The result of the discussion was delete. JPG-GR ( talk) 02:22, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
This banner is worse than useless. It has been applied indiscriminately to a random selection of FAs and former FAs in foreign languages without consideration of whether content from these FAs would be useful in expanding English-language Wikipedia articles. Most foreign-language Wikipedias have lower standards for FAs, so most of these banners are incorrectly applied. Note that WP:FAOL and WP:ECHO are currently dead.
Recently, User:Kobrabones has applied these indiscriminately to hundreds more articles corresponding with featured Polish articles, even where the English-language Wikipedia article was featured first and the Polish article was translated from English. I don’t mean to single out Kobrabones, though—this template has never been used in a rational, helpful manner. The current use of the template is worse than a random selection of foreign-language FAs, because the template was often applied long ago, so many of the uses don’t even correspond to foreign-language FAs currently (because those have been delisted), and more recent foreign-language FAs (which tend to be higher-quality) are not covered. If we merely want to know which foreign-language articles are featured, that is what {{ link fa}} is for. It is consistent and bot-applied. I have spent probably dozens of hours—both recently and in years past—trying to assess these translation requests and see which are useful (and I have converted the worthy ones to the newer templates like {{ Expand Spanish}}), but I have come to the conclusion that this is a huge waste of time. It would be more effective to just start at the list of featured articles for each wiki, and see which is better from there, than dealing with this random and unhelpful assortment currently tagged.
One of my biggest projects over the course of my time in Wikipedia is trying to consolidate and rationalize Wikipedia’s translation system (see Wikipedia:Translation/Overhaul), and I think the time has come to get rid of this unhelpful template system in favor of targeted requests that are actually helpful. Getting rid of the banners could also be the first step in rolling the old WP:ECHO and WP:FAOL into a new, more effective translation wikiproject, which I hope to work on in the coming weeks and months. Calliopejen1 ( talk) 17:15, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. JPG-GR ( talk) 02:23, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
Unnecessary navigation template since Hanks has only directed two films. MOS:FILM#Navigation says, "The number of blue links to related articles should be substantial enough to warrant a navigation template. For example, if a director has only made two films, each film article instead can have a 'See also' section linking to the other film article," which has been done. If Hanks does direct more films (and it was fifteen years between his two films), we can recreate the template. Erik ( talk | contribs) 14:02, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. JPG-GR ( talk) 02:25, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
Delete. Unused and unnecessary. -- Alan Liefting ( talk) - 01:40, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. JPG-GR ( talk) 02:22, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
This banner is worse than useless. It has been applied indiscriminately to a random selection of FAs and former FAs in foreign languages without consideration of whether content from these FAs would be useful in expanding English-language Wikipedia articles. Most foreign-language Wikipedias have lower standards for FAs, so most of these banners are incorrectly applied. Note that WP:FAOL and WP:ECHO are currently dead.
Recently, User:Kobrabones has applied these indiscriminately to hundreds more articles corresponding with featured Polish articles, even where the English-language Wikipedia article was featured first and the Polish article was translated from English. I don’t mean to single out Kobrabones, though—this template has never been used in a rational, helpful manner. The current use of the template is worse than a random selection of foreign-language FAs, because the template was often applied long ago, so many of the uses don’t even correspond to foreign-language FAs currently (because those have been delisted), and more recent foreign-language FAs (which tend to be higher-quality) are not covered. If we merely want to know which foreign-language articles are featured, that is what {{ link fa}} is for. It is consistent and bot-applied. I have spent probably dozens of hours—both recently and in years past—trying to assess these translation requests and see which are useful (and I have converted the worthy ones to the newer templates like {{ Expand Spanish}}), but I have come to the conclusion that this is a huge waste of time. It would be more effective to just start at the list of featured articles for each wiki, and see which is better from there, than dealing with this random and unhelpful assortment currently tagged.
One of my biggest projects over the course of my time in Wikipedia is trying to consolidate and rationalize Wikipedia’s translation system (see Wikipedia:Translation/Overhaul), and I think the time has come to get rid of this unhelpful template system in favor of targeted requests that are actually helpful. Getting rid of the banners could also be the first step in rolling the old WP:ECHO and WP:FAOL into a new, more effective translation wikiproject, which I hope to work on in the coming weeks and months. Calliopejen1 ( talk) 17:15, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. JPG-GR ( talk) 02:23, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
Unnecessary navigation template since Hanks has only directed two films. MOS:FILM#Navigation says, "The number of blue links to related articles should be substantial enough to warrant a navigation template. For example, if a director has only made two films, each film article instead can have a 'See also' section linking to the other film article," which has been done. If Hanks does direct more films (and it was fifteen years between his two films), we can recreate the template. Erik ( talk | contribs) 14:02, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. JPG-GR ( talk) 02:25, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
Delete. Unused and unnecessary. -- Alan Liefting ( talk) - 01:40, 5 July 2011 (UTC)