Skeezix1000's and Sweetnightmares's essentially identical, non-policy-based soapboxing arguments have been addressed above already.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ≼  10:35, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
• Delete per comments at the British English discussion above. Resolute 14:46, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Template:Govinda (actor) sidebar

Template:Govinda (actor) sidebar (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

A side bar template with three incoming links and only three links is a bit of an overkill. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 06:34, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

• Expand into navbox: He seems to be quite the notable Indian actor, so expanding this template into something like Template:Jeff Foxworthy would probably be the best course of action. Supernerd11 _{Firemind ^_^ Pokedex} 07:45, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
• delete per prior consensus. Frietjes (talk) 16:29, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
• Delete: Better as in-context links in the article, or at worst in "See also". There's not enough for a page-bottom navbox. Also, as noted, this has already been deleted once, perhaps in slightly different form.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ≼  10:37, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Template:British Columbia New Democratic Party/meta/color

Template:British Columbia New Democratic Party/meta/color (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Previously deleted unused template. 117Avenue (talk) 03:58, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

• speedy delete Frietjes (talk) 16:29, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
• Delete per nom.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ≼  10:38, 15 August 2014 (UTC)