The result of the discussion was no consensus. It appears there are issues with how the VE handles templates which overload parameters, but there is also no consensus on how to fix it. There is also no consensus to deploy this solution. I am closing this as no consensus under the assumption that these will be used to continue discussion about the best solution. Feel free to renominate these if the discussion stalls, or the result of discussion is to not use this solution. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 13:50, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
Redundant fork of {{
Coord}}, which already has the "signed decimal numbers" various functionality for which this was these were apparently created; as evidenced in this
sample conversion.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits 22:52, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
I've added the other templates, to this nomination. We have a template which works well, and has done for several years. We shouldn't be forking it because of a bogus accusation that it is "broken by design". Note the bugzilla response by Richard Morris:
Its a template used on 863,827 pages, so I guess people have been able to use it just fine. Its not broken by design its just a template which makes heavy use of Function overloading which differs by the arity of its arguments, a well used software design practice. The problem is that the templatedata systems does not allow for this paradigm.
Where is the on=wiki discussion of the supposed need to do this? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:26, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 04:53, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
generally redundant to {{ infobox}}, with 'award1=' replaced with 'data1='. transclusions where it is used to list awards and honours can be typically replaced with a parameter in infobox person. other cases can be replaced with {{ multiple image}} or with {{ image array}} or with {{ photomontage}}, or just with a simple {{ infobox}}. other outliers can be handled with using less generic templates. also commonly confused with {{ infobox award}} or {{ infobox film awards}}. Frietjes ( talk) 19:26, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. -- BDD ( talk) 22:27, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
single use template, now merged with the article. Frietjes ( talk) 18:54, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 04:53, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
WP:NENAN Just three relevant links to schools and no backlink to the school district The Banner talk 16:37, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 05:36, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
better covered by a category, which is the standard method for grouping lists of musicians with a particular national origin. Frietjes ( talk) 16:29, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete; deleted as G7 by NawlinWiki ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 17:08, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
WP:NENAN Only 3 more or less relevant links (I have doubts about the links to the singles) The Banner talk 16:18, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 05:14, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
This is not a real infobox, in the sense that all its parameters are already filled, and it is meant to be included in only one article ( European Union). The separation was likely motivated by concerns about its size (14kb), and the poor readability of its wikicode. But creating a prefilled infobox as a separate template merely conceals this issue, rather than solving it. A potential solution would be to follow the example of other articles; India, for example, only lists two names for the country in the infobox, leaving the rest for a separate article. Likewise, the United Nations article avoids listing all member states in the infobox itself, as the EU infobox currently does. eh bien mon prince ( talk) 14:21, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 04:49, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
Previous discussion: WikiProject Video games talk page
I am nominating these recently created and (as far as I'm aware, undiscussed) templates for specific countries for deletion. The templates list hardware and software developers, game franchises and games, industry people, and very few country-specific topics arranged by the country they are in. Firstly, this is a very broad intersection, with hundreds of pages in some cases. This duplicates our lists and categories. Secondly, the inclusion criteria appears to be subjective with no clear reason why some games/franchises/companies/people are not listed. Should we list all pages in an unbiased manner, it would quickly become unwieldy. Not to mention why these countries are, rather than every country with notable examples. I would also argue that the common topic, i.e. the country, is not sufficiently characteristic in today's video gaming industry. While it is common to separate games and developers by geographic areas (N/S America, Europe, Asia, Oceania, Africa), individual countries within these areas is not. When looked strictly at organizations, conferences, rating systems, and other industry articles that, there are only a handful of pages that can all fit nicely is a larger Video gaming industry in region" templates. But I do not see the usefulness of listing every (subjectively notable) game and developer in this particular way. — HELLKNOWZ ▎ TALK 09:59, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
I don't see why the templates should be deleted, there are templates about other industries relating to a specific country like, Template:Automotive industry in the People's Republic of China and Template:Electronics industry in Japan. Seqqis ( talk) 16:39, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. -- BDD ( talk) 22:25, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
Do not need for this one time used template that has information already in the Presto card and better explained too. Martin Morin ( talk) 03:39, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was no consensus. It appears there are issues with how the VE handles templates which overload parameters, but there is also no consensus on how to fix it. There is also no consensus to deploy this solution. I am closing this as no consensus under the assumption that these will be used to continue discussion about the best solution. Feel free to renominate these if the discussion stalls, or the result of discussion is to not use this solution. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 13:50, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
Redundant fork of {{
Coord}}, which already has the "signed decimal numbers" various functionality for which this was these were apparently created; as evidenced in this
sample conversion.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits 22:52, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
I've added the other templates, to this nomination. We have a template which works well, and has done for several years. We shouldn't be forking it because of a bogus accusation that it is "broken by design". Note the bugzilla response by Richard Morris:
Its a template used on 863,827 pages, so I guess people have been able to use it just fine. Its not broken by design its just a template which makes heavy use of Function overloading which differs by the arity of its arguments, a well used software design practice. The problem is that the templatedata systems does not allow for this paradigm.
Where is the on=wiki discussion of the supposed need to do this? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:26, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 04:53, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
generally redundant to {{ infobox}}, with 'award1=' replaced with 'data1='. transclusions where it is used to list awards and honours can be typically replaced with a parameter in infobox person. other cases can be replaced with {{ multiple image}} or with {{ image array}} or with {{ photomontage}}, or just with a simple {{ infobox}}. other outliers can be handled with using less generic templates. also commonly confused with {{ infobox award}} or {{ infobox film awards}}. Frietjes ( talk) 19:26, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. -- BDD ( talk) 22:27, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
single use template, now merged with the article. Frietjes ( talk) 18:54, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 04:53, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
WP:NENAN Just three relevant links to schools and no backlink to the school district The Banner talk 16:37, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 05:36, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
better covered by a category, which is the standard method for grouping lists of musicians with a particular national origin. Frietjes ( talk) 16:29, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete; deleted as G7 by NawlinWiki ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 17:08, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
WP:NENAN Only 3 more or less relevant links (I have doubts about the links to the singles) The Banner talk 16:18, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 05:14, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
This is not a real infobox, in the sense that all its parameters are already filled, and it is meant to be included in only one article ( European Union). The separation was likely motivated by concerns about its size (14kb), and the poor readability of its wikicode. But creating a prefilled infobox as a separate template merely conceals this issue, rather than solving it. A potential solution would be to follow the example of other articles; India, for example, only lists two names for the country in the infobox, leaving the rest for a separate article. Likewise, the United Nations article avoids listing all member states in the infobox itself, as the EU infobox currently does. eh bien mon prince ( talk) 14:21, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 04:49, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
Previous discussion: WikiProject Video games talk page
I am nominating these recently created and (as far as I'm aware, undiscussed) templates for specific countries for deletion. The templates list hardware and software developers, game franchises and games, industry people, and very few country-specific topics arranged by the country they are in. Firstly, this is a very broad intersection, with hundreds of pages in some cases. This duplicates our lists and categories. Secondly, the inclusion criteria appears to be subjective with no clear reason why some games/franchises/companies/people are not listed. Should we list all pages in an unbiased manner, it would quickly become unwieldy. Not to mention why these countries are, rather than every country with notable examples. I would also argue that the common topic, i.e. the country, is not sufficiently characteristic in today's video gaming industry. While it is common to separate games and developers by geographic areas (N/S America, Europe, Asia, Oceania, Africa), individual countries within these areas is not. When looked strictly at organizations, conferences, rating systems, and other industry articles that, there are only a handful of pages that can all fit nicely is a larger Video gaming industry in region" templates. But I do not see the usefulness of listing every (subjectively notable) game and developer in this particular way. — HELLKNOWZ ▎ TALK 09:59, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
I don't see why the templates should be deleted, there are templates about other industries relating to a specific country like, Template:Automotive industry in the People's Republic of China and Template:Electronics industry in Japan. Seqqis ( talk) 16:39, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. -- BDD ( talk) 22:25, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
Do not need for this one time used template that has information already in the Presto card and better explained too. Martin Morin ( talk) 03:39, 11 August 2013 (UTC)