Wikiwand AI

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2025 August 25

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

< August 24
August 26 >

August 25

Template:2023 Ohio Valley Conference football standings and similar

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 14:25, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

No transclusions, documentation, or incoming links. This is article content that is highly unlikely to change. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:23, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

delete, seems like there was some merger of the conferences as all the articles are using Template:2023 Big South–OVC football standings instead? Frietjes (talk) 21:43, 25 August 2025 (UTC)
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Culture sidebars part 3

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 and redirect as listed. Most participants felt this would be a better use of space. Beland (talk) 17:34, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

Nominator's rationale: WP:LEADSIDEBAR and WP:TFD#REASONS #2. Follow-up to the LAT precedents (Liechtenstein, Andorra, Transnistria) a.k.a. Culture sidebars part 1, and Culture sidebars part 2, which all resulted in merge. NLeeuw (talk) 15:51, 25 August 2025 (UTC)
PS: I just finished tagging. Maybe I should try Mass TFD next time, although I've got a tendency to make mass errors when I do, so... For this one, I decided to tag them all manually. NLeeuw (talk) 18:35, 25 August 2025 (UTC)
Weak support for merge: Thanks for the ping. I'm not really familiar with sidebars because I don't tend to use them, but I will say that I supported the ones for the microstates because the articles mostly overlapped. By looking through some of these for larger countries, it seems to be a similar case, but I can also see arguments against merging. TheBritinator (talk) 19:28, 25 August 2025 (UTC)
  • strongly opposed these are two different styles of navigation templates for two different sets of articles covering different topics. I'm assuming this an attempt to delete all sidebars from culture articles? If we leave redirects will now have footer templates in the lead? When thinking of proposals like this we should do what is best for our readers. Will there be an attempt to do this for the remaining 850 templates? The precedents above are not very relevant because the articles did not have culture of standalone articles.Moxy🍁 16:54, 25 August 2025 (UTC)
    Hi @Moxy, thanks for your feedback and questions. I'll try to address each of them in turn. :)
    these are two different styles of navigation templates for two different sets of articles covering different topics. Not really. The precedents all showed an extremely strong WP:OVERLAP, making the culture sidebars WP:REDUNDANTFORKs.
    Take links to Template:Culture of Albania as an example, and compare it to links to Template:Albania topics:
    1. Culture of Albania (transclusion) also in Template:Albania topics
    2. Cinema of Albania (transclusion) also in Template:Albania topics
    3. Kanun (Albania) (transclusion) also in Template:Albania topics
    4. Albanian cuisine (transclusion) also in Template:Albania topics
    5. Music of Albania (transclusion) also in Template:Albania topics
    6. Public holidays in Albania (transclusion) also in Template:Albania topics
    7. Albanian literature (transclusion) also in Template:Albania topics
    8. Television in Albania (transclusion) also in Template:Albania topics
    9. Albanian art (transclusion) also in Template:Albania topics
    10. Languages of Albania (transclusion) also in Template:Albania topics
    11. List of radio stations in Albania (transclusion) also in Template:Albania topics
    12. Mass media in Albania (transclusion) also in Template:Albania topics
    13. Traditional Albanian clothing (transclusion) also in Template:Albania topics
    14. Besa (Albanian culture) (transclusion) also in Template:Albania topics
    15. Vajtim and Gjëmë (transclusion) NOT in Template:Albania topics (but it's not in Template:Culture of Albania itself either!)
    16. Traditional clothing of Kosovo (transclusion) NOT in Template:Albania topics (but it's not in Template:Culture of Albania itself either! And it shouldn't, because Kosovo is a different country anyway...)
    17. Irreligion in Albania (transclusion) NOT in Template:Albania topics (but Religion in Albania is, which does not transclude Template:Culture of Albania!)
    18. Architecture of Albania (transclusion) also in Template:Albania topics
    19. Secularism in Albania (transclusion) also in Template:Albania topics
    20. Traditions of Albania (transclusion) also in Template:Albania topics
    21. Vatër (transclusion) NOT in Template:Albania topics (but it's not in Template:Culture of Albania itself either!)
    So even in the 4 cases where the two templates don't overlap, Template:Culture of Albania does it worse. (And that's just scratching the surface why Template:Albania topics is better designed and used.) WP:TFD#REASONS reason #2 says that this means we should delete Template:Culture of Albania, because it is redundant. The same applies to all other 40 templates I've nominated to be merged here.
    The precedents above are not very relevant because the articles did not have culture of standalone articles. Well, having a Culture of Fooland standalone article or not, is irrelevant to this TfM. What matters is how the sidebars are designed and used. The fact is these sidebars do not comply to all the rules templates need to comply with. You can read here Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2025 August 10#Culture sidebars part 2 why and how the precedents all resulted in merge each as proposed. These other countries are no different. The objections you raise have been dealt with before, so there is no need to worry. :)
    When thinking of proposals like this we should do what is best for our readers. Indeed we should. Fortunately, we already did. You can read about it in the precedents. There's no need to reinvent the wheel.
    I'm assuming this an attempt to delete all sidebars from culture articles? (...) Will there be an attempt to do this for the remaining 850 templates? Yes, but one step at a time, to prevent a WP:TRAINWRECK. I've been careful to start small and build up understanding and consensus with the aforementioned precedents.
    Good day, and greetings from the Netherlands. NLeeuw (talk) 17:56, 25 August 2025 (UTC)
    This sounds reasonable...... main problem I have is jamming all these articles into the main topic navigation.... this is just going to jumble things all to hell..... Simply going to be a nightmare for navigation when we add hundred more links to the country topic navigation. Basically we're going to be doing the opposite of what we recommend at WP:NAVBOX "Navigation templates are particularly useful for a small, well-defined group of articles; templates with a large number of links are not forbidden, but can appear overly busy and be hard to read and use." We should be doing what is best for accessibility over aesthetics.Moxy🍁 22:45, 25 August 2025 (UTC)
    Okay, I understand that concern. :) But as you can see, we won't add hundred[s] more links to the country topic navigation. In the given example of Template:Culture of Albania, all 17 links are already in Template:Albania topics, and the remaining 4 probably shouldn't, so nothing will actually be "jammed" into it that isn't already there. We won't add hundreds more links, but zero. (But for some of the other 40 nominees, we might transfer a link or two, which is why I nominated them for merging and not just deletion).
    Deleting / redirecting Template:Culture of Albania will not diminish navigation either. Every single one of these 17 articles can still be navigated from and to using the Template:Albania topics. WP:TFD#REASONS reason #2 is very clear on this: The template is redundant to a better-designed template.
    And that's not the only reason; there are other rules which the culture sidebars are violating, such as WP:NAV-WITHIN, WP:LINKBACK, WP:BRINT and more. Incidentally, these rules all demonstrate the fact that the 4 additional links in the Culture sidebar of Albania either shouldn't be there, or haven't been properly designed and/or used.
    Plus, WP:LEADSIDEBAR is very clear that placing sidebars in the lead section of articles (which is overwhelmingly how these sidebars are designed and used) has been generally discouraged since November 2020 (for reasons you can read in the RfC). So unless there is a reasonable excuse to have these sidebars at all, they should be removed. That decision was already agreed to by the community, first for Liechtenstein, Andorra, and Transnistria, then for larger countries and regions in Europe, and now it's the rest of Europe's turn. Good day from the Netherlands. :) NLeeuw (talk) 04:59, 26 August 2025 (UTC)
    Perhaps I was not clear ...country navboxes have parent articles ijn them - we do not want to add ever country sidebar to them - looks like to goal is to dump all the sidebars into them - so yes 100s of links that the country projects dont want in the main nav boxs
    More information To display all subcategories click on the "►": ...
    To display all subcategories click on the "►":
    Canada sidebar templates (1 C, 50 P)
    Close
    Moxy🍁 12:52, 26 August 2025 (UTC)
  • Courtesy ping to participants of LAT precedents (part 1) and Culture sidebars part 2 discussions for follow-up: @TheBritinator, Super Dromaeosaurus, Chipmunkdavis, Gonnym, Frietjes, Matrix, and DemocracyDeprivationDisorder: for your information. NLeeuw (talk) 18:33, 25 August 2025 (UTC)
  • delete or redirect the sidebars. the footer country topics navboxes are better for navigation because they do not crowd other floating content like images and infoboxes. and, because most all the articles that have the sidebar also have the navbox, the culture sidebar is generally redundant navigation. any links missing from the "country topics" navboxes can be easily added. Frietjes (talk) 21:11, 25 August 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete or redirect them. They are redundant and take up space on the screen which could be useful for text. —Matrix ping mewhen u reply (t? - c) 09:35, 26 August 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete or redirect them per Matrix. Renata•3 03:52, 30 August 2025 (UTC)
  • Merge per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 02:24, 1 September 2025 (UTC)
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Campaignbox Mongol invasions and conquests

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 relisted on 2025 September 3. Izno (talk) 23:48, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:ARKive

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 relisted on 2025 September 2. (non-admin closure) element 21:50, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:OSM Location map/ArcText

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 14:39, 1 September 2025 (UTC)

Unused after this edit converted the template to use a module backend. Gonnym (talk) 08:39, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

{{OSM Location map/ModuleSandbox}} is a useful way to call the actual module sandbox, and is used by the useful test collection of templates in the doc. It is only relevent if/when features are being considered, but it, or something like it, would need recreating one day if it was deleted.
The two 'temp' items were stopgap templates with no further interest.
All of the others embody the development process and last working state of the pre-lua template. Since the lua module does not carry forward any of that development or rational history, it would be lost if these are deleted. I have no idea if that matters or not. I agree that them staying within the current {{OSM Location map}} space is unhelpful for both clarity and to anyone looking to use the lua version on other wikis. If there is a place where such things get archived, that would seem a good solution, but if not I am content they are deleted. RobinLeicester (talk) 10:26, 25 August 2025 (UTC)
Wikipedia isn't really setup as an archive site, nor does it need to. Template:OSM Location map/sandbox is used to call the module sandbox (as it should) making Template:OSM Location map/ModuleSandbox redundant. Gonnym (talk) 12:05, 25 August 2025 (UTC)
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Module:Higher education task force test2

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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; deleted by Pppery (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 05:06, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

Unused stale tests. This also isn't how tests should be made. If you are testing something, use Module:Higher education task force/testcases. If you are working on a sandbox, use Module:Higher education task force/sandbox. There is hardly a valid reason for the same person to work on 3 different sandboxes at the same time. Gonnym (talk) 07:44, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

Each version was an iterative version which was being presented to people at the same time, but I wasn't aware of /testcases as being an option, and agree that would be better. Is there any reference page I can look at for future issues like this? No one pointed me in the right direction. Thanks. Is it ok if I move these pages to the appropriate place myself? Tduk (talk) 02:56, 26 August 2025 (UTC)
Reasonable. It should find a place before we have a close on this nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 02:24, 1 September 2025 (UTC)
  • I don't think we are using these anymore. The project banner is now working in the way that the project wants. Should be okay to delete I think? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:18, 1 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete per nomination. It's been two weeks since nomination. If it hasn't been moved perhaps it can be done should anyone request a copy after deletion so they can do it later. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:55, 7 September 2025 (UTC)
  • I have redirected Template:WikiProject Higher education/test to Template:WikiProject Higher education/sandbox. Apologies if this was out of order - if so, feel free to revert — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:56, 18 September 2025 (UTC)
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Graph:PieChart

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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. Izno (talk) 23:47, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

Currently this is broken due to the graph extension being permanently broken. Given this state, it would be best to delete this template, especially given the fact it only used in 20 places, none of which are articles, and many of which relate to the template itself. I suggest deleting it to reduce confusion and prevent accidental use. There is consensus, as Template:PageViews graph was deleted on similar grounds. GalStar (talk) (contribs) 05:51, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

Delete: I don't think it's worth the effort porting the graphs over. —Matrix ping mewhen u reply (t? - c) 09:40, 26 August 2025 (UTC)
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Related Articles

Timelines

Top Qs

Fact Checks